In this contribution four interconnected assumptions are made and explored as a normative interpretation of “what is at stake”. 1) It is necessary to exclude any kind of narrow mono-disciplinary approach from the analytical tools used by scholars in characterising contemporary global, alias transnational, phenomena. Political philosophy and social sciences should use both old and new conceptual tools, in the way of a reflexive paradigm, in order to define supra individual identities (group identities). This would ensure much greater efficacy in dealing with emerging cross-border issues. 2) Therefore, hybrid syntagmas, such as “Gender Sensitivity”, “Moral Minority” and “Adaptive Preference”, should be reframed given the coloured, prismatic facets of the ever-changing global/ transnational scenario for the sake of peace and emancipation. 3) In fact, these syntagmas should be taken into careful consideration by social scientists and political thinkers particularly in the case of ‘embedded analyses’, focusing on the real asymmetries of power existing within national, international and transnational contexts. 4). The hermeneutic approach, in the sense of the auditory/acroamatic dimension of qualitative research methods, is therefore of great importance here, for the following reason.
Methodology, in the sense of the discourse on how to do research (method), coincides with the second-level reflection on hermeneutics, the technique of interpretation of symbolical textures and compacts. The reason for adoption of this methodical turning point is that of equipping social scientists and political thinkers with a more suitable definition of emancipatory issues and policies. This, in turn, is aimed at investigating the durable and potential cross-border effects.
Barbara Henry DIRPOLIS Institute (Institute of Law, Politics and Development), Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies, Piazza Martiri Della Libertà 33, I-56125 Pisa, Italy.