 |
 |
***** To join INSNA, visit http://www.sfu.ca/~insna/ ***** I have a serious question: As a scholar looking at spending the next 6 years doing my Ph.D.s, I'm trying to figure out where to focus exactly, and I'm finding that many people are saying the same things in different disciplines (sometimes in the same disciplines) and yet calling it by different names. For ex: Actor/Network theory Relational ontology constructivism structuration theory post-structuralism post-modernism etc. Now I know I'm conflating some of the distinctions between these arguably sub-fields. "Actor network theory is a ruthless application of semiotics. It tells that entities take their form and acquire their attributes as a result of their relations with other entities." and from Constructivism "Agents and structures are co-constituted by their relationships." I really could go on, but I won't My question is this: Is anybody making any attempt to synthesize all of these various perspectives? I'd be happy to do it ;-) thx much, -Paul -- -------------------------------------------------------- [log in to unmask] http://www.panarchy.com -------------------------------------------------------- The Universe is made up of stories, not atoms. -------------------------------------------------------- _____________________________________________________________________ SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social network researchers (http://www.sfu.ca/~insna/). To unsubscribe, send an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.