| 1. |
- Wisselgren, Per, 1967-
(författare)
-
Samhällets kartläggare : Lorénska stiftelsen, den sociala frågan och samhällsvetenskapens formering i Sverige 1830-1920
- 2000
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Using the Lorén Foundation (Lorénska stiftelsen) as a concrete empirical point of departure, the aim of this dissertation is to study the formation of a Swedish social science discourse in the historical context of the lengthy and broad-ranging discussions summarized in the formula "the social question". Established in 1885, the explicit aim of the Lorén Foundation was to promote the rise of Swedish social science and to contribute to the solution of the social question. Composing an heuristic case, the historical reconstruction of the Lorén Foundation and its activities thus comprise the basic thesis - that modern social science should be understood as an "answer" to the "social question" - while providing it with empirical substance and historical content.Emphasizing the contextual and conceptual aspects of the history of social knowledge, the "social question", the Lorén Foundation, and the institutionalization of social science are regarded as different components in an historical discourse centred around the social sphere as it took shape from the 1830s and onwards. In this broad, multifarious definition and articulation process, social science is understood not as a unique "answer", but rather as one attempt alongside others to regulate the social sphere. Focusing on the intimate interrelations between social science practice and realist and naturalist authors, as well as contemporary social reform efforts, the dissertation also emphasizes the historically changing boundaries of social knowledge and its inherent political, gendered and professional dimensions. The final part of the study discusses the role of social science in the Swedish welfare state in more general terms, employing a comparative, international perspective, and the historiographical construction of disciplinary identities characteristic of academic sociology after World War II.
|
|
| 2. |
- Hermannsson, Birgir, 1963-
(författare)
-
Understanding Nationalism : Studies in Icelandic Nationalism, 1800-2000
- 2005
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This dissertation is an attempt to understand nationalism, in a general sense, and Icelandic nationalism in particular. For this purpose the concepts of ideology, political culture, discourse and political language are pushed to the forefront as viable analytical tools to take on the difficult phenomena of nationalism. It is argued that this perspective is useful in conceptualizing and studying nationalism. Moreover, it serves both as a benchmark to evaluate the theoretical field as well as guiding the empirical study. There is no consensus on either the correct definition of nationalism or the proper theoretical approach to study it. This is a result of the highly contested nature of nationalism and the politically infused character of all attempts to define it. Both the subject (the scholar) and the object (nationalism) are part of changing historical circumstances, which make all attempts to objectify nationalism fruitless as well as making our understanding conditional. The problematic of the influential “modernist school,” namely state-formation, democratic rule and economic transformation, is accepted as crucial for our understanding of nationalism. Its understanding of culture and ideology is, however, shown to be too instrumental and elitists. Cultural production and reception must be given greater prominence. The role of external models and the problem of imitation are clearly important for the intellectual mobilization of nationalism. The desired model for imitation is not accepted unchanged, but must in some way be adapted to the prevailing traditions or conventions of the adapting country.The most important aspect of the Icelandic nationalistic discourse was to open up new discursive horizons by: (1) creating the language and aims of the independent struggle, (2) defining the nation, its history and place in the world; (3) making modernity Icelandic. As such nationalism was an ideological innovation, which marks a radical change in Icelandic political history. This ideology soon became hegemonic within the political discourse: a paradigm that defined the aims and substance of politics. Jón Sigurðsson’s historical language became the main justification for autonomy. This language grew out of the realities of the Danish Monarchy and argued for the status of Iceland as a free country in union with the King. If the dissolution of the Absolutist Monarchy was the political impetus for politics of this kind, the perceived backwardness of Iceland became a more general cause for intellectual mobilization. This discourse was caught between the ingrained “space of experience” that characterized the peasant society and the new “horizon of expectation” most clearly seen in emphasis on progress and change. Parallel to this development was a redefinition of history, which made the Commonwealth (930-1262) the Golden Age of Icelandic history, and had a profound impact on the collective memory of Icelanders and defined the identity of the state they created in 1944.
|
|
