In societies described as “cold” by Claude Lévi-Strauss, the historical dimension is coded into myths, traditions and rituals. Lévi-Strauss says that ritual is an “instrument for the destruction of time”. The key to the author’s idea of the opposition of synchronicity and diachronicity is found in his work The Savage Mind, in which he talks about a never-ending struggle between these two which initiates totemic thinking. In current sociology, Levi-Strauss’ concept of reversible time is utilised by Anthony Giddens, who adapts it in his structuration theory. However the concept of synchronous (structuralist) reversible time is simultaneously the subject of a critique from the perspectives of cultural anthropology (Alfred Gell) and sociology (Barbara Adam). At the article’s conclusion, the argument is made that when Lévi-Strauss talks about cold societies, which tend to banish history from the consciousness, it doesn’t mean that he is trying to over rule the laws of logic or physics (as he is accused by Gell) but at tempting to see the world through the eyes of a specific type of society and to understand time from the perspective of a “native”. and Jiří Šubrt.
The article confronts James Coleman’s and Randall Collins’s approaches towards action theory: reviews both their similarities (based on the importance of micro-sociological perspective for understanding social macro-level) and differences (their attitude towards the assumed rational nature of human action). Coleman supports the homo oeconomicus thesis and understands actors as beings, which make rational decisions and direct their actions on the basis of costs and gains calculations. Collins, on the other hand, emphasizes the extra-rational factors of emotions and routine. By putting up these approaches against each other two ideal type constructions arise, which are particular intellectual modes yet cannot comprehend social reality in its full complexity., Jiří Šubrt., and Obsahuje bibliografii
For Niklas Luhmann modern society is a functionally differentiated society, i. e. it is composed of heterogeneous but equal parts which are relatively independent and are defined as social subsystems. Luhmann’s analysis presents contemporary society as a whole differentiated into functionally dependent yet autonomous sub-systems that constitute neighbouring worlds for each other. This raises the question of the existence or non-existence of potential unifying forces or integration mechanisms. In Luhmann’s view the main problem is the non-existence of means of “metacommunication”. The development of specialised media and codes in the individual sub-systems increases the overall complexity of the social system, but does not entail the metacom¬munication that would make possible the self-observation and self-reference of the social system as a whole. and Jiří Šubrt.
Stať deskriptivní formou přináší poznatky z prvního dotazníkového průzkumu, který je součástí širšího projektu sociologického výzkumu historického vědomí obyvatel České republiky. Po úvodním zasazení do kontextu koncepcí historického vědomí a kolektivní paměti jsou nejprve popsány výsledky průzkumu na téma zájmu o dějiny a jejich jednotlivé oblasti; zdrojů, z nichž lidé získávají historické informace a sebehodnocení z hlediska znalosti historie. Další části článku jsou věnovány problematice českých národních dějin, především tomu, jakým způsobem veřejnost hodnotí jednotlivá historická období, a jsou zde také předloženy informace týkající se hrdosti občanů na národní historii. Závěrečná část se věnuje obecným aspektům historického vědomí tzn. názorům lidí na průběh dějin a důležitost sil, které ho ovlivňují, a také na význam, který má historie pro současný život společnosti., This article describes the results of an initial survey which is a part of broader project of sociological research into the historical consciousness of inhabitants of the Czech Republic. Firstly, the topic is put into the context of conceptions of historical consciousness and collective memory. This is followed by an outline of the public’s interests in history and its different fields, their sources of information and self-evaluation of historical knowledge. Next the article deals with the issue of Czech national history, especially how the public evaluates different historical periods and the level of pride Czech peo - ple feel about their national history. The final section addresses the problem of the historical consciousness of citizens on a more general level; it summarizes opinions on the course of the historical process, the importance of different influences on it, and also on the role which history plays in contemporary society., and Jiří Šubrt, Jiří Vinopal.
This article describes the attitudes of the Czech public towards the Velvet Revolution and towards the social situation preceding and following it. The text deals with the general image of Velvet Revolution in the context of modern Czech history, tracks public opinion on this event, deals with evaluations of the period before and after November 1989, and handles assessments of the whole previous period. The event of the Velvet Revolution in Czech history is seen predominantly as a highlight, and as a positive phase in Czech history. Similarly, the stage that followed is seen in a predominantly positive light, although not so much as the change of political regime itself. However, there is a significant difference between how Czech public opinion judged the first and second decades after the Velvet Revolution. According to the public, not all areas of society have showed improvement during the latter period; in some cases developments are viewed negatively., Stanislav Hampl, Jiří Vinopal, Jiří Šubrt., and Obsahuje seznam literatury
Stať převážně empirického charakteru čerpá z archivních dat, ze zdrojů Centra pro výzkum veřejného mínění a z první fáze realizace projektu Grantové agentury ČR s názvem „Sociologický výzkum historického vědomí obyvatel České republiky”. Teoretická část textu vychází z konceptu kolektivní paměti, zejména z myšlenky selektivity a proměnlivosti obsahů uložených v paměti. Článek dále prezentuje kvantitativní data týkající se veřejného mínění o české historii a kvalitativní zjištění výzkumu o historickém vědomí získaná prostřednictvím metody focus groups., The article of a mostly empirical character is drawn from archive data, from the sources of the Centre for Public Opinion Research, and from the first phase of the undertaking of a project of the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic entit - led „The Sociological Research of the Historical Consciousness of Inhabitants of the Czech Republic“. The theoretical part of the text is based on the concept of collective memory, especially on the idea of the selectivity and changeability of contents saved in the memory. This article also presents quantitative data concerning the perspective held by public opinion on Czech history, and qualitative perspectives on historical consciousness attained through the use of focus groups., and Jiří Šubrt, Štěpánka Pfeiferová.