Hostname: page-component-6bb9c88b65-lm65w Total loading time: 0.006 Render date: 2025-07-21T11:14:46.424Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Politics of Method and Its Agentic, Performative, and Ontological Others

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2016

Marion Fourcade
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Information

Type
Special Section: Commentary on The Politics of Method in the Human Sciences: Positivism and Its Epistemological Others
Information
Social Science History , Volume 31 , Issue 1 , Spring 2007 , pp. 107 - 114
Copyright
Copyright © Social Science History Association 2007 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Burawoy, Michael (2005) “Provincializing the social sciences,” in Steinmetz, George (ed.) The Politics of Method in the Human Sciences: Positivism and Its Epistemological Others. Durham, NC: Duke University Press: 508–25.Google Scholar
Callon, Michel (1998) “The embeddedness of economic markets in economics,” in Callon, Michel (ed.) The Laws of the Markets. Oxford: Blackwell: 1–57.Google Scholar
Fourcade, Marion (forthcoming) Economists and Societies: Discipline and Profession in the United States, Great Britain, and France. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Furner, Mary (1975) Advocacy and Objectivity: A Crisis in the Professionalization of American Social Science, 1865-1905. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.Google Scholar
Jessop, Bob (1989) “Conservative regimes and the transition to post-Fordism: The cases of Great Britain and West Germany,” in Gottdiener, Mark and Komninos, Nicos (eds.) Capitalist Development and Crisis Theory: Accumulation, Regulation, and Spatial Restructuring. London: Macmillan: 261–99.Google Scholar
Lipietz, Alain (1994) “De l’approche de la régulation à l’écologie politique: Une mise en perspective historique,” in Vercellone, Carlo and Sébaï, Farida (eds.) Ecole de la régulation et critique de la raison économique. Paris: Futur Antérieur-L’Harmattan. Available online at multitudes.samizdat.net/De-l-approche-de-la-regulation-a-l.html.Google Scholar
MacKenzie, Donald, Muniesa, Fabian, and Siu, Lucia (forthcoming) Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Porter, Theodore (1995) Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Steinmetz, George (2005a) “Positivism and its others in the social sciences,” in Steinmetz, George (ed.) The Politics of Method in the Human Sciences: Positivism and Its Epistemological Others. Durham, NC: Duke University Press: 1–56.Google Scholar
Steinmetz, George (2005b) “Scientific authority and the transition to post-Fordism: The plausibility of positivism in U.S. sociology since 1945,” in Steinmetz, George (ed.) The Politics of Method in the Human Sciences: Positivism and Its Epistemological Others. Durham, NC: Duke University Press: 275–323.Google Scholar