Search

Copyright of Psychotherapie im Alter is the property of Psychosozial-Verlag and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Psychotherapie im Alter is the property of Psychosozial-Verlag and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article intends to compare the pure We-relationship in Schütz to what happens between us in Waldenfels. Schütz criticizes Weber’s basic methodological concepts: behavior and rationalism. For Schütz it is impossible through rational observance on relational behavior to guarantee the objectivism of sociology as a science. Schütz tries to prove that only a sociological theory that shows the different realms/worlds from which the interpretation of a product is built, with its obvious limitation of grasping the real meaning, while also clarifying the deep relationship with others, can in fact illustrate its relative anonymity or concreteness. This task involves a sense of searching for concreteness instead of taking for granted its objectiveness. For Waldenfels, the pure We-relationship is too fixed in the subjectivity that is based on one-sided understanding, and decreases possibilities of the event occurring between us. For Schütz, one deals with an eternal paradox of interpretation that will not make us acquainted completely with the other’s mind. The lack of fissure in the We-relationship does not leave space for the possibilities of what happens between us, in other words, the meaning is arrested in subjectivity in an attempt to make meaning as concrete as possible. Waldenfels will not say that the meaning in its integrality can be found, but he will open ways, which lead to a threshold where/elsewhere one will find fissures, new possibilities that first penetrate the body and after can take place in attitudes towards the other.

Copyright of Zeitschrift für Qualitative Forschung (ZQF) is the property of Verlag Barbara Budrich GmbH and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The aim of this paper is to examine the notion of social mechanisms by comparison with the notions of evolutionary and physical mechanisms. It is argued that social mechanisms are based on trends, and not lawlike regularities, so that social mechanisms are different from mechanisms in the natural sciences. Taking as an example of social causation the abolition of the slave trade, this paper argues that social mechanisms should be incorporated in Weber’s wider notion of adequate causation in order to achieve their explanatory purpose

The essay focuses on recent developments in the field of history of socialist/ communist regime in Bulgaria. The author considers this form of disciplinary knowledge as a set of discourses and draws his research material from a number of interviews with researchers (mostly historians, but also anthropologists and sociologists) in the field. The attempt is made to elucidate the “moral base” and potential political implications of the existing demarcation and differentiation between different approaches to this still burning subject. The accent is put on the individual (and collective) choice of labeling the epoch – socialism, communism, or totalitarianism. Those three labels are used in order to construct three ideal types of historical-sociological research and to indicate the methodological specificities of every type of research as well as itsparticular objects of study. Finally a point is made on the danger which a close relationship between a study and politics represents to the relative research autonomy.

This paper discusses the application of a qualitative methodology—forming ideal types by understanding—to the psychoanalytic psychotherapy of suicidal men. The paper focuses on a particular phase of the methodology: the validation through external expert replication. Data of cases from psychoanalytic treatment, analysed by the originating group in Germany, is analysed by a group in London, UK, which formed to undertake the task of blind comparison. We describe the contribution of this method in the field of psychoanalytic research, the method developed for generating data and the processes through which data are analysed. We demonstrate the comparative findings from the first (German) and second (UK) analyses and explore the meanings of the similarities and differences. The paper concludes with an appraisal of the strengths and limitations (in terms) of moderate levels of generalisation of results from this method for research in the field of qualitative psychotherapy research. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1002120

A multitude of products, systems, approaches, views and notions characterize the field of e-learning. This article attempts to disentangle the field by using economic and sociological theories, theories of marketing management and strategy as well as practical experience gained by the author while working with leading edge suppliers of e-learning. On this basis, a distinction between knowledge creation e-learning and knowledge transfer e-learning is made. The various views are divided into four different ideal-typical paradigms, each with its own characteristics and limitations. Selecting the right paradigm to use in the development of an e-learning strategy may prove crucial to success. Implications for the development of an e-learning strategy in businesses and educational institutions are outlined.

References to „patrimonialism“ and „neopatrimonialism“ are rife in analyses of the causes of perceived state failure, mainly in the Global South. Although such interventions have in common that they invoke Max Weber, their reading of Weber's ideal type of the rational state rests on a deep methodological misunderstanding. Whereas the ideal type of the rational state is taken for actual practice, the patrimonial one is misconstrued based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the logic of ideal types. Taken together, these misunderstandings lead to deeply flawed empirical assumptions. A critical reading of relevant literature links this finding to the pervasive Eurocentrism within (neo-)patrimonialism and state failure discourse. While this discussion is mainly aimed at literature concerned with Africa, a comparative Latin American perspective shows both divergent trajectories of state buildings and some commonalities in methodological misunderstandings, albeit using different terminology. Against this backdrop, some more critical approaches using patrimonialism terminology are explored, including the notion of „patrimonial capitalism“. The article closes with three theses on the unsuitability of „(neo-)patrimonialism“ as an overarching analytical paradigm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Österreichische Zeitschrift für Soziologie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Zeitschrift für Qualitative Forschung (ZQF) is the property of Verlag Barbara Budrich GmbH and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)