IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socres/v5y2000i1p27-31.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

‘Reflexivity or Sociological Practice: A Reply to May’

Author

Listed:
  • Roger Slack

Abstract

The paper constitutes a response to May's concept of reflexivity, and argues that debates on reflexivity have missed the need to ground their claims in the life world of society members - thus promoting the very ironic stance they seek to address. A re-articulation of claims to reflexivity is made in the distinction between ‘essential’ and ‘stipulative’ reflexivities wherein the former is grounded in members’ observable-reportable natural language practical actions, while the latter remains the province of the analyst and subjects members’ versions to sociological remedy. The paper suggests a return to the work of Garfinkel (1967) as a means of respecifying the grounds of the reflexivity debate.

Suggested Citation

  • Roger Slack, 2000. "‘Reflexivity or Sociological Practice: A Reply to May’," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 5(1), pages 27-31, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:5:y:2000:i:1:p:27-31
    DOI: 10.5153/sro.416
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5153/sro.416
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5153/sro.416?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:5:y:2000:i:1:p:27-31. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.