Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2019-3-286-308
V. Bystrov, V. Kamnev
This article can be considered as the history of the concept of vulgar sociologism, including both the moment of the emergence of this concept and its subsequent history. In the 20th century, new approaches were formed in the natural sciences about society and man which assumed to consider all of the ideas from the point of view of class psycho-ideology. This approach manifested itself somewhat in the history of philosophical and scientific knowledge, but chiefly in literary criticism (Friche, Pereverzev). As a result, any work of art turns into a ciphered message behind which the interest of a certain class or group hides. The critic has to solve this code and define its sociological equivalent. In the discussions against vulgar sociology, M. Lifshitz and his adherents insisted on a limitation of the vulgar-sociological approach, qualifying it as a bourgeois perversion of Marxism. They saw the principle of the criticism of vulgar sociology in the well-known statement by K. Marx about the aesthetic value of the Ancient Greek epos. The task of the critic does not only reduce to the establishment of social genetics of the work of art because he also needs to explain why this work causes aesthetic pleasure during other historical eras. In the article, it is shown that later attempts to reduce the complete spectrum of modern western philosophy and aesthetics into a paradigm of vulgar sociology of the 1920s is an unreasonable exaggeration. At the same time, in discussions in the 1930s, the question of the need of the differentiation of the vulgar-sociological approach and a sociological method in general was raised. As for sociology, this question remains relevant even today.
{"title":"Vulgar Sociologism: The History of the Concept","authors":"V. Bystrov, V. Kamnev","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2019-3-286-308","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2019-3-286-308","url":null,"abstract":"This article can be considered as the history of the concept of vulgar sociologism, including both the moment of the emergence of this concept and its subsequent history. In the 20th century, new approaches were formed in the natural sciences about society and man which assumed to consider all of the ideas from the point of view of class psycho-ideology. This approach manifested itself somewhat in the history of philosophical and scientific knowledge, but chiefly in literary criticism (Friche, Pereverzev). As a result, any work of art turns into a ciphered message behind which the interest of a certain class or group hides. The critic has to solve this code and define its sociological equivalent. In the discussions against vulgar sociology, M. Lifshitz and his adherents insisted on a limitation of the vulgar-sociological approach, qualifying it as a bourgeois perversion of Marxism. They saw the principle of the criticism of vulgar sociology in the well-known statement by K. Marx about the aesthetic value of the Ancient Greek epos. The task of the critic does not only reduce to the establishment of social genetics of the work of art because he also needs to explain why this work causes aesthetic pleasure during other historical eras. In the article, it is shown that later attempts to reduce the complete spectrum of modern western philosophy and aesthetics into a paradigm of vulgar sociology of the 1920s is an unreasonable exaggeration. At the same time, in discussions in the 1930s, the question of the need of the differentiation of the vulgar-sociological approach and a sociological method in general was raised. As for sociology, this question remains relevant even today.","PeriodicalId":102221,"journal":{"name":"Sotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126260991","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2019-3-309-327
A. Sitnikov
The article deals with the social phenomenology of Alfred Schütz. Proceeding from the concept of multiple realities, the author describes religious reality, analyses its relationship with everyday, theoretical, and mythological realities, and identifies the areas where they overlap and their specifics. According to Schütz’s concept, reality is understood as something that has a meaning for a human being, and is also consistent and certain for those who are ‘inside’ of it. Realities are structurally similar to one another as they are similar to the reality that is most obvious for all human beings, i.e., the world of everyday life. Religious reality has one of the main signs of genuine reality, that of internal consistency. Religious reality has its own epoché (special ascetic practices) which has similarities with the epoché of the theoretical sphere since neither serve practical objectives, and imply freedom from the transitory issues of everyday life. Just as the theoretical sphere exists independently of the life of a scientist in the physical world and is needed to transfer results to other people, so the religious reality depends on ritual actions and material objects in its striving for the transcendent. Individual, and especially collective, religious practices are performed physically and are inextricably linked with the bodily ritual. The article notes that although Schütz’s phenomenological concept of multiple realities has repeatedly served as a starting point for the development of various social theories, its heuristic potential has not been exhausted. This allows for the further analyzing and development of topical issues such as national identity and its ties with religious tradition in the modern era, when religious reality loses credibility and has many competitors, one of which is the modern myth of the nation. Intersubjective ideas of the nation that are socially confirmed as the self-evident reality of everyday life cause complex emotions and fill human lives, thus displacing religious reality or forcing the latter to come into complex interactions with the national narrative.
