Abstract
Based on specialist journals, this dissertation investigates the "early academic" Sociology in Germany and the United States of America during the period between 1900-1933. This dissertation heads on the registration of conditions and structures which support or restrict an international research reception within the formation process of the academic sociology and which form elements/parts of the construction of the research objects.
By combining historical and structural data and certain conditions as well as data from German and American Universities and academic sociology with tendencies found in the analysed material of the specialist journals, the author explains periods of high vs. low international reception. Furthermore, he sets out the social-historical integration of the sociological interests in concrete problems and contexts of society. This puts sociology in between the two poles of theoretical constitution and social constellation, which are connected to the social contexts of each society.
In a very detailed manner, the author brings out the different societal starting conditions as an integral moment of academic sociology`s kinds of formation.
The central thesis supposes that the consideration, discussion, and reproduction of foreign sociological authors and objects as "other"vsociologies, depend on the logic of specific "conditions and structures" of the unique to each country social sphere. These national "conditions and structures" constitute the subject of sociology concerning its (in- and outside) definitions. The tendency to internationalise research does not seem to be the important criteria for the academic formation of sociology.
As a difficult and problematic theme for the constituion of academic sociology this dissertation picks out the position of academic sociology located between social questions and international exchange of research, which still today hinders necessary discourses.
This dissertation shows the formation of academic sociology by analysing a "legitimate" discursivity within certain German and US-American specialist journals, which have defined the sociological objects within their specialisations and fragmentisations.
Furthermore, the author considers the symbolic balance of power of the national specialist journals as multiplicators and definers of sociological knowledge. |
