Uncertainty in/of Sociology: Transformations, Crises, Catastrophes
Format: on Shaninka campus and online
Language: Russian, English
Moderators: Victoria Astakhova (Shaninka student), Danil Arkhangelsky (Shaninka student), Sabina Balishyan (Shaninka student)
Language: Russian, English
Moderators: Victoria Astakhova (Shaninka student), Danil Arkhangelsky (Shaninka student), Sabina Balishyan (Shaninka student)
Abstract
Sociology is adept at addressing (social) facts, (social) actions, (social) relations, (social) bodies, and other forms of objects. But can a researcher effectively apply the elusive and conceptually resistant notion of uncertainty for sociological analysis? We believe it is possible and aim to demonstrate that this concept is central to contemporary social sciences.
Key figures of modern social theory, such as Mary Douglas (1992), Niklas Luhmann (1999), and Anthony Giddens (1999), have addressed the category of uncertainty in one way or another. For theorists who did not work directly with uncertainty as a concept, it often appeared as an element in describing crises, as exemplified by Bourdieu in Homo Academicus when analyzing transformations during «critical moments» of uncertainty. Lastly, Ulrich Beck conceptualized risk as an integral part and derivative of modern sociality itself (1992). Since at least 2017, the sociology of risk (and uncertainty, as we add following Zinn (2009)) has been recognized as an established thematic area in sociological handbooks (Korgen, 2017). This is unsurprising given the rich historical material of the 20th century—such as the upheavals of the 1960s, the implementation of neoliberal reforms (Chamayou & Brown, 2021), and the dissolution of the Soviet Union (Eyal, Szelényi & Townsley, 1998; Eyal, 2003)—for studying crises and uncertainty. Additionally, the transformations brought by the 21st century, especially in biology and medicine (Rose & Rose, 2014; Theunissen & Browning, 2022), raise new questions at the intersection of crises, transformation, materiality, and ethics.
Our central interest lies in the possibility of the sociology of uncertainty as such. In other words, can we move beyond the dichotomy of «conflict» and «stability» theories and place uncertainty as a point of equilibrium before, after, and within a crisis at the center of sociological theorizing? What epistemic steps are necessary to «define» uncertainty? Does it remain uncertainty in this post-defined state?
We invite discussions on these and related questions in the panel «Uncertainty in/of Sociology: Transformations, Crises, Catastrophes». We welcome sociologists and colleagues from related disciplines—anthropologists, historians, political and cultural studies researchers—who share similar interests. We encourage submissions of both theoretical works addressing the outlined topics at the conceptualization level and empirical studies.
The panel is organized with the support of the Laboratory of Social Change Research at MSSES.
Key figures of modern social theory, such as Mary Douglas (1992), Niklas Luhmann (1999), and Anthony Giddens (1999), have addressed the category of uncertainty in one way or another. For theorists who did not work directly with uncertainty as a concept, it often appeared as an element in describing crises, as exemplified by Bourdieu in Homo Academicus when analyzing transformations during «critical moments» of uncertainty. Lastly, Ulrich Beck conceptualized risk as an integral part and derivative of modern sociality itself (1992). Since at least 2017, the sociology of risk (and uncertainty, as we add following Zinn (2009)) has been recognized as an established thematic area in sociological handbooks (Korgen, 2017). This is unsurprising given the rich historical material of the 20th century—such as the upheavals of the 1960s, the implementation of neoliberal reforms (Chamayou & Brown, 2021), and the dissolution of the Soviet Union (Eyal, Szelényi & Townsley, 1998; Eyal, 2003)—for studying crises and uncertainty. Additionally, the transformations brought by the 21st century, especially in biology and medicine (Rose & Rose, 2014; Theunissen & Browning, 2022), raise new questions at the intersection of crises, transformation, materiality, and ethics.
Our central interest lies in the possibility of the sociology of uncertainty as such. In other words, can we move beyond the dichotomy of «conflict» and «stability» theories and place uncertainty as a point of equilibrium before, after, and within a crisis at the center of sociological theorizing? What epistemic steps are necessary to «define» uncertainty? Does it remain uncertainty in this post-defined state?
We invite discussions on these and related questions in the panel «Uncertainty in/of Sociology: Transformations, Crises, Catastrophes». We welcome sociologists and colleagues from related disciplines—anthropologists, historians, political and cultural studies researchers—who share similar interests. We encourage submissions of both theoretical works addressing the outlined topics at the conceptualization level and empirical studies.
The panel is organized with the support of the Laboratory of Social Change Research at MSSES.
- Бурдье, П. (2018). Homo academicus. Издательство Института Гайдара.
- Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: towards a new modernity. Sage.
- Chamayou, G., & Brown, A. (2021). The Ungovernable society: A Genealogy of Authoritarian Liberalism. Polity Press.
- Douglas, M. (1992). Risk and blame: essays in cultural theory. Routledge.
- Ermakoff, I. (2012). Rational Choice May Take Over. In P. Gorski (Ed.), Bourdieu and Historical Analysis (pp. 89–107). Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822395430-006
- Eyal, G. (2003). The Origins of Post-Communist Elites: From Prague Spring to the Breakup of Czechoslovakia. University of Minnesota Press.
- Eyal, G., Szelényi, I., & Townsley, E. R. (1998). Making capitalism without capitalists: Class Formation and Elite Struggles in Post-Communist Central Europe. Verso.
- Giddens, A. (1999). Risk and Responsibility. The Modern Law Review, 62(1), 1–10.
- Korgen, K. O. (Ed.). (2017). The Cambridge handbook of sociology (Vol. 2). Cambridge University Press.
- Luhmann, N. (1993). Risk: a sociological theory. A. de Gruyter.
- Rose, H., & Rose, S. (2014). Genes, cells, and brains: The Promethean Promises of the New Biology. Verso Books.
- Sapiro, G. (2012). Structural History and Crisis Analysis: The Literary Field in France during the Second World War. In P. Gorski (Ed.), Bourdieu and Historical Analysis (pp. 266–285). Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822395430-013
- Theunissen, M., & Browning, J. (2022). Putting explainable AI in context: Institutional explanations for medical AI. Ethics and Information Technology, 24(2), 23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-022-09649-8
- Jens O. Zinn, (2009). The sociology of risk and uncertainty – current state and perspectives.
Main topics
- Crises and Critical Moments: Conceptualization and Research Approaches.
- Transformations of Social Space.
- Risk Studies and Strategies in Uncertain Situations.
- Epistemic Uncertainty and Its Analysis.
- Empirical Studies of Crises and Uncertainty.
- Uncertainty and Technology.
Keynote speakers
- Jens O. Zinn, T. R. Ashworth Associate Professor in Sociology at the University of Melbourne, School of Social and Political Sciences.
- Peter Taylor-Gooby, Professor of Social Policy, University of Kent.
- Kevin Platt, Professor of Russian and East European Studies, University of Pennsylvania.
- Maria Volkova, PhD student in Sociology, University of Exeter.
- Kirill Petrov, Researcher at the STS Center, Associate Professor at the School of Computational Social Sciences, European University at St. Petersburg (EUSP).
- Stepan Kozlov, Lecturer at the Social Sciences Department, Head of the Laboratory of Social Change Research, MSSES.
- Alexander Bikbov, Associate Fellow at the Center for Russian, Caucasian and Central European Studies (Paris).
Sign in
Contacts
vectors@universitas.ru
Shaninka, Gazetny Lane, 3-5, building 1