{"title":"An Approach to the Analysis of Religious Reality in the Social Phenomenology of Alfred Schütz","authors":"A. Sitnikov","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2019-3-309-327","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2019-3-309-327","url":null,"abstract":"The article deals with the social phenomenology of Alfred Schütz. Proceeding from the concept of multiple realities, the author describes religious reality, analyses its relationship with everyday, theoretical, and mythological realities, and identifies the areas where they overlap and their specifics. According to Schütz’s concept, reality is understood as something that has a meaning for a human being, and is also consistent and certain for those who are ‘inside’ of it. Realities are structurally similar to one another as they are similar to the reality that is most obvious for all human beings, i.e., the world of everyday life. Religious reality has one of the main signs of genuine reality, that of internal consistency. Religious reality has its own epoché (special ascetic practices) which has similarities with the epoché of the theoretical sphere since neither serve practical objectives, and imply freedom from the transitory issues of everyday life. Just as the theoretical sphere exists independently of the life of a scientist in the physical world and is needed to transfer results to other people, so the religious reality depends on ritual actions and material objects in its striving for the transcendent. Individual, and especially collective, religious practices are performed physically and are inextricably linked with the bodily ritual. The article notes that although Schütz’s phenomenological concept of multiple realities has repeatedly served as a starting point for the development of various social theories, its heuristic potential has not been exhausted. This allows for the further analyzing and development of topical issues such as national identity and its ties with religious tradition in the modern era, when religious reality loses credibility and has many competitors, one of which is the modern myth of the nation. Intersubjective ideas of the nation that are socially confirmed as the self-evident reality of everyday life cause complex emotions and fill human lives, thus displacing religious reality or forcing the latter to come into complex interactions with the national narrative.","PeriodicalId":102221,"journal":{"name":"Sotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127470701","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2021-4-111-137
Ksenia Shepetina
The paper is concerned with the social categorizations and perception of social diversity of the Moscow Metro passengers. Drawing on the Goffman’s theory, I assume that the interaction between passengers is based on categorization, which links appearance and behavior of people with their cultural expectations. The categorization allows to make interaction participants identifiable and accountable. In 2020 face masks and gloves, social distancing transformed the process of categorization having directly affected per-sonal front of city dwellers and situational proprieties. Using the theoretical resources of Erving Goffman, Harvey Sacks, and contemporary urban researchers, I compare how passengers of Moscow Metro recog-nized and defined each other under the regular circumstances and during the self-isolation regime, which was enforced by the city authorities at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. The study is built around three general types of “Others” that were developed as abductive notions: non-specific, specific, and stigmatized Others. I analyze how these types are situationally produced and to what extent they change when the localized interactional order undergoes significant transformations. On the one hand, this study is aimed at a detailed documentation of the unique socio-historical situation that occurred at an early stage of the pandemic. On the other hand, I use it as a “natural” breaching experiment that helps to reveal the basic elements of temporal and local specificity of the social order.
