Социология и общество в XXI веке: кризисы и образы будущего (круглый стол)
Abstract. On November 28–30, 2019 the International Scientific Conference “The Future of
Sociological Knowledge and Challenges of Social Transformation (to the 90th Anniversary of V.A. Yadov)”
took place, and within the framework of the conference the round table discussion of Community of
Professional Sociologists was held, the general content of which we offered to the readers. The main
issue of the discussion was the state and role of sociology in Russia and the world. The participants
expressed different positions, outlined the main problems of sociological knowledge and profession,
diagnosed both crisis phenomena and grounds for development of the modern sociology. Specialists
stated that the crisis in the theoretical understanding of society in sociology is reflected to a certain
extent in society’s distrust to sociology. Practically each of the participants discussed the public role
of sociologist in the modern world, which faces the need to interact with commercial and power
organizations. Discussing the fate of sociology in the 21st century, the participants proposed ways
out of the crisis – rethinking the subject of sociology, new ways of assembling the palette of modern
sociological research, the need to return to the theory of a holistic image of society and construction
of ideas about the ways of future development of society.
This small collection includes translations of Max Wber's famous works: Politics as a Vocation and Main Sociological Concepts. They were written almost simultaneously and can be seen as compliments to each other. The translator introduced the collection. In his essay he outlines main problems of Max Weber theoretical and political sociology.
While many past theoretical discussions on nature of social norms were centered on a problem of their precise definition, I propose an analysis of peculiar character of sociological theorizing about norms which is grounded in a wider interdisciplinary context (particularly, on sociologically relevant implications from H.L.A. Hart’s and H. Kelsen’s views on law and norms) and based on systematization of principal norm-related questions which varying types of theories attempt to answer, i.e., nature of norms, social mechanisms of their maintenance and change, analytic and empirically-based distinctions between norms and rules and conventions, irreducible complexity of norms, etc. Besides, the chapter presents a systematic review of classical and modern approaches to elucidation of intricate relations between multiple normative systems, e.g., law and morality. I also discuss some recent arguments against moral relativism in social sciences brought forward by S. Lukes.
The article argues that sociological analysis of justice and fairness perception phenomena requires a closer examination of their purported relationships with everyday descriptive knowledge available to social actors. The results of an experiment studying relationships between individual judgments on fair division of putative centralized transfer payments addressed to different groups of the general population and subjects ordinary pre-existing knowledge of relevant social and economic facts are presented and analyzed. The experimental results obtained indicated that in most cases no significant correlations between individual judgments on just distribution of money transfers aimed at 1) equalizing average salaries for those working in different economic sectors and 2) Internet-access levels for different age cohorts, on the one hand, and relevant everyday predictions for salaries and Internet-access distributions, on the other hand, were observed. The weak-to-moderate correlations between individuals everyday cognitions and their justice-related judgments were revealed only in few cases for particular groups of hypothesized money transfers beneficiaries and could have a direction contrary to theoretically expected one. The results obtained give some indirect support to a cognitivist theory of moral feelings (R. Boudon) and cast doubts on popular broad interpretations of the Thomas theorem.
The first volume contains articles devoted to the problems of sociology of space, as well as the theory and the history of sociology. The main issues considered here are the theoretical analysis of the phenomena of empire, the theoretical problems of mobility and globalization and the perspectives of sociological theory in Russia. The are followed by the articles on the value of the classical works of J.-J. Rousseau, F. Toennies, M. Weber et al. The conluding chapters are devoted to the German conservative sociology of intellectuals.
The collective monograph contributes to theoretical understanding of the mutual influences and reconfigurations of scientific and lay knowledge about society. This book summarizes the results of theoretical, historical and sociological studies of varying conceptualizations of social knowledge in different disciplinary fields of social sciences, carried out on the basis of an analysis of a representative corpus of classical and contemporary works. The contributors to this volume make use of conceptual tools of the sociology of knowledge, theoretical sociology, as well as modern methodological approaches of cognitive social science in order to attain generalizations about inner mechanisms of reciprocal influences of ordinary social knowledge and social sciences and to make first steps toward closing the lacunae in our understanding of the processes of reflective reconfiguration of scientific and common-sense knowledge about society. These processes are illustrated with examples taken from a broad range of disciplinary areas: sociology of science and social studies of professions, social ecology and bioethics, social epistemology,modern social theory and conceptions of “folk sociology”. The book is supposed to be useful to readers in many different fields of social sciences and humanities, including those studying sociology at advanced level. It also will make an immediate appeal to the general reader familiar with contemporary social theory.
Several approaches to the concept of fatherhood present in Western sociological tradition are analyzed and compared: biological determinism, social constructivism and biosocial theory. The problematics of fatherhood and men’s parental practices is marginalized in modern Russian social research devoted to family and this fact makes the traditional inequality in family relations, when the father’s role is considered secondary compared to that of mother, even stronger. However, in Western critical men’s studies several stages can be outlined: the development of “sex roles” paradigm (biological determinism), the emergence of the hegemonic masculinity concept, inter-disciplinary stage (biosocial theory). According to the approach of biological determinism, the role of a father is that of the patriarch, he continues the family line and serves as a model for his ascendants. Social constructivism looks into man’s functions in the family from the point of view of masculine pressure and establishing hegemony over a woman and children. Biosocial theory aims to unite the biological determinacy of fatherhood with social, cultural and personal context. It is shown that these approaches are directly connected with the level of the society development, marriage and family perceptions, the level of egality of gender order.