The anti-sociological and techno-expert management of Covid-19 pandemic
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Published
20-03-2021
Danilo Martuccelli
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5940-8949
Abstract
The article proposes a set of critical reflections on the techno-expert management of the covid-19 pandemic. Leaning on the two major prevention strategies put into practice, quarantines and distancing, the text is not interested in the differentials results at the national level, nor in the reasons that led to their implementation. What it is analyzed are the presuppositions and social imaginaries underlying the decisions made, the homogeneity of the measures that were generalized with very little attention to local contexts, and the ideals of sociability that were mobilized. Above all the article analyzes the tension between the face-to-face and the virtual relations, between a sociability founded on interaction and a sociability that tends to be conceived out from generalized connectivity, as well as the way in which this potentially redesigns a whole new social hierarchy of trades and activities. It is this disparate set of imaginaries, trends and measures that the article criticizes for its anti-sociological and decontextualized nature.
How to Cite
Martuccelli, D. (2021). The anti-sociological and techno-expert management of Covid-19 pandemic. Papeles De Identidad, 2021(1), papel 246. https://doi.org/10.1387/pceic.21916
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Keywords
anti-sociology, sociability, experts, pandemic, covid-19
References
AA.VV. (2020). Sopa de Wuhan. Sin/lugar: Editorial ASPO.
Aubert, N., y Haroche, Cl. (2011) (Eds.). Les tyrannies de la visibilité. Toulouse: Erès.
Barrère, A. (2017). Au cœur des malaises enseignants. Paris: Armand Colin.
Bayat, A. (2013). Life as politics. Stanford: Stanford California Press.
Beck, U. (2004). ¿Qué es la globalización? Barcelona: Paidós.
Boyer, R. (2020). Les capitalismes à l’épreuve de la pandémie. Paris: La Découverte.
Callon, M., Lascoumes, P., y Barthe, Y. (2001). Agir dans un monde incertain. Paris: Seuil.
Castells, M. (1998). La société en réseaux. Paris: Fayard.
Chamboredon, J.-C., y Lemaire, M. (1970). Proximité spatiale et distancia sociale. Les grands ensembles et leur peuplement. Revue française de sociologie, 11(1), 3-33.
Collins, R. (2009). Cadenas de rituales de interacción. Barcelona: Anthropos.
Durkheim, E. (1985). Les formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse. Paris: PUF.
Esposito, R. (2004). Bios. Turin: Giulio Einaudi Editore.
Fogel, J.-F., y Patino, B. (2014). La condition numérique. Paris: Points.
Gatti, G. (2020). Desde la ventana de mi refugio. Pequeñas historias de urgencia desde Palo Alto, CEMI, 4 de mayo.
Giddens, A. (1994). Las consecuencias de la modernidad. Madrid: Alianza.
Habermas, J. (1987). Théories de l’agir communicationnel (2 tomos). Paris: Fayard.
Haesler, A. (2018). Hard modernity. Paris: Editions Matériologiques.
Hall, E.T. (1985). La dimensión oculta. México: Siglo XXI.
Haraway D. (2007). Manifeste Cyborg et autres essais. Paris: Exil Editeurs.
Harvey, D. (1989). The Condition of Postmodernity. Cambridge: Basil Blackwell.
Heinich, N. (2012). De la visibilité. Paris: Gallimard.
Jacobs, J. (1969). Economies of Cities. New York: Random House.
Jauréguiberry, F. (2003). Les branches du portable. Paris: PUF.
Kurzweill R. (2007). Humanité 2.0. Paris: M21.
Luhmann, N. (1995). Social Systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Martuccelli, D. (2007). Gramáticas del individuo. Madrid: Losada.
Martuccelli, D. (2010). Critique de la philosophie de l’évaluation. Cahiers internationaux de sociologie, CXXVIII-CXXIX, 27-52.
Martuccelli, D. (2017). La condition sociale moderne. Paris: Gallimard.
Martuccelli, D. (2020). La nouvelle solitude de l’Amérique latine. Cités, 84, 95-110.
Mora, R., y Tironi, M. (2020). ¿Distanciamiento social? Lazos sociales en tiempos de crisis. El Mostrador, 5 de junio. htps://www.elmostrador.cl/noticias/opinion/columnas/2020/06/05/distanciamiento-social-lazos-sociales-en-tiempos-de-crisis/
Morozov, E. (2014). Pour tout résoudre cliquez ici. Paris: FYP Éditions.
Park, R.E. (1984). La ville comme laboratoire social. En Y. Grafmeyer y J. Isaacs (Eds.). L’école de Chicago (pp.163-180). Paris: Aubier.
Passeron, J.-C. (1991). Le raisonnement sociologique. Paris: Nathan.
Sacriste, V. (2018). Nos vies, nos objets. Villeneuve d’Ascq: Presses Universitaires du Septentrion.
Sardin, E. (2015). La vie algorithmique. Paris: L’Échappée.
Singly, F. de. (2020). Le confinement a été révélateur des inégalités qui structurent la vie familiale. Le Monde, 20 juin. https://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2020/06/19/le-confinement-a-ete-revelateur-des-inegalites-qui-structurent-la-vie-familiale_6043416_3224.html
Soja, E. (1989). Postmodern Geographies. London: Verso.