{"title":"The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Public Transport Passenger Categorization Practices: The Case of the Moscow Metro","authors":"Ksenia Shepetina","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2021-4-111-137","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2021-4-111-137","url":null,"abstract":"The paper is concerned with the social categorizations and perception of social diversity of the Moscow Metro passengers. Drawing on the Goffman’s theory, I assume that the interaction between passengers is based on categorization, which links appearance and behavior of people with their cultural expectations. The categorization allows to make interaction participants identifiable and accountable. In 2020 face masks and gloves, social distancing transformed the process of categorization having directly affected per-sonal front of city dwellers and situational proprieties. Using the theoretical resources of Erving Goffman, Harvey Sacks, and contemporary urban researchers, I compare how passengers of Moscow Metro recog-nized and defined each other under the regular circumstances and during the self-isolation regime, which was enforced by the city authorities at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. The study is built around three general types of “Others” that were developed as abductive notions: non-specific, specific, and stigmatized Others. I analyze how these types are situationally produced and to what extent they change when the localized interactional order undergoes significant transformations. On the one hand, this study is aimed at a detailed documentation of the unique socio-historical situation that occurred at an early stage of the pandemic. On the other hand, I use it as a “natural” breaching experiment that helps to reveal the basic elements of temporal and local specificity of the social order.","PeriodicalId":102221,"journal":{"name":"Sotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129097630","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2021-3-43-70
I. Presnyakov
The purpose of the present paper consists of two points. First, it is to show how the internal structure and the “inner logic” of science as a value sphere are formed in Max Weber’s theory. Then, relying on logical-methodological foundations proposed by Weber, the second point is to identify how the action carried out by scientists in a “vocation” mode in a situation of “value polytheism” is realized within science. Analyzing the content of recent discussions about the empirical validity and character of Weber’s argumentation in one of his central works, The Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism, as well as about the autonomy and conceptual boundaries of Weber’s science, we draw a line of reasoning as follows. Firstly, we trace the changing of the methodological role of values in general, and the value of truth, in particular, in the “sciences of culture” in connection with the transition from the transcendental solution of Heinrich Rickert to Weber’s “value polytheism”. Secondly, we analyze how the relationship between Weber’s science, progress, and rationalization is structured. Thirdly, we explicate the mode of “vocation” in science, relying on the logical-methodological foundations proposed by Weber. Fourthly, we identify the development of Weber’s idea of the value autonomy of science. It is shown that Weber rejects the criterion of truth’s universality proposed by Rickert’s logical solution. However, the construction of ideal-typical concepts and the mechanics of “cognitive interest” described by Weber allows scientists to separate extra-scientific pragmatics from the scientific research itself. The progress of the “sciences of culture” for Weber is the differentiation and the emergence of new research approaches and the refinement of concepts. At the same time, science is not teleologically connected with “progress in general” and the rationalizing world, the configuration of which is a specific historical constellation. As associated with scientific work, “gaining the clarity” turns out to be not its own goal, but a possible effect of using scientific knowledge. The mode of “vocation” in a “value polytheism” situation forces scientists to contribute to the endless scientific progress; they formulate such ideal-types and causal explanations that seem adequate and sufficient from the point of view of their cognitive interests. The stability of science’s boundaries and its value autonomy are formed in Weber’s theory gradually; epistemological studies and the implementation of his sociology of the religion research “programme” make the difference between vocations in science and politics clear.
{"title":"What do Social Scientists Do in a “Value Polytheism” Situation?; Or, A Little More on Weber’s “Vocation”","authors":"I. Presnyakov","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2021-3-43-70","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2021-3-43-70","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of the present paper consists of two points. First, it is to show how the internal structure and the “inner logic” of science as a value sphere are formed in Max Weber’s theory. Then, relying on logical-methodological foundations proposed by Weber, the second point is to identify how the action carried out by scientists in a “vocation” mode in a situation of “value polytheism” is realized within science. Analyzing the content of recent discussions about the empirical validity and character of Weber’s argumentation in one of his central works, The Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism, as well as about the autonomy and conceptual boundaries of Weber’s science, we draw a line of reasoning as follows. Firstly, we trace the changing of the methodological role of values in general, and the value of truth, in particular, in the “sciences of culture” in connection with the transition from the transcendental solution of Heinrich Rickert to Weber’s “value polytheism”. Secondly, we analyze how the relationship between Weber’s science, progress, and rationalization is structured. Thirdly, we explicate the mode of “vocation” in science, relying on the logical-methodological foundations proposed by Weber. Fourthly, we identify the development of Weber’s idea of the value autonomy of science. It is shown that Weber rejects the criterion of truth’s universality proposed by Rickert’s logical solution. However, the construction of ideal-typical concepts and the mechanics of “cognitive interest” described by Weber allows scientists to separate extra-scientific pragmatics from the scientific research itself. The progress of the “sciences of culture” for Weber is the differentiation and the emergence of new research approaches and the refinement of concepts. At the same time, science is not teleologically connected with “progress in general” and the rationalizing world, the configuration of which is a specific historical constellation. As associated with scientific work, “gaining the clarity” turns out to be not its own goal, but a possible effect of using scientific knowledge. The mode of “vocation” in a “value polytheism” situation forces scientists to contribute to the endless scientific progress; they formulate such ideal-types and causal explanations that seem adequate and sufficient from the point of view of their cognitive interests. The stability of science’s boundaries and its value autonomy are formed in Weber’s theory gradually; epistemological studies and the implementation of his sociology of the religion research “programme” make the difference between vocations in science and politics clear.","PeriodicalId":102221,"journal":{"name":"Sotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review","volume":"88 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130677170","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2021-2-250-272
