Author: Nic Craith, Máiréad
Title: ‘Going Soft?’: The cultural challenge for the social sciences.
Institution: University of Ulster
Email: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

In previous generations, Ireland operated primarily as a self-contained, rural society in the shadow of Great Britain. Today, the state finds itself on a global platform, actively engaging in trans-national networks such as the European Union. Irish society has changed from a largely mono-cultural, rural population to a multi-cultural, urban people. Such changes have implications for the way we define ourselves, our culture and our identity. There is also the question of how we engage with other political, social and cultural communities at international levels. In Northern Ireland, one can ‘choose’ to be Irish or British or both. In the Republic, we are reluctant to accommodate the influx of migrants, proposing that would-be citizens acquire an appreciation of Irish values, cultural heritage and knowledge of English (and possibly Irish).

Citizenship tests and language skills have become inextricably linked in many nation-states and languages are creating boundaries that are far more effective than any territorial borders on the map. Perhaps such citizenship requirements are themselves expressions of anxiety from nation-states under pressure. In this age of ‘Liquid Modernity’, there have been many predictions of the disintegration of nation-states and concerns are being articulated regarding the implications of globalisation and glocalisation for the protection of economies, rights and traditional values at national levels.

This plenary argues for a greater emphasis on the “soft side” of social sciences in Ireland. There has never been a greater need for an inter-cultural understanding of the perspectives, languages and histories of other peoples and other societies. A study of migration that fails to consider the borders created by language does not engage fully with the human context. An assessment of human rights that does not consider the issue of language is overlooking the claim of many minorities and individuals for their linguistic human rights. An analysis of conflict and peace processes that does not refer to issues of communication is incomplete. An economic survey that does not explore intangible cultural heritage as a catalyst for development neglects indigenous potential.

Partnerships between political scientists, geographers, economists, sociologists and ethnolinguists can sharpen the focus on the neglected “soft side” of societies – a dimension that is more commonly associated with the humanities. Such networks could explore social structures and the contestation of power from a multiplicity of human perspectives, including language. A new emphasis on the cultural dimension could foster real communication on difficult issues and shape a public, social consciousness that is more insightful of other peoples, traditions and values.

Author: Corcoran, Mary
Title: Society, space and the public realm.
Institution: NUI Maynooth
Email: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

A feature of late modern society is the privatization of social life and the concomitant individualization of formerly social practices resulting in a decline in public space. This has occurred against a backdrop where the commitment to the concept of the public and public goods in general has been severely tested by the deification of the deregulated market place. Oldenberg (1989), amongst others, has expressed concerns about the sustainability of third places in the modern era and has argued that ‘third places’ are being replaced by ‘non places’- places where individuals relate to each other purely in functional terms.  Non places promote civil disaffiliation rather than civil integration. How can we guard against the tide of “gated individualization” (Judt, 2010)? In this paper I argue for an exploration of the ‘spaces of potential’ within the public realm of the city that can help to promote relationships of trust, respect and mutuality. By acknowledging and promoting such ‘spaces of potential’ we can help to reinvigorate notions of the public good while enhancing civil integration.