Publication: Una crítica conceptual del conflicto en el marco de la teoría sociológica de la globalización: contingencia, heterogeniedad y asimetría
Loading...
Files
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2016-06-08
Authors
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Citations
Exportar
Abstract
El objetivo de este trabajo ha sido honrar al gran protagonismo del que ha gozado el concepto de conflicto en la tradición de la sociología y aún más si cabe en los debates teóricos que más han recientemente han tenido lugar en su seno. La perspectiva que hemos adoptado, sin embargo, ha sido la de un análisis crítico que nos permitiera afrontar el enmarañado “juego de lenguaje” que se ha constituido en derredor suyo, producto de la multitud de paradigmas teóricos y campos de estudio empírico en los que se ha desarrollado. No ha sido nuestra finalidad tanto el conseguir la definición más depurada del mismo como la articulación de una larga serie de términos inscritos en su campo semántico, con la intención de elaborar una cartografía, lo más inclusiva posible, de los distintos significados, esto es, usos, que en un plano teórico ha recibido el conflicto, pues pensamos que esa diversidad da cuenta de aplicaciones fructuosas y necesidades reales de la investigación. No obstante, hemos tratado de conjugar esa diversidad en un esquema con sentido que pudiera eliminar paradojas y abrir vías alternativas en algunos callejones sin salida. Nuestra apuesta a la hora de afrontar esta crítica conceptual del conflicto ha sido una reconstrucción teórica a partir de las dimensiones metateóricas que consideramos fundamentales, siendo nuestra principal baza la continuidad con los trabajos que han hecho de la inclusión de la dicotomía conflicto-integración uno de sus rasgos definitorios, frente a los intentos de diversos teóricos de reducirla a algunas de las otras más frecuentemente utilizadas. Hemos defendido, por tanto, la autonomía analítica de lo que hemos preferido llamar relaciones opositivas y no-opositivas en la distinción de tipos teóricos de relaciones, implicando con ello la imposibilidad de limitarlas a uno solo de ellos y potenciando su dispersión en, lo que creemos que es, un reflejo de esa diversidad de usos productivos que hemos podido contemplar en la historia de la sociología...
The purpose of this work has been to honour the prominence which have had de concept of conflict in the sociological tradition, particularly in the debates that have recentaly taken place at its heart. The perspective we have adopted, however, has been a critical analysis which could allow us to confront the complex laguage game that has been established around it as a result of the multitude of theoretical paradigms and fields of study in wich it has evolved. It has not been our objective to reach the most polished definition, but to articulate a long series of terms that are part of its semantic field, with the intention of elaborating a cartography, as inclusive as possible, of all these different meanings, that is to say, uses, which in a theoretical level the conflict has been given, since we think this diversity account for frutiful applications and true necessities of the investigation. Nevertheless, we have tried to conjugate this diversity in a meaningful scheme which could put an end to certain paradoxes and open alternative routes in some dead end streets. Our proposal to face this conflict conceptual critique has been a theoretical reconstruction which starts with the metatheoretical dimensiones that we considere fundamental, building on the works that made of the conflict-integration dichotomy one if their defining characteristics, opposing the efforts of various theorist of reducing it to others more frequently used. Therefore, we have stand up for the analytic autonomy of which have prefer to call oppositional and no-oppositional relationships in the distinction of theoretical types of relationships, implying the impossibility of limiting them to just one of them and fostering its dispersion, in what we believe it is a reflection of that diversity of productive uses which one can detect throughout the history of sociology...
The purpose of this work has been to honour the prominence which have had de concept of conflict in the sociological tradition, particularly in the debates that have recentaly taken place at its heart. The perspective we have adopted, however, has been a critical analysis which could allow us to confront the complex laguage game that has been established around it as a result of the multitude of theoretical paradigms and fields of study in wich it has evolved. It has not been our objective to reach the most polished definition, but to articulate a long series of terms that are part of its semantic field, with the intention of elaborating a cartography, as inclusive as possible, of all these different meanings, that is to say, uses, which in a theoretical level the conflict has been given, since we think this diversity account for frutiful applications and true necessities of the investigation. Nevertheless, we have tried to conjugate this diversity in a meaningful scheme which could put an end to certain paradoxes and open alternative routes in some dead end streets. Our proposal to face this conflict conceptual critique has been a theoretical reconstruction which starts with the metatheoretical dimensiones that we considere fundamental, building on the works that made of the conflict-integration dichotomy one if their defining characteristics, opposing the efforts of various theorist of reducing it to others more frequently used. Therefore, we have stand up for the analytic autonomy of which have prefer to call oppositional and no-oppositional relationships in the distinction of theoretical types of relationships, implying the impossibility of limiting them to just one of them and fostering its dispersion, in what we believe it is a reflection of that diversity of productive uses which one can detect throughout the history of sociology...
Description
Tesis inédita de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Sociología, Departamento de Sociología V (Teoría Sociológica), leída el 18-12-2015