E. Salnikov, I. Salnikova
This article is devoted to the study of the transformation of the processes of the politicization of sports. The authors show that the development of modern states naturally included sports in the system of power relations both at the domestic and foreign policy levels. At the beginning of the 21st century, a new form of this process was a kind of interpretation of racial discrimination, proposed in the framework of critical racial theory. The most striking embodiment of the ideology and practice of critical race theory was the BLM movement, whose actions were supported by a number of athletes and sports organizations causing a mixed reaction in the fan community. Based on both domestic and Western studies of the attitude of sports fans, we attempted to analyze the specifics of the perception of BLM actions of Russian fans in sports. The empirical basis of the study was the comments of fans on the forums of sports news agencies in 2020. The research hypothesis was based on the assumption that the study of online comments on the news about the participation or non-participation of Russian athletes in BLM events will reveal the unconscious attitudes and semantic framework for the perception of domestic sports fans of a new interpretation of the racial problem in sports. As a result of the analysis, there was a lack of unity in the assessment of BLM-shares in sports. Some fans support athletes in the fight against discrimination in sports, while some evaluate the actions of athletes negatively, and categorically do not accept their position. Here, on a mundane level, the illusory nature of BLM is recognized. The specifics of the social dimension of racism, which CRT insists on, are not understood by domestic fans; BLM actions appear to be an external phenomena in sports, primarily having a political dimension. Special attention should be paid to the pattern of Russia as a special space; because of the moral characteristics of the population and its specific mentality, discriminatory practices are historically generally uncharacteristic, and the fight against these discriminatory practices is irrelevant in the Russian fan community.
{"title":"Combating Discrimination or Repoliticizing Sports? The Specifics of the Perception of Black Lives Matter in Sports-Fans Online Communities","authors":"E. Salnikov, I. Salnikova","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2021-2-250-272","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2021-2-250-272","url":null,"abstract":"This article is devoted to the study of the transformation of the processes of the politicization of sports. The authors show that the development of modern states naturally included sports in the system of power relations both at the domestic and foreign policy levels. At the beginning of the 21st century, a new form of this process was a kind of interpretation of racial discrimination, proposed in the framework of critical racial theory. The most striking embodiment of the ideology and practice of critical race theory was the BLM movement, whose actions were supported by a number of athletes and sports organizations causing a mixed reaction in the fan community. Based on both domestic and Western studies of the attitude of sports fans, we attempted to analyze the specifics of the perception of BLM actions of Russian fans in sports. The empirical basis of the study was the comments of fans on the forums of sports news agencies in 2020. The research hypothesis was based on the assumption that the study of online comments on the news about the participation or non-participation of Russian athletes in BLM events will reveal the unconscious attitudes and semantic framework for the perception of domestic sports fans of a new interpretation of the racial problem in sports. As a result of the analysis, there was a lack of unity in the assessment of BLM-shares in sports. Some fans support athletes in the fight against discrimination in sports, while some evaluate the actions of athletes negatively, and categorically do not accept their position. Here, on a mundane level, the illusory nature of BLM is recognized. The specifics of the social dimension of racism, which CRT insists on, are not understood by domestic fans; BLM actions appear to be an external phenomena in sports, primarily having a political dimension. Special attention should be paid to the pattern of Russia as a special space; because of the moral characteristics of the population and its specific mentality, discriminatory practices are historically generally uncharacteristic, and the fight against these discriminatory practices is irrelevant in the Russian fan community.","PeriodicalId":102221,"journal":{"name":"Sotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116843845","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2019-4-164-185
Rouslan Khestanov, Aleksander Suvalko
The article focuses on one of the most mysterious and intriguing stories of the Soviet civilization that is connected with the original ideas of the Bolsheviks and then to the Soviet nomenclature of culture. Chronologically, our research covers the first years of the formation of Soviet state institutions, the so-called Leninist and then Stalinist periods of leadership, and ends with a period that is often called “The Thaw.” In order to grasp the conceptual and doctrinal motifs for building Soviet cultural and state institutions, we used verbatim records of the Party Congresses as our main source of information. Our main task was to clarify why culture was central and strategic for early Soviet leaders. We will show how culture gave political doctrine its conceptual integrity by linking perceptions of state, leadership and governance, and communism and labour. The analysis of our sources testifies to the existence of a quite definite trajectory of cultural policy: (1) the birth of the Bolshevik cultural project, (2) its materialization in the institutions of the Soviet statehood, (3) the normalization of the created state structures and, finally, (4) the marginalization of the cultural issue. We introduced the concept of "cultural fundamentalism" to emphasize the peculiarity of the Bolshevik cultural project in which radical anti-etatism was expressed, which implied compensation by the culture of the abolished statehood. The internal logic of the development of the cultural project led, however, to a paradoxical result — the creation of a total social state. The principal thesis of the article is that the concept of culture played a central and strategic role in the construction of a new socialist state.
