Disciplining an Unruly Field: Terrorism Experts and Theories of Scientific/Intellectual Production
Disciplining an Unruly Field: Terrorism Experts and Theories of Scientific/Intellectual Production
复制标题
规范不守规矩的领域：恐怖主义专家和科学/知识生产理论
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Lisa Stampnitzky
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lisa Stampnitzky
“恐怖主义”已被证明是一个非常有问题的专业对象。恐怖主义研究未能符合最常见的社会学概念，即知识生产领域应该是什么样子，参与者和观察者都将其描述为失败。然而，无论是从资金、出版物还是有抱负的专家数量来看，恐怖主义研究都是一个蓬勃发展的领域。本文旨在解释，首先，实践中的恐怖主义研究与知识生产领域的社会学文献之间的脱节，其次，专家对其领域的“失败修辞”的原因。我认为，恐怖主义研究，而不是符合一个理想的典型的职业、学科或有限的“知识领域”的概念，而是代表了一个知识生产的间隙空间。我进一步认为，“失败的修辞”可以被理解为一种策略，通过这种策略，恐怖主义研究人员调动科学/文化领域的社会学理论，作为一种解释资源，在他们试图理解他们的领域和他们的情况的明显奇怪之处，作为图式，或模型，在他们试图重塑该领域。我的结论是，社会学家应该扩大我们的视野，将占据间隙空间的许多专业领域纳入其中，在多个领域之间移动和旅行。
Abstract“Terrorism” has proved to be a highly problematic object of expertise. Terrorism studies fails to conform to the most common sociological notions of what a field of intellectual production ought to look like, and has been described by participants and observers alike as a failure. Yet the study of terrorism is a booming field, whether measured in terms of funding, publications, or numbers of aspiring experts. This paper aims to explain, first, the disjuncture between terrorism studies in practice and the sociological literature on fields of intellectual production, and, second, the reasons for experts’ “rhetoric of failure” about their field. I suggest that terrorism studies, rather than conforming to the notion of an ideal-typical profession, discipline, or bounded “intellectual field,” instead represents an interstitial space of knowledge production. I further argue that the “rhetoric of failure” can be understood as a strategy through which terrorism researchers mobilize sociological theories of scientific/cultural fields as both an interpretive resource in their attempts to make sense of the apparent oddness of their field and their situation, and as schemas, or models, in their attempts to reshape the field. I conclude that sociologists ought to expand our vision to incorporate the many arenas of expertise that occupy interstitial spaces, moving and travelling between multiple fields.