Abstract
Epicharmus says that mortals should have only mortal and not immortal thoughts. Using his saying, which I subscribe to, as a criterion to evaluate current social-scientific work, I am led to conclude that we are entering a period of mortal social sciences of which the two articles I am commenting on are good examples, even if both articles have still a certain and subtle Sehnsucht for immortality: Coombe's article, not only by style but also by content;' Trubek's and Esser's article, by its description of the present period of the law and society movement as an autumnal one2 (as presumably compared to an hypothetical immortal summer-and I would be tempted to add, with the Brazilian poet Vinicius de Morals, immortal while it lasted). Positivist social science (of which the instrumental theory is an offspring) has always imposed upon itself strange standards when compared with those guiding common people and their common-sense knowledge. It has made a fundamental distinction between description and evaluation, while common people always muddle them in their verbal and nonverbal practices. It has made a fundamental distinction between the subjectivity of the actors and the behavior of the actors which the actors themselves would never think of making. It has made a fundamental distinction between knowledge and practice, while common-sense knowledge is always
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call