Wissenssoziologische Diskursanalyse

Abstract

Abstract:The contribution outlines a research programme which I have coined the "sociology of knowledge approach to discourse" (Wissenssoziologische Diskursanalyse). This approach to discourse integrates important insights of FOUCAULT's theory of discourse into the interpretative paradigm in the social sciences, especially the "German" approach of hermeneutic sociology of knowledge (Hermeneutische Wissenssoziologie). Accordingly, in this approach discourses are considered as "structured and structuring structures" which shape social practices of enunciation. Unlike some Foucauldian approaches, this form of discourse analysis recognises the importance of socially constituted actors in the social production and circulation of knowledge. Furthermore, it combines research questions related to the concept of "discourse" with the methodical toolbox of qualitative social research. Going beyond questions of language in use, "the sociology of knowledge approach to discourse" (Wissenssoziologische Diskursanalyse) addresses sociological interests, the analyses of social relations and politics of knowledge as well as the discursive construction of reality as an empirical ("material") process. For empirical research on discourse the approach proposes the use of analytical concepts from the sociology of knowledge tradition, such as interpretative schemes or frames (Deutungsmuster), "classifications", "phenomenal structure" (Phänomenstruktur), "narrative structure", "dispositif" etc., and the use of the methodological strategies of "grounded theory". Since the impressive work of Michel FOUCAULT in the 1960s and 1970s, discourse research in the social sciences has been oscillating between the comprehensive theoretical interpretation of social macro-discourses (e.g. the Foucauldian tradition, work inspired by LACLAU and MOUFFE, Cultural and Postcolonial Studies) and the analysis of concrete "language in use" in the field of discourse analysis (including linguistic pragmatics and ethnomethodologically rooted conversation analysis). Recent attempts to build bridges between these rather heterogeneous paradigms have aimed to reduce problems localised on both sides, either in an "all too abstract macro analysis in discourse theory" not really fitted to reach the level of empirical research, or in an "all to micro perspective" on discourse unable to go beyond local micro-data analysis. Although I agree with this diagnosis, I suggest a different strategy for discourse research in order to bring the latter "down to earth" in empirical sociology: Rather than focusing on the analysis of "language in use", it is preferable-and possible

Das Gesellschaftliche als Aporie – Plädoyer für eine poststrukturalistisch informierte Diskurs-Praktiken-Forschung im Kontext der Transformation Sozialer Arbeit

“…Klassische Bestimmungsversuche in der Vergangenheit wurden nicht müde, die Unvereinbarkeit bzw. Unvermittelbarkeit zwischen Diskursen und Praktiken zu betonen (Keller 2011;Reckwitz 2003), insofern nämlich Diskurse zumeist auf einer rein sprachlichen, Praktiken hingegen auf einer eindeutigen Handlungsebene lokalisiert wurden. In den letzten Jahren sind allerdings zahlreiche theoriesystematische Beiträ-ge entstanden, die zwar auch noch Differenzen, vielleicht gar Oppositionen sehen, aber keineswegs mehr dem Nomos des unvereinbaren Gegensatzes folgen.…”

The hermeneutic side of responsible research and innovation

“…Keller 2005Keller , 2011. Discourse and actor analyses can reveal links between positions, diagnoses, assessments, and arguments on the one hand and actors and interests on the other.…”

Wissenssoziologische Diskursanalyse

“…The first reflections on the programme of Wissenssoziologische Diskursanalyse were presented in the late nineties (see KELLER 1997KELLER , 1998KELLER , 2001, and since then they have been informing empirical research in different fields of the social sciences and stimulating a wider debate on the relationship between "sociology of knowledge" and "discourse theory and research". 12 Whereas the present empirical research might, as I hope, contribute to further reflection on the practice of discourse research, the more theoretical contributions may lead to an open dialogue between different strands of knowledge analysis, especially between poststructuralism, cultural studies and the interpretative paradigm as represented by BERGER and LUCKMANN.…”