The idea of conceputal scheme is clearly present in the classical and modern sociological theory. However, contemporary sociological thinking is highly critical of it and in its radical versions this idea is dismissed altogether. This articele taces various historically formed insights into the nature of concept formation in sociology and tries to demonstrate that without the attempts at creating a coherent conceptual scheme, sociology would be deprived of any possibility to push through a specifically sociological perspecitve on the social world. Talcott Parsons´conceptual level of theory is examined in detail and taken as an example of a viable theoretical approach based on the transformation of sociological concepts. The account of the sociological dilemma of scheme and reality is brought together with Donald Davidson´s argument against the dogma of scheme and reality. The idea of a conceptual scheme has been discredited on contemporary thinking together with the idea and the project of (grand) general theory of society. It is argued that from the generalizing critique of the idea of general theory it does not follow that sociology does not need sound concepts. If it were so then no sociological knowledge that would not refer only to itself would be possible., Jan Baloun., and Obsahuje seznam literatury
The paper deals with the relationship between Emile Durkheim´s sociology and the contractualist tradition of political philosophy, represented here pricipally by Thomas Hobbles. Its aim is to show that Giddens´s strict rejection of Parsons´s claim according to which Durkheim has reopened in his work the "Hobbes´s problem of order", should not be accepted as such, because it´s radicality hides that what is the value in Parsons´s thesis. As we argue, Parsons has the merit of noticing that Hobbes and Spencer, who - in respect of their social philosophies - are usually seen as opposed, appear to be close to each other when they are considered by Durkheim as to the conception of the society their philosophies yield. Yet Durkheim´s sociology is an endeavour to conceive the society independently of the state, and thus, inversely, to emancipate the state from the society, so that it can be entrusted with a different function other than the guarantor of the social order. and Jan Maršálek.
The text is inspired by the article of Steve Fuller named Making Agency Count (Fuller 1994) where Fuller introduced the concept of agency in medias res in order to treat agency as a kind of social "scarce good". My aim is to show that while Fuller claim seems plausible in the light of the agency negotiation in the legal determination of patents, the fetal medicine or the fetal fissue research, there are nevertheless several problems in its implications. First, if we consider moral action as an example of agency, an altruistic actor, in order to not consume much form the stock of available agency, would resign from a moral action, or, in extreme case, would act immorally to provide more space for moral actioon. Second, agency is always connected to multiple meanings therefore what is considered as agency by one actor, could be considered as non-agency by another one. Agency can by multiplied by diversification of attributed meanings, what is not the case of economic goods. In concluding the article I make a hypothesis that there is an interesting kind of agency (quasi-agency), which is produced by a social protection. Children, animals, fetuses are claimed to be actors but, in fact, this action magnify temporarily mainly the agency of claimants than those objects of protection., Martin Hájek., and Obsahuje použitou literaturu
As a challenge to those who do not give much credit to reflecting on sociology as a science, this essay stresses the import of metatheoretical considerations. After all, what is known as postmodern discourse is scarcely a little more than metatheorizing and the phenomenon of the so-called “crisis of sociology” cannot be comprehended without some metatheoretical premises. Knowledge about knowledge should therefore form a special field of inquiry and enjoy its relative autonomy. In this article, the place for metasociology is delimitated by the account of the development of the general science of science. While the prefix “meta-” originally came from linguistics as a way to differentiate a proposition about an object of science from a proposition about science itself, the history of metatheorizing can be traced back to ancient philosophy. Hence, the most important sources of inspiration for this intellectual activity are epistemology and the philosophy of science. A crucial moment in thein development was the so-called “crisis in physics” that carried over to social sciences and spawned many contemporary trends such as the multicultural approach to sociology and the radical stance of methodological anarchism. The major philosophical orientations that have most directly addressed the questions about the scientific knowledge have been neopositivism and analytical philosophy on one hand, and phenomenology on the other one. No claims about metasociology can be made without being acquainted with at least the elementary positions in this exchange of ideas that took place in the philosophy of science. Metasociology, itself divided into metatheory and metamethodology (or general methodology), makes up an integral part of the science of science., Miloslav Petrusek., and Obsahuje bibliografii
Dennis H. Wrong postulates sociological theory's origins in the asking of general questions about man and society. The answers lose their meaning if they are elaborated without reference to the questions, as has been the case in much contemporary theory. An example is the Hobbesian question of how men become tractable to social controls. The two-fold answer of contemporary theory is that man „internalizes” social norms and seeks a favorable self-image by conforming to the „expectations” of others. Such a model of man denies the very possibility of his being anything but a thoroughly socialized being and thus denies the reality of the Hobbesian question. The Freudian view of man, on the other hand, which sociologists have misrepresented, sees man as a social though never a fully socialized creature. Wrong claims that sociologists need to develop a more complex, dialectical conception of human nature instead of relying on an implicit conception that is tailor-made for special sociological problems., Dennis H. Wrong; z angličtiny přeložila Barbora Valentová., Text je přeložen z American Sociological Review 1961: 26 (2), str. 183-193, který je poupravenou verzí článku předneseného na setkání Americké sociologické asosiace v New Yorku 30. srpna 1960, and Obsahuje bibliografii
The article surveys the ways science was thematized as a sociological subject. It starts with the reflections on knowledge and science in the Enlightenment, further reviews the main contributions of Comtean philosophy and sociology of science, stresses Merton’s role in making the traditional sociology of knowledge open to empirical research, and traces the subsequent development of the field: the progress of quantitative analyses and ethnographic researches of science, the Kuhnian turn towards historicizing and Foucaultian turn towards the politics of science, the evolution of cognitive sociology of science, as well as the inspirations drawn from works of Bloor, Barnes, and Latour., Miloslav Petrusek., and Obsahuje bibliografii