2021
DOI: 10.1177/1360780421997838
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Moral Orders of Mobility: Youth Aspirations and ‘Doing’ Social Position in Finland

Abstract: By studying the moral orders that young Finnish adults (aged 18–30) attach to geographical mobility, this article reveals previously neglected relationships between aspiration and mobility. The 40 young adult interviewees are living in the midst of Finnish political debates about youth aspiration, which emphasise geographical rather than social mobility as a way to enhance employability and demonstrate aspiration. We argue that young people themselves use the discourse of geographical mobility by leaning on mo… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 31 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Moral ethics formed in a pluralistic or multi-ethnic society are also caused by the geographical mobility of a particular social group by sticking to their moral orders. This conception also organizes social life in a global expansion, which seeks to undermine traditional cultural ethics (Nikunen & Ikonen, 2021;Sleeter, 2018). Thus, cross-cultural interaction implemented as amalgamation is a social format to strengthen the social knot between two social groups.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moral ethics formed in a pluralistic or multi-ethnic society are also caused by the geographical mobility of a particular social group by sticking to their moral orders. This conception also organizes social life in a global expansion, which seeks to undermine traditional cultural ethics (Nikunen & Ikonen, 2021;Sleeter, 2018). Thus, cross-cultural interaction implemented as amalgamation is a social format to strengthen the social knot between two social groups.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%