{"title":"The Beginning and the End of the Soviet Cultural Fundamentalism Project","authors":"Rouslan Khestanov, Aleksander Suvalko","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2019-4-164-185","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2019-4-164-185","url":null,"abstract":"The article focuses on one of the most mysterious and intriguing stories of the Soviet civilization that is connected with the original ideas of the Bolsheviks and then to the Soviet nomenclature of culture. Chronologically, our research covers the first years of the formation of Soviet state institutions, the so-called Leninist and then Stalinist periods of leadership, and ends with a period that is often called “The Thaw.” In order to grasp the conceptual and doctrinal motifs for building Soviet cultural and state institutions, we used verbatim records of the Party Congresses as our main source of information. Our main task was to clarify why culture was central and strategic for early Soviet leaders. We will show how culture gave political doctrine its conceptual integrity by linking perceptions of state, leadership and governance, and communism and labour. The analysis of our sources testifies to the existence of a quite definite trajectory of cultural policy: (1) the birth of the Bolshevik cultural project, (2) its materialization in the institutions of the Soviet statehood, (3) the normalization of the created state structures and, finally, (4) the marginalization of the cultural issue. We introduced the concept of \"cultural fundamentalism\" to emphasize the peculiarity of the Bolshevik cultural project in which radical anti-etatism was expressed, which implied compensation by the culture of the abolished statehood. The internal logic of the development of the cultural project led, however, to a paradoxical result — the creation of a total social state. The principal thesis of the article is that the concept of culture played a central and strategic role in the construction of a new socialist state.","PeriodicalId":102221,"journal":{"name":"Sotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131178235","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2023-2-29-49
Viktor Kaploun
This paper uses some of the conceptual tools developed by the primary authors of the Oxford-Cambridge tradition in the philosophy of language (especially G. Ryle and L. Wittgenstein) to analyze the “grammar” (in the specific Wittgensteinian sense of the word) of some basic concepts of social sciences such as “reality”, “action”, “consciousness”, etc., having mainly emerged in the language of E. Durkheim’s tradition in social theory. The focus of the paper is the concept of “institution”, which still occupies a privileged place in the language of contemporary social sciences. The paper highlights some conceptual problems, logical nonsenses, and philosophical myths embedded in the language of classical social theory coming from the philosophical language of the 19th century that, in turn, had inherited them from the centuries-old tradition of European metaphysics. Due to the specific metaphorical use of concepts, this language may undermine the clarification of reality and hide the real mechanisms of the functioning of institutions and real power relations in certain contexts. The paper also examines the grammar of the concept of “habitus” as introduced by M. Mauss, and argues that some traditional concepts in social theory can be effectively re-interpreted in the methodological perspective of the pragmatic turn in the social sciences (“theory of practices”).
