31 ESA Social Theory Conference, Innsbruck, September 11-13, 2008
The Possibility of Sociology in Turkish Context
Considering the emergence period of sociology in Turkey, it is witnessed that sociology was used for national unity of newly emerged Turkish nation at the beginning of the twentieth century. The purpose in here is to create an inner consistency among the modern Turkish nation, whose pioneer figure is Ziya Gokalp who was the first sociologist in Turkey. Regarding this mission, Ziya Gokalp tried to adapt the sociology of Emile Durkheim by way of looking cultures as total entity and emphasizing unity of social existence, which was the Turkish nation at that time. While Durkheim had an objective to put forth the positivistic elements of modern society; Gokalp did the same as constructing the Turkish counterpart of modern society. Rather, the equivalent of “social” became “Turkish nation” in Turkish context. Therefore, the contents of social
things, social unity and consistency were deployed and preserved by Turkishness, modernization and Islam. For instance, the counterpart of division of labour was transformed into Turkish culture and Islam. The reason for this correlation found its expression in the answers to the problems of the modern Turkish nation; and this also reflects the nature of the Turkish social science. The epistemological and methodological quesitoning of Sociology is an exceptional situation and there are rare examples (such as the research of social history in 1960s) of it. One of the most significant cause of this ignorance is to find the immediate solutions to the problems of nation state and Turkish nation. As a matter of course, the role of sociology has been rarely
position towards the main social and political predicaments. In this presentation, my basic objective is to interrogate this instrumental role of sociology in
Turkey, and to discuss methodological possibility i
its epistemological and n Turkish context by taking
account of major sociological traditions in Turkish academia.
Frame, Ideology Movement
The topic of AGM is primarily a sociological matter which is basically dominated by two research paradigms: new social movements and frame analysis. We will turn are attention only to the latter.
How can the anti-globalization movement (AGM) disaffection from politics be explained ? In spite of large l i t e r a t u r e o n t h e t o p i c , i t i s s t i l l d i f f i c u l t t o f i n d a answer to this question. The few bring into question the character too satisfactory formulations
diverse and scattered of the movement which forbids it from being able to translate his speech into concrete political action. But these responses are unconvincing in so far as it avoids from trying to fully grasp the elements which affect its reasoning that are located outside the social realm. To fully understand the AGM disaffection from politics, one needs to explain why in contemporary societies, political action is now so devalued. The AGM is, in this sense, a mere manifestation of the recent transformation of the general relationship to politics, this transformation needs therefore to be studied in conjunction with that of the AGM.
Frame analysis focuses on psychosocial and inter- subjective issues in the social movements and seeks to
mobilizations take shape and what contribute to their success. This approach fails, however, to explain the reasons for the political disaffection of AGM for it conducts its analysis in a social black box. The hypothesis I defend is as follow: to understand why the AGM refuses to engage into politics, we must conduct an analysis centered on the ideology it carries, which permits to link the AGM with values shared outside the social realm; values that finds themselves in a certain way "condensed" into the no globo thought.