Cambio CfP: Is (historical) sociology Eurocentric?
CAMBIO. Rivista sulle trasformazioni sociali – Number 13, June 2017
For the Review’s monographic section we will consider theoretical and empirical research contributions on the topic:
Is (historical) sociology Eurocentric?
Nation building, European integration and cosmopolitanism: critical and normative visions
Edited by Florence Delmotte (Université Saint-Louis – Bruxelles)
From precursors Marx and Tocqueville up to contemporaries like Stefano Bartolini (Restructuring Europe, 2005) via classics (Weber, Geertz and Elias, Tilly, Wallerstein or Anderson), historical sociology of the modern political has always had much to do with Europe. Almost by definition: is not the nation state born in Europe? Sociologists, be they comparativist or not, have been searching for avoiding evolutionism legated by the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries’ social theorists Marx and Comte as well as Spencer or Durkheim. However, (historical) sociology, even when closer to idiographic approaches rather than to nomothetic sociology, is often suspected of (at least unintentional) Eurocentrism.
This issue proposes to take seriously this criticism and to test it by questioning the visions of Europe and Cosmopolitanism that stems from classic or from current socio-historical analyses in sociology, political science and EU studies. It centrally aims at tackling these issues: Does the historical sociology entail specific normative visions of Europe and of “post-national constellations” (Habermas, 2000)? To what extent does it propose “critical” views (Delanty, 2006) on trans-nationalisation processes at work from 1945 and on the scepticism that followed?
The issue is open to empirical and theoretical issues as such:
- Does the legacy of classics in contemporary figures of historical sociology entail specific normative and critical visions about the future of European societies, in the frame of EU and beyond? What about the role of human rights, for instance?
- How (historical) sociology has recently been impacting EU studies and national case studies, notably in matter of Euroscepticism?
Finally, how could we gain analytical leverage from the links between sociology, law, history and political philosophy in order to tackle cosmopolitan issues?
The editors are also interested in evaluating contributions to the Journal’s non-thematic area, which includes the Sections Eliasian Themes, Essays and Researches, and Contributions. They also invite profiles, reviews and recommendations of books, essays and scientific events. The invitation to participate in the selection is intended for researchers from all fields of the social sciences, with no preference for particular theoretical or methodological approaches. The texts – unpublished and not submitted simultaneously for evaluation by other journals – must be sent by march 31st, 2017, to the editors, in docx, doc, or rtf format, according to the Indications for authors published on our website, at:
The editors determine the publishability of contributions on the basis of the opinions of anonymous referees, in accordance with the double-blind peer review formula. Exception is made only for articles in the Comments section.
The editors will inform authors of the outcome of the referee decisions, and hence acceptance or not of the article within a month after its submission. The texts sent must be between 30,000 and 50,000 characters (spaces and bibliographical references included). There must also be attached: a) a brief biographical note (approximately 600 characters, spaces included) must contain information about the university/institution of membership, research topics pursued, projects in progress, and major publications; b) a short abstract in English, in which the gist of the article is indicated in a clear and concise manner; c) some keywords (3 to 6, at the close of the English abstract) in order to recap with extreme brevity the subjects treated.
Contact for further information email@example.com
Last edited on:22,Mar 2017 06:50:34 by