Epistemological Approach and Self-Reflection of Immanuel Wallerstein’s World- Systems Analysis

Şeyda Güdek-gölçek

Makale detayları

Epistemological Approach and Self-Reflection of Immanuel Wallerstein’s World- Systems Analysis

Yazarlar:

Şeyda Güdek-gölçek

Yayıncı:

Ahmet Arif EREN

Dergi:

Fiscaoeconomia Vol.7 Issue 1, pp.885-910

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

1/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001281892

pISSN:

2564-7504

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 Immanuel Wallerstein criticizing social science which he considers directly related to development and continuation of the modern world-system focuses his critique on the epistemological structure of social science. Wallerstein stands against the structure of modern knowledge of social science which based on epistemological polarization consisting of duality of nomotethic-idiographic and interdisciplinary division, Eurocentrism, instrumental rationality and problematical approach of TimeSpace. Considering the construction of new knowledge as the responsibility of social scientists, Wallerstein tried to develop an alternative approach or overcome the boundaries of social science with world-system analysis. When the epistemological self-reflection of world-systems analysis is made in terms of giving clues about new social science, it is seen that Wallerstein fulfilled a part of this purpose. It is possible to say that Wallerstein used two epistemologies without distinction althoug he has an asymmetric tendency to the nomotethic and considered social reality in its entirety without breakin up with the boundaries of disciplines. He has coerced Eurocentrism in a manner consistent with his strategy, has tried to move away from the rationality of Enlightment with substantive rationality -he adopted- and has formed alternative TimeSpace layers. Thus he tries to pave the way for new knowledge structures and social science. In this context, he makes theoretical and practical contributions to the sociology of social sciences. However, the importance -he attached to the size of structural TimeSpace and addressing the modern world-system with a determinist approach eliminates of the purpose of the analysis.

 Immanuel Wallerstein criticizing social science which he considers directly related to development and continuation of the modern world-system focuses his critique on the epistemological structure of social science. Wallerstein stands against the structure of modern knowledge of social science which based on epistemological polarization consisting of duality of nomotethic-idiographic and interdisciplinary division, Eurocentrism, instrumental rationality and problematical approach of TimeSpace. Considering the construction of new knowledge as the responsibility of social scientists, Wallerstein tried to develop an alternative approach or overcome the boundaries of social science with world-system analysis. When the epistemological self-reflection of world-systems analysis is made in terms of giving clues about new social science, it is seen that Wallerstein fulfilled a part of this purpose. It is possible to say that Wallerstein used two epistemologies without distinction althoug he has an asymmetric tendency to the nomotethic and considered social reality in its entirety without breakin up with the boundaries of disciplines. He has coerced Eurocentrism in a manner consistent with his strategy, has tried to move away from the rationality of Enlightment with substantive rationality -he adopted- and has formed alternative TimeSpace layers. Thus he tries to pave the way for new knowledge structures and social science. In this context, he makes theoretical and practical contributions to the sociology of social sciences. However, the importance -he attached to the size of structural TimeSpace and addressing the modern world-system with a determinist approach eliminates of the purpose of the analysis.

 Immanuel Wallerstein criticizing social science which he considers directly related to development and continuation of the modern world-system focuses his critique on the epistemological structure of social science. Wallerstein stands against the structure of modern knowledge of social science which based on epistemological polarization consisting of duality of nomotethic-idiographic and interdisciplinary division, Eurocentrism, instrumental rationality and problematical approach of TimeSpace. Considering the construction of new knowledge as the responsibility of social scientists, Wallerstein tried to develop an alternative approach or overcome the boundaries of social science with world-system analysis. When the epistemological self-reflection of world-systems analysis is made in terms of giving clues about new social science, it is seen that Wallerstein fulfilled a part of this purpose. It is possible to say that Wallerstein used two epistemologies without distinction althoug he has an asymmetric tendency to the nomotethic and considered social reality in its entirety without breakin up with the boundaries of disciplines. He has coerced Eurocentrism in a manner consistent with his strategy, has tried to move away from the rationality of Enlightment with substantive rationality -he adopted- and has formed alternative TimeSpace layers. Thus he tries to pave the way for new knowledge structures and social science. In this context, he makes theoretical and practical contributions to the sociology of social sciences. However, the importance -he attached to the size of structural TimeSpace and addressing the modern world-system with a determinist approach eliminates of the purpose of the analysis.

 Modern dünya-sisteminin gelişimi ve devamı ile doğrudan ilişkili gördüğü sosyal bilimi eleştiren Immanuel Wallerstein, eleştirilerini sosyal bilimin epistemolojik yapısı üzerine yoğunlaştırmaktadır. Wallerstein sosyal biliminin, idiografik-nomotetik ikiliğinden oluşan epistemolojik kamplaşmasına ve disiplinlere bölünmesine, Avrupa merkezciliğine, araçsal rasyonaliteye ve sorunlu ZamanUzay yaklaşımına dayanan modern bilgi yapılarına karşı çıkmaktadır. Yeni bilgi yapılarının inşasını sosyal bilimcilerin sorumluluğu olarak gören Wallerstein, dünya-sistemleri analizi ile alternatif bir yaklaşım geliştirmeye ya da verili hali ile sosyal bilimin sınırlarını aşmaya çalışmıştır. Yeni sosyal bilime dair ip uçları vermesi açısından, dünya-sistemleri analizinin epistemolojik özdüşünümü yapıldığında, Wallersteinin bu amacının bir kısmını yerine getirdiği görülmektedir. Bu anlamda Wallersteinin nomotetik olana asimetrik bir eğilimi olmasına rağmen iki epistemolojiyi ayırmadan kullandığını ve toplumsal gerçekliği disiplinlerin sınırları ile parçalamadan bütünlük içerisinde ele aldığını söylemek mümkündür. Kendi stratejisi ile tutarlı bir biçimde Avrupa merkezciliği zorlamış, benimsediği tözel rasyonaliteyle Aydınlanmanın rasyonalitesinden uzaklaşmaya çalışmış ve alternatif ZamanUzay katmanları oluşturmuştur. Böylece idealize ettiği yeni bilgi yapıları ve sosyal bilim için bir yol açmaya çalışmıştır. Bu bağlamda sosyal bilimler sosyolojisine teorik ve pratik katkılar sunmuştur. Ancak yapısal ZamanUzay boyutuna atfettiği önem ve modern dünya-sistemini determinist bir yaklaşımla ele alması analizinin amacının önüne geçmiştir.

Makale detayları

Epistemological Approach and Self-Reflection of Immanuel Wallerstein’s World- Systems Analysis

Yazarlar:

Şeyda Güdek-gölçek

Yayıncı:

Ahmet Arif EREN

Dergi:

Fiscaoeconomia Vol.7 Issue 1, pp.885-910

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

1/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001281892

pISSN:

2564-7504

World-System Analysis

Modern World-System

Social Science

Modern Structure of Knowledge

Epistemology

Dünya-Sistemleri Analizi

Modern Dünya-Sistemi

Sosyal Bilim

Modern Bilgi Yapıları

Epistemoloji

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Şeyda Güdek-gölçek

Yayıncı: Ahmet Arif EREN

Dergi: Fiscaoeconomia Vol.7 Issue 1, pp.885-910

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 1/2023

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001281892

pISSN: 2564-7504

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Şeyda Güdek-gölçek

Yayıncı:

Ahmet Arif EREN

Dergi:

Fiscaoeconomia Vol.7 Issue 1, pp.885-910

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

1/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001281892

pISSN:

2564-7504