{"title":"Durkheim’s Myth: What Wittgenstein and Ryle Might Have to Say About the Validity of the Basic Concepts of the Social Sciences","authors":"Viktor Kaploun","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2023-2-29-49","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2023-2-29-49","url":null,"abstract":"This paper uses some of the conceptual tools developed by the primary authors of the Oxford-Cambridge tradition in the philosophy of language (especially G. Ryle and L. Wittgenstein) to analyze the “grammar” (in the specific Wittgensteinian sense of the word) of some basic concepts of social sciences such as “reality”, “action”, “consciousness”, etc., having mainly emerged in the language of E. Durkheim’s tradition in social theory. The focus of the paper is the concept of “institution”, which still occupies a privileged place in the language of contemporary social sciences. The paper highlights some conceptual problems, logical nonsenses, and philosophical myths embedded in the language of classical social theory coming from the philosophical language of the 19th century that, in turn, had inherited them from the centuries-old tradition of European metaphysics. Due to the specific metaphorical use of concepts, this language may undermine the clarification of reality and hide the real mechanisms of the functioning of institutions and real power relations in certain contexts. The paper also examines the grammar of the concept of “habitus” as introduced by M. Mauss, and argues that some traditional concepts in social theory can be effectively re-interpreted in the methodological perspective of the pragmatic turn in the social sciences (“theory of practices”).","PeriodicalId":102221,"journal":{"name":"Sotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review","volume":"227 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132392314","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2022-1-9-37
S. Kaspe
The author sees tradition as a special type of human interaction, typical of modern and changing societies rather than of traditional ones; for that reason, his focus is on its use as a category of political struggle and as an instrument of power. There are four strata of modern Russia, and tradition has its own modus operandi in each of them. These groups are the scientific community, the intellectual elites (reflexive and functional), the political elites, and the masses (the latter covering all groups not belonging to the listed above). The scientific community generally adheres to the ethos of professional neutrality. Intellectual elites produce more-or-less politically-biased interpretations of tradition, guided both by their moral pathos and by their contractual obligations to the political elites. The latter use tradition directly as a tool of political governance. Such use is (a) instrumental, (b) quite indifferent to the content of those policies and courses that are intended to serve, and (c), quite indifferent to the authenticity of the tradition as such. However, the effectiveness of these impetuses from the elite directed at the masses remains highly questionable. Until recently, no research has been conducted to find out what the Russian masses consider to be traditional, and how positively this tradition is perceived. The situation has only started to change in recent years, thanks to the work of the ZIRCON group. For the time being, however, it is not known to what extent resorting to tradition (that is, to the kind of substantivized speculation that is suggested to be seen as tradition) could play in the integrating and legitimizing role which the political elites expect from it.
{"title":"Many Skeletons in This Closet: The Political Use of Tradition in Modern Russia","authors":"S. Kaspe","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2022-1-9-37","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2022-1-9-37","url":null,"abstract":"The author sees tradition as a special type of human interaction, typical of modern and changing societies rather than of traditional ones; for that reason, his focus is on its use as a category of political struggle and as an instrument of power. There are four strata of modern Russia, and tradition has its own modus operandi in each of them. These groups are the scientific community, the intellectual elites (reflexive and functional), the political elites, and the masses (the latter covering all groups not belonging to the listed above). The scientific community generally adheres to the ethos of professional neutrality. Intellectual elites produce more-or-less politically-biased interpretations of tradition, guided both by their moral pathos and by their contractual obligations to the political elites. The latter use tradition directly as a tool of political governance. Such use is (a) instrumental, (b) quite indifferent to the content of those policies and courses that are intended to serve, and (c), quite indifferent to the authenticity of the tradition as such. However, the effectiveness of these impetuses from the elite directed at the masses remains highly questionable. Until recently, no research has been conducted to find out what the Russian masses consider to be traditional, and how positively this tradition is perceived. The situation has only started to change in recent years, thanks to the work of the ZIRCON group. For the time being, however, it is not known to what extent resorting to tradition (that is, to the kind of substantivized speculation that is suggested to be seen as tradition) could play in the integrating and legitimizing role which the political elites expect from it.","PeriodicalId":102221,"journal":{"name":"Sotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132476032","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2021-4-7-14
Alexander F. Filippov, A. Korbut
{"title":"Perturbations of Private and Public under COVID-19","authors":"Alexander F. Filippov, A. Korbut","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2021-4-7-14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2021-4-7-14","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":102221,"journal":{"name":"Sotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review","volume":"144 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133138777","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2019-3-143-171
A. Zygmont
The article considers the phenomenon of martyrdom in the Western nationalisms of the 18th–20th centuries, and is analyzed in three examples. These are the cults of Marat, Lepelletier, Chalier, and other martyrs in France during the 1789 French Revolution; the cult of Abraham Lincoln and other “martyr president” cults in the USA; and the Irish martyrdom ideologies from the 17th century to the 1916 Eastern Rising. The classic studies on nationalism (E. Gellner, B. Anderson, E. Hobsbawm, etc.) do not pay attention to the topic. Other works consider separate cases, though lack a general theory. Thus, the article’s major goals are to discover what is the role of martyrdom in nationalisms, and how is it related to religious ideas. In order to answer these questions, the author proposes a structural, or “compositional”, model, suggesting that the discourse of martyrdom consists of the three motives of founding, militancy, and mobilization. These three components work as an integral “engine” that allows a nationalist movement or a nation-state to fight to create the new reality and preserve what was created. The author suggests that the balance of these three motives in each individual case may differ, so one of the motives may be hypertrophied, while the other two motives are simply “completed” to the minimum level. Proceeding from the fact that martyrdom in nationalisms constantly refers to religious ideas, images, and rituals, the author concludes that martyrdom is an integral phenomenon with no clear borderline between “secular” or “religious” with regard to both individual cases and the elements of a much larger case.
