Metatheoretical Foundations of Civilizational Analysis in Contemporary Sociology
Abstract
The article is subjected to the metatheoretical foundations of the emerging sociological paradigm of civilizational analysis, represented by two main branches: the theory of “civilizational patterns” and the theory of “civilizing processes”. The integration potential of civilizational analysis depends on the way of solving the dilemma “autonomism vs. constitutivism" in the interpretation of the fundamental conceptual dichotomy “culture/power”, which forms a special focus of contemporary sociological problematic. J. Olick’s substantiation of a consistent constitutivist position based on the process approach of N. Elias in sharp opposition to the principle of analytical autonomy of culture, put by S. Eisenstadt at the basis of the “pattern” direction, leads to a split in civilizational analysis. As an alternative “integral” solution to the metatheoretical dilemma, a culture-oriented version of historical constitutivism is proposed, found in the project of civilizational analysis by J. Arnason. At the same time, the metatheoretical dilemma between autonomism and constitutivism is translated into the ontological problem of the relationship between “dimensions” and “spheres” of social life. The “paradox of culture” formulated by J. Arnason is considered as a solution to the above dilemma. This decision is of fundamental importance not only for the consolidation of the emerging paradigm of civilizational analysis, but also for the formation of the “broad program” of cultural sociology and for the development of social theory in general.
References
Александер Дж., Смит Ф. (2013) Сильная программа в культурсоциологии: Элементы структурной герменевтики. Александер Дж. Смыслы социальной жизни: Культурсоциология. М.: Праксис: 56–94.
Арнасон Й. (2012) Понимание цивилизационной динамики: вводные замечания. Журнал социологии и социальной антропологии, 15(6): 18–29.
Арнасон Й. (2017) Революции, трансформации, цивилизации: пролегомены к переориентации парадигмы. Неприкосновенный запас. Дебаты о политике и культуре, 5: 37–69.
Арнасон Й. (2021) Культурный поворот и цивилизационный подход. Арнасон Й. Цивилизационные паттерны и исторические процессы. М.: Новое литературное обозрение: 84–109.
Гидденс Э. (2002) Новые правила социологического метода. Баньковская С.П. (ред.) Теоретическая социология: Антология. Ч. 2. М.: Книжный дом «Университет»: 281–318.
Йоас Х. (2005) Креативность действия. СПб.: Алетейя.
Йоас Х., Кнебль В. (2011) Социальная теория. Двадцать вводных лекций. СПб.: Алетейя.
Козловский В.В. (2000) Фигуративная социология Норберта Элиаса. Журнал социологии и социальной антропологии, 3(3): 40–59.
Ницше Ф. (2005) Воля к власти. Опыт переоценки всех ценностей. М.: Культурная революция.
Олик Дж. (2012) Фигурации памяти: процессо-реляционная методология, иллюстрируемая на примере Германии. Социологическое обозрение, 11(1): 40–74.
Шубрт И. (2013) Индивидуализм versus холизм: о попытке преодолении теоретического дуализма. Вестник РУДН. Серия: Социология, 1: 34–64.
Элиас Н. (2001а) О процессе цивилизации: Социогенетические и психогенетические исследования. Т. 1. М.; СПб.: Университетская книга.
Элиас Н. (2001б) Общество индивидов. М.: Праксис.
Adams S., Arnason J.P. (2016) Sociology, Philosophy, History: A Dialogue. Social Imaginaries, 2(1): 151–190.
Alexander J.C., Smith Ph. (2003) The Strong Program in Cultural Sociology: Elements of a Structural Hermeneutics. In: Alexander J.C. (ed.) The Meanings of Social Life: A Cultural Sociology. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 11–26.
Alexander J.C., Smith Ph. (2010) The Strong Program: Origins, Achievements, and Prospects. In: Hall J.R., Grindstaff L., Lo M.-Ch. (eds) Handbook of Cultural Sociology. L.; N.Y.: Routledge: 13–24.
Alexander J.C., Smith Ph. (2019) The Strong Program: Meaning First. In: Grindstaff L., Lo M.-Ch., Hall J.R. (eds.) Routledge Handbook of Cultural Sociology: 2nd Edition. L.; N.Y.: Routledge: 13–22.
Arnason J.P. (1987) Figurational Sociology as a Counter-Paradigm. Theory, Culture, Society, 4(2–3): 429–456.
Arnason J.P. (1989) Civilization, Culture and Power: Reflections on Norbert Elias’ Genealogy of the West. Thesis Eleven, 24(1): 44–70.
Arnason J.P. (2001) Civilizational Patterns and Civilizing Processes. International Sociology, 16(3): 387–405.
Arnason J.P. (2003) Civilizations in Dispute: Historical Questions and Theoretical Traditions. Leiden; Boston: Brill.
Arnason J.P. (2010a) Interpreting History and Understanding Civilizations. In: Joas H., Klein B. (eds.) The Benefit of Broad Horizons: Intellectual and Institutional Preconditions for a Global Social Science: Festschrift for Bjorn Wittrock on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday. Leiden; Boston: Brill: 167–184.
Arnason J.P. (2010b) The Cultural Turn and the Civilizational Approach. European Journal of Social Theory, 13(1): 67–82.
Arnason J.P. (2015) Elias and Eisenstadt: The Multiple Meanings of Civilisation. Social Imaginaries, 1(2): 146–176.
Arnason J.P. (2020) The Labyrinth of Modernity: Horizons, Pathways and Mutations. L.: Rowman and Littlefield.
Bourdieu P., Wacquant L. (1992) An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Eisenstadt S.N. (1987) Macrosociology and Sociological Theory: Some New Directions. Contemporary Sociology, 16(5): 602–609.
Eisenstadt S.N. (1998) Comparative Studies and Sociological Theory: Autobiographical Notes. The American Sociologist, 29(1): 38–58.
Eisenstadt S.N. (2000) The Civilizational Dimension in Sociological Analysis. Thesis Eleven, 62(1): 1–21.
Elias N. (1978) What is Sociology? N.Y.: Columbia University Press.
Goudsblom J. (2006) Civilization: The Career of a Controversial Concept. History and Theory, 45(2): 288–297.
Hall J.R., Grindstaff L., Lo M.-Ch. (2010) Introduction: Culture, Lifeworlds, and Globalization. In: Hall J.R., Grindstaff L., Lo M.-Ch. (eds.) Handbook of Cultural Sociology. L.; N.Y.: Routledge: 1–10.
Kilminster R. (1998) Structuration Theory as a World-View. In: Kilminster R. The Sociological Revolution: From the Enlightenment to the Global Age. L.: Routledge: 115–144.
Olick J.K. (2010) What is “The Relative Autonomy of Culture”? In: Hall J.R., Grindstaff L., Lo M.-Ch. (eds.) Handbook of Cultural Sociology. L.; N.Y.: Routledge: 97–108.
Olick J.K. (2019) What is “The Relative Autonomy of Culture”? In: Grindstaff L., Lo M.-Ch., Hall J.R. (eds.) Routledge Handbook of Cultural Sociology: 2nd Edition. L.; N.Y.: Routledge: 75–84.
Piiroinen T. (2014) For “Central Conflation”: A Critique of Archerian Dualism. Sociological Theory, 32(2): 79–99.
Smith J. (2017) Debating Civilisations: Interrogating Civilisational Analysis in a Global Age. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
