当前位置: X-MOL 学术Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Is the social study of finance necessarily nominalist? Using realism to address shortcomings in actor-network theory approaches to financialisation and everyday life
Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour ( IF 1.4 ) Pub Date : 2021-04-05 , DOI: 10.1111/jtsb.12278
Niamh Mulcahy 1, 2
Affiliation  

The financial crisis of 2007–2009 has reignited an interest among sociologists and social scientists in finance and economics, especially in technical aspects of the economy and the inner workings of market relations. However, in these cases social studies of finance retain a distinctly nominalist character, focusing on individual interactions in a market treated as a means of coordinating exchange. The social study of finance as a field seeking to address everyday financial decisions in relation to market expansion and fluctuation is predominantly characterised by its use of actor-network theory to explain the emergence and development of financial systems and networks, to the exclusion of equally necessary studies of the inequality that pervades newly financialised economies. I therefore argue for the need to revisit earlier political economy approaches to the study of finance, taking seriously criticisms leveled at such work by actor-network theorists who worry about excessive structural determinism and rigidity. To this end, I contrast nominalism with realism, in order to think about financial systems as emergent properties within the contemporary social formation. By thinking about actors as individuals that enter into existing sets of social relations, which shape their actions, it is possible to understand the origins of financial inequality. As actors interact with social structures, however, they ultimately change their character, rendering them anew in different circumstances, and therefore avoid the deterministic character of structures.

中文翻译:

金融的社会研究必然是唯名论的吗?使用现实主义解决演员网络理论方法在金融化和日常生活中的缺陷

2007-2009 年的金融危机重新点燃了社会学家和社会科学家对金融和经济学的兴趣,特别是对经济的技术方面和市场关系的内部运作。然而,在这些情况下,金融社会研究保留了明显的唯名论特征,关注被视为协调交换手段的市场中的个体互动。金融社会研究作为一个寻求解决与市场扩张和波动相关的日常金融决策的领域,其主要特征在于它使用参与者网络理论来解释金融系统和网络的出现和发展,排除同样必要的研究普遍存在于新金融化经济体中的不平等现象。因此,我认为有必要重新审视金融研究的早期政治经济学方法,并认真对待行动者网络理论家对此类工作提出的批评,他们担心过度的结构决定论和僵化。为此,我将唯名论与实在论进行对比,以便将金融系统视为当代社会形态中的新兴属性。通过将行为者视为进入现有社会关系的个体,这些社会关系塑造了他们的行为,就有可能理解金融不平等的根源。然而,当行动者与社会结构互动时,他们最终会改变他们的性格,在不同的环境中重新塑造他们,从而避免结构的确定性特征。认真对待行动者网络理论家对此类工作提出的批评,他们担心过度的结构决定论和僵化。为此,我将唯名论与实在论进行对比,以便将金融系统视为当代社会形态中的新兴属性。通过将行为者视为进入现有社会关系的个体,这些社会关系塑造了他们的行为,就有可能理解金融不平等的根源。然而,当行动者与社会结构互动时,他们最终会改变他们的性格,在不同的环境中重新塑造他们,从而避免结构的确定性特征。认真对待行动者网络理论家对此类工作提出的批评,他们担心过度的结构决定论和僵化。为此,我将唯名论与实在论进行对比,以便将金融系统视为当代社会形态中的新兴属性。通过将行为者视为进入现有社会关系的个体,这些社会关系塑造了他们的行为,就有可能理解金融不平等的根源。然而,当行动者与社会结构互动时,他们最终会改变他们的性格,在不同的环境中重新塑造他们,从而避免结构的确定性特征。为了将金融系统视为当代社会形态中的新兴属性。通过将行为者视为进入现有社会关系的个体,这些社会关系塑造了他们的行为,就有可能理解金融不平等的根源。然而,当行动者与社会结构互动时,他们最终会改变他们的性格,在不同的环境中重新塑造他们,从而避免结构的确定性特征。为了将金融系统视为当代社会形态中的新兴属性。通过将行为者视为进入现有社会关系的个体,这些社会关系塑造了他们的行为,就有可能理解金融不平等的根源。然而,当行动者与社会结构互动时,他们最终会改变他们的性格,在不同的环境中重新塑造他们,从而避免结构的确定性特征。
更新日期:2021-04-05
down
wechat
bug