Comments for The Sociological Imagination

Comment on Charles Wright Mills’ Sociological Imagination and why we fail to match it today by Mike O’Donnell on “Charles Wright Mills and the (Continuing) Problem of Radical Agency” | The Sociological Imagination

Wed, 16 May 2012 07:00:51 +0000

[...] Charles Wright Mills’ Sociological Imagination and why we fail to match it today [...]

Comment on Flying awkwardly: a year in the life of a first year PhD student, by Amy Louise Webber (II) by Jonathan Simmons

Jonathan Simmons — Tue, 15 May 2012 12:59:47 +0000

I found this oddly comforting and I like the mantra. I do however worry about the talk of fun, not because I am against it, but because those stuffy professors that sneer and go on and on about evidence often are having fun. I don’t think it’s a front or the consequence of cynicism.

Comment on Steve Fuller on Interdisciplinarity (a lecture in 3 parts) by Steve Fuller in interdisciplinarity | Thinking culture

Steve Fuller in interdisciplinarity | Thinking culture — Mon, 14 May 2012 07:56:19 +0000

[...] a video of Steve Fuller talking about interdisciplinarity. There is a strong critique here of short term approaches to knowledge formation. Again from the [...]

Comment on The Transformation of Academic Practice – Interview with Martin Weller, author of the Digital Scholar by Digital scholarship and publishing | Thinking culture

Digital scholarship and publishing | Thinking culture — Mon, 14 May 2012 07:17:52 +0000

[...] is an audio with Martin Weller, the author of the above book, here. It covers the open access debate and the new forms of publishing that are now available for [...]

Comment on Les Back on Sociology’s Promise by Sociological Imagination

Sociological Imagination — Sun, 13 May 2012 09:08:35 +0000

The other two will be up next week

Comment on Les Back on Sociology’s Promise by Ursula

Ursula — Sun, 13 May 2012 06:40:27 +0000

Thanks for posting this Mark. Really useful stuff.

Comment on Government Still failing to address racism in Northern Ireland by manjeet chaturvedi

manjeet chaturvedi — Thu, 10 May 2012 07:31:18 +0000

It is easy to find a ’cause’ for ills in society, mainly economic deprivation, resource sharing and job scarcity, in the presence of outsiders who belong to other races and ethnic groups. Thus a micro number of native people form a prejudice on racial basis which sometimes snowballs. Sometimes, the local law and order does labeling of outsiders and protects those who indulge into minor hate crimes like social ridicule, pushing out from a queue. Ignoring minor incidents encourages racism. Denial of racist bias in day – to – day affairs may lead to petty crimes or even to major attacks on people belonging to other races.

Comment on Emotional management during research: A personal reflection by Kirsty Liddiard

Kirsty Liddiard — Wed, 09 May 2012 19:19:26 +0000

Hi Robert, thanks so much for your insightful comment regarding the article. You summed up really beautifully some of the things I’ve been thinking about since I finished my PhD and began my postdoc; the issue of guilt regarding the fact I’m now, effectively, building a career off the back of peoples’ stories. This is a tricky thing (now I’m starting to see the fruits of my labour, as it were, in terms of publishing etc) that I’m sure many of us deal with. Thanks again for your comments!!

Comment on How much do you have to lose? Les Back on the riots by Les Back on the UK riots | Thinking culture

Les Back on the UK riots | Thinking culture — Wed, 09 May 2012 07:18:06 +0000

[...] is an audio of Les Back talking about the 2011 UK riots. He makes a really important distinction here between those with nothing to lose and those with [...]

Comment on Open access is no more than academic consumerism. It neither democratises knowledge production nor communication by Aalam Wassef

Aalam Wassef — Tue, 08 May 2012 09:59:22 +0000

Hi Steve, I find this piece interesting because you’re putting Open Access and Open Science (OS) side by side, pointing out aspirations they seem to have in common and (unless I misunderstood) what they don’t have in common yet. The Open Access movement is indeed eager to clarify that OA only describes scientific literature that is 1/Peer reviewed, 2/Digital, 3/Available online, 4/For free. To me, the question is: will Open Science – defined as 1/Open, public, collaborative research 2/Relying on a completely different conception of scientific validation 3/Relying on publisher-driven, Institutional and/or social dissemination – will help Open Access achieve its two main goals: greater access to reliable scientific literature. I definitely believe that with the right infrastructures, with open source reputation models (on top of H Index and citation counts), and with innovative credit attribution, OS will indeed take science and access to science to a completely different level.