Methodologies of Memory Studies and Sociology of Philosophy in the Study of the History of Philosophy and Science

Q3 Social Sciences Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal Pub Date : 2022-03-29 DOI:10.19181/socjour.2022.28.1.8836
O. Vlasova
{"title":"Methodologies of Memory Studies and Sociology of Philosophy in the Study of the History of Philosophy and Science","authors":"O. Vlasova","doi":"10.19181/socjour.2022.28.1.8836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While interest towards Memory Studies has long been popular when it comes to studying cultural traditions and social groups, the field of science (scientific traditions) describes issues using the traditional language of history, philosophy and sociology of science. This happens despite Memory Studies potentially being a productive asset in this problem field. This paper brings together Memory Studies and R. Collins’ sociology of philosophy, while presenting a new strategy for problematization based on the history of philosophy. Memory Studies and sociology of philosophies are presented as two complementary approaches that have interdisciplinary prospects for understanding the methodological problems of the humanities in general and philosophy in particular. The foundations of the approaches are analyzed, a comparative analysis is conducted of the conceptual apparatus, examples of explication of sociological tools in the field of current philosophical discussions are considered.\nHow does philosophy work with the past, how does the “past-present” dialectic unfold in the community of philosophers, how do mnemonic practices determine the lines of power in this field? How are “sacred texts” selected in academic communities, what role do mnemonic practices play when it comes to generational bonds? What sort of practices circulate in the community in terms of condemning or accepting figures from the past? All of these issues are analyzed in the study, based on the concepts of Memory Studies and sociology of philosophy while invoking the ideas of R. Collins’ critics, as well as methodological historical and philosophical works. The approach offered by the author makes it possible to expand Memory Studies and sociology of philosophy into the field of history of philosophy and lay the foundations for such studies in the history, sociology and philosophy of science.","PeriodicalId":35261,"journal":{"name":"Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19181/socjour.2022.28.1.8836","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While interest towards Memory Studies has long been popular when it comes to studying cultural traditions and social groups, the field of science (scientific traditions) describes issues using the traditional language of history, philosophy and sociology of science. This happens despite Memory Studies potentially being a productive asset in this problem field. This paper brings together Memory Studies and R. Collins’ sociology of philosophy, while presenting a new strategy for problematization based on the history of philosophy. Memory Studies and sociology of philosophies are presented as two complementary approaches that have interdisciplinary prospects for understanding the methodological problems of the humanities in general and philosophy in particular. The foundations of the approaches are analyzed, a comparative analysis is conducted of the conceptual apparatus, examples of explication of sociological tools in the field of current philosophical discussions are considered. How does philosophy work with the past, how does the “past-present” dialectic unfold in the community of philosophers, how do mnemonic practices determine the lines of power in this field? How are “sacred texts” selected in academic communities, what role do mnemonic practices play when it comes to generational bonds? What sort of practices circulate in the community in terms of condemning or accepting figures from the past? All of these issues are analyzed in the study, based on the concepts of Memory Studies and sociology of philosophy while invoking the ideas of R. Collins’ critics, as well as methodological historical and philosophical works. The approach offered by the author makes it possible to expand Memory Studies and sociology of philosophy into the field of history of philosophy and lay the foundations for such studies in the history, sociology and philosophy of science.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
哲学科学史研究中的记忆研究方法与哲学社会学
当涉及到研究文化传统和社会群体时,对记忆研究的兴趣一直很受欢迎,而科学领域(科学传统)使用历史、哲学和科学社会学的传统语言来描述问题。尽管记忆研究在这个问题领域可能是一项富有成效的资产,但这种情况还是发生了。本文将记忆研究与柯林斯的哲学社会学相结合,在哲学史的基础上提出了一种新的问题化策略。记忆研究和哲学社会学是作为两种互补的方法提出的,它们具有跨学科的前景,可以理解一般的人文学科和哲学的方法论问题。分析了这些方法的基础,对概念工具进行了比较分析,并考虑了当前哲学讨论领域中社会学工具解释的例子。哲学是如何与过去合作的,“过去-现在”的辩证法是如何在哲学家群体中展开的,记忆法的实践是如何决定这个领域的权力路线的?在学术团体中,“神圣文本”是如何被选择的?当涉及到代际关系时,记忆练习扮演了什么角色?在谴责或接受过去的人物方面,社会上流传着什么样的做法?本研究以记忆研究和哲学社会学的概念为基础,援引R.柯林斯批评家的观点,并结合方法论的历史和哲学著作,对这些问题进行了分析。这为记忆研究和哲学社会学拓展到哲学史领域提供了可能,为历史、社会学和科学哲学的记忆研究奠定了基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal
Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
审稿时长
37 weeks
期刊介绍: “Sotsiologicheskij Zhurnal” publishes the articles on sociological disciplines. Interdisciplinary studies in sociology and related disciplines, such as social psychology, cultural studies, anthropology, ethnography, etc. — are also welcomed. The main emphasis is on the fundamental research in the field of theory, methodology and history of sociology. The regular rubric highlights the results of mass surveys and case studies. The rubric “Discussion”, which debated the controversial issues of sociological research, is regular as well. The journal publishes book reviews, and summaries, as well as lists of new books in Russian and English, which represent the main areas of interdisciplinary research in the social sciences. The journal aims to not only play samples of knowledge, considered regulatory and standards of internal expertise in the professional community, but also aims for opportunities to improve them. These rules, a tough selection and decision to print only a small portion of incoming materials allow “Sotsiologicheskij Zhurnal” contribute to improving the quality of sociological research. Submitted manuscripts should show a high integrity in problem setting, problem analysis and correspond to the journal’s thematic profile and its scientific priorities.
期刊最新文献
Theoretical Approaches Towards Studying Motivation for Surrogate Motherhood A Person that Feels, Values, and Studies Time. Professor Garold E. Zborovsky is 85 Years Old Is it Possible for a Society to Exist Without Development? Telemedicine in Russian Megacities: Problems and Prospects Batygin’s Lesson stuck with me on my Professional Path — Always Check Yourself to Make Sure your Conclusions Can Be Substantiated”. Interview Prepared by D.M. Rogozin
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1