A Book Review on Restructuring the Social Sciences: Gulbenkian Commission, Open the Social Sciences Report

Authors

  • Ahmet Ali Çelik Bayburt Üniversitesi,

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10429700

Keywords:

Social Sciences, Gulbenkian Commission, History of Social Sciences

Abstract

“Open the Social Sciences" report, published by the Gulbenkian Commission in 1993, is a study created to provide solutions to the problems experienced in the social sciences recently. In this report, which is the product of the commission's work spanning two years, ten scientists from different disciplines aim to develop a perspective on today's problems and offer solutions by establishing a connection between the past and future of social sciences. In this report, which was first published in 1995, the historical establishment of the social sciences from the 18th century to 1945 and the discussions within the social sciences from 1945 to the present were discussed, respectively, and then "What kind of social science should we establish now?" An attempt has been made to answer the question. The social sciences are prone to some problems due to the dynamics they bring from the past to the present. The report was written with the ultimate aim of offering solutions to these problems and "reconstructing the social sciences." The authors have also suggested things like rethinking the limits of how the social sciences have been specialized in the past and limiting over-specialization, which can lead to the formation of knowledge monopolies and the careless spending of university funds. Instead, they suggest boosting the number of multidisciplinary studies and the resources and institutions that support them.

References

Gulbenkian Komisyonu, (1999), Sosyal Bilimleri Açın, Sosyal Bilimlerin Yeniden Yapılanması Üzerine Rapor, Metis Yayınları

Published

2023-12-25

How to Cite

Çelik, A. A. (2023). A Book Review on Restructuring the Social Sciences: Gulbenkian Commission, Open the Social Sciences Report. Journal of Curriculum and Educational Studies, 1(2), 306–315. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10429700