本文考察了18 - 20世纪西方民族主义中的殉难现象，并通过三个实例进行了分析。这些是1789年法国大革命期间马拉、勒佩列蒂埃、夏利埃和其他殉道者的邪教;美国对亚伯拉罕·林肯和其他“烈士总统”的崇拜;以及从17世纪到1916年东方起义的爱尔兰殉道意识形态。关于民族主义的经典研究(E. Gellner, B. Anderson, E. Hobsbawm等)并未关注这一话题。其他作品考虑不同的案例，但缺乏一个普遍的理论。因此，本文的主要目标是发现殉道在民族主义中的作用，以及它与宗教思想的关系。为了回答这些问题，作者提出了一个结构性的或“构成性的”模型，表明殉道话语由建国、战斗和动员三种动机组成。这三个组成部分作为一个整体的“引擎”，使民族主义运动或民族国家能够为创造新的现实而斗争，并保留已经创造的东西。作者认为，这三种动机在每个个案中的平衡可能不同，因此其中一种动机可能是肥大的，而另外两种动机只是简单地“完成”到最低水平。从民族主义中的殉教经常涉及宗教观念、形象和仪式这一事实出发，作者得出结论，殉教是一种整体现象，无论是在个别情况下，还是在更大的情况下，都没有明确的“世俗”或“宗教”的界限。
{"title":"“Dulce et decorum est”: The Phenomenon of Martyrdom in Western Nationalisms of the 18th–20th Centuries","authors":"A. Zygmont","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2019-3-143-171","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2019-3-143-171","url":null,"abstract":"The article considers the phenomenon of martyrdom in the Western nationalisms of the 18th–20th centuries, and is analyzed in three examples. These are the cults of Marat, Lepelletier, Chalier, and other martyrs in France during the 1789 French Revolution; the cult of Abraham Lincoln and other “martyr president” cults in the USA; and the Irish martyrdom ideologies from the 17th century to the 1916 Eastern Rising. The classic studies on nationalism (E. Gellner, B. Anderson, E. Hobsbawm, etc.) do not pay attention to the topic. Other works consider separate cases, though lack a general theory. Thus, the article’s major goals are to discover what is the role of martyrdom in nationalisms, and how is it related to religious ideas. In order to answer these questions, the author proposes a structural, or “compositional”, model, suggesting that the discourse of martyrdom consists of the three motives of founding, militancy, and mobilization. These three components work as an integral “engine” that allows a nationalist movement or a nation-state to fight to create the new reality and preserve what was created. The author suggests that the balance of these three motives in each individual case may differ, so one of the motives may be hypertrophied, while the other two motives are simply “completed” to the minimum level. Proceeding from the fact that martyrdom in nationalisms constantly refers to religious ideas, images, and rituals, the author concludes that martyrdom is an integral phenomenon with no clear borderline between “secular” or “religious” with regard to both individual cases and the elements of a much larger case.","PeriodicalId":102221,"journal":{"name":"Sotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review","volume":"45 9-10","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114033564","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：