Tarragoni, F. (2019). L’esprit démocratique du populisme. Paris: La Découverte.
Aubert, N., y Haroche, Cl. (2011) (Eds.). Les tyrannies de la visibilité. Toulouse: Erès.
Barrère, A. (2017). Au cœur des malaises enseignants. Paris: Armand Colin.
Bayat, A. (2013). Life as politics. Stanford: Stanford California Press.
Beck, U. (2004). ¿Qué es la globalización? Barcelona: Paidós.
Boyer, R. (2020). Les capitalismes à l’épreuve de la pandémie. Paris: La Découverte.
Callon, M., Lascoumes, P., y Barthe, Y. (2001). Agir dans un monde incertain. Paris: Seuil.
Castells, M. (1998). La société en réseaux. Paris: Fayard.
Chamboredon, J.-C., y Lemaire, M. (1970). Proximité spatiale et distancia sociale. Les grands ensembles et leur peuplement. Revue française de sociologie, 11(1), 3-33.
Collins, R. (2009). Cadenas de rituales de interacción. Barcelona: Anthropos.
Durkheim, E. (1985). Les formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse. Paris: PUF.
Esposito, R. (2004). Bios. Turin: Giulio Einaudi Editore.
Fogel, J.-F., y Patino, B. (2014). La condition numérique. Paris: Points.
Gatti, G. (2020). Desde la ventana de mi refugio. Pequeñas historias de urgencia desde Palo Alto, CEMI, 4 de mayo.
Giddens, A. (1994). Las consecuencias de la modernidad. Madrid: Alianza.
Habermas, J. (1987). Théories de l’agir communicationnel (2 tomos). Paris: Fayard.
Haesler, A. (2018). Hard modernity. Paris: Editions Matériologiques.
Hall, E.T. (1985). La dimensión oculta. México: Siglo XXI.
Haraway D. (2007). Manifeste Cyborg et autres essais. Paris: Exil Editeurs.
Harvey, D. (1989). The Condition of Postmodernity. Cambridge: Basil Blackwell.
Heinich, N. (2012). De la visibilité. Paris: Gallimard.
Jacobs, J. (1969). Economies of Cities. New York: Random House.
Jauréguiberry, F. (2003). Les branches du portable. Paris: PUF.
Kurzweill R. (2007). Humanité 2.0. Paris: M21.
Luhmann, N. (1995). Social Systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Martuccelli, D. (2007). Gramáticas del individuo. Madrid: Losada.
Martuccelli, D. (2010). Critique de la philosophie de l’évaluation. Cahiers internationaux de sociologie, CXXVIII-CXXIX, 27-52.
Martuccelli, D. (2017). La condition sociale moderne. Paris: Gallimard.
Martuccelli, D. (2020). La nouvelle solitude de l’Amérique latine. Cités, 84, 95-110.
Mora, R., y Tironi, M. (2020). ¿Distanciamiento social? Lazos sociales en tiempos de crisis. El Mostrador, 5 de junio. htps://www.elmostrador.cl/noticias/opinion/columnas/2020/06/05/distanciamiento-social-lazos-sociales-en-tiempos-de-crisis/
Morozov, E. (2014). Pour tout résoudre cliquez ici. Paris: FYP Éditions.
Park, R.E. (1984). La ville comme laboratoire social. En Y. Grafmeyer y J. Isaacs (Eds.). L’école de Chicago (pp.163-180). Paris: Aubier.
Passeron, J.-C. (1991). Le raisonnement sociologique. Paris: Nathan.
Sacriste, V. (2018). Nos vies, nos objets. Villeneuve d’Ascq: Presses Universitaires du Septentrion.
Sardin, E. (2015). La vie algorithmique. Paris: L’Échappée.
Singly, F. de. (2020). Le confinement a été révélateur des inégalités qui structurent la vie familiale. Le Monde, 20 juin. https://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2020/06/19/le-confinement-a-ete-revelateur-des-inegalites-qui-structurent-la-vie-familiale_6043416_3224.html
Soja, E. (1989). Postmodern Geographies. London: Verso.
Tarragoni, F. (2019). L’esprit démocratique du populisme. Paris: La Découverte.
Section
Research Articles
The contents of Papeles de Identidad are distributed, since 2024, under the license Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
You are free to:
- copy, distribute and publicly communicate the work
Under the following conditions:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
- NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.
Understanding that:
- Waiver — Some of these conditions may not apply if permission is obtained from the copyright holder.
- Public Domain — Where the work or any element of the work is in the public domain under applicable law, this is not affected by the license.
- Other rights — The following rights are not affected by the license in any way:
- Rights arising from lawful uses or other limitations recognized by law are not affected by the foregoing.
- The moral rights of the author;
- Rights that may be held by others in the work itself or its use, such as image or privacy rights.
- Notice — When reusing or distributing the work, you must make clear the terms of the license of this work.
The author may make free use of his/her article, always indicating that the text has been published in Papeles de Identidad since the University of the Basque Country retains the copyright. Any re-publication of the article must be, as well, authorized by the journal.