Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Conceptual analysis reveals persistent theoretical and methodological dilemmas in Central and Eastern European sociology, highlighting how binary frameworks shape professional identity and publishing.
After the end of the Cold War, sociology in Central and Eastern Europe – which had existed for several decades under the conditions of the geopolitical East–West divide – found itself caught up in new divisions, dichotomies, and (self-)categorizations. This article examines the post-1989 development of sociology in the region, starting from the idea that dichotomous thinking hinders the identification of paradoxes and dilemmas in the research practices of sociologists from Central and Eastern Europe; when left unresolved, these paradoxes and dilemmas affect both the professional ethos, and the place and role of sociology beyond academia. By tracing the metamorphoses in the conceptualizations of several dichotomies (East–West, before–after 1989, national–international), we demonstrate the epistemological, theoretical, methodological, and linguistic dilemmas in which Central and Eastern European sociologists find themselves, as well as the professional choices in publishing that reproduce these dilemmas.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Svetla Koléva (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: