Teorie vědy XVI/ XXIX 3–4 / 2007


OBSAH / CONTENTS

William Outhwaite:
Nové filosofie sociální vědy: Realistická alternativa 5
Miloslav Petrusek:
Předpoklady sociologické metateorie a filosofie vědy 39
Michael Warner:
Styly intelektuálních publik 81
Alain Touraine:
Sociologie po sociologii 117
Jiří Chvátal:
Durkheim a epistemologie, Durkheimova epistemologie 133
Tomáš Dvořák:
Peter Winch a idea sociální vědy 157
Petra Gümplová:
Suverenita, stát a demokracie v českém politickém
diskursu 169
Klasické texty:
Dennis Wrong:
Přesocializovaná koncepce člověka v moderní sociologii 209
Recenze:
Tomáš Dvořák: Niklas Luhman – Sociální systémy 233

---

Nové filosofie sociální vědy:
Realistická alternativa
William Outhwaite
New Philosophies of Social Science: The Realist Alternative
Abstract
This text provides a detailed examination of realism as a philosophy
of natural science and its implications for the practice of social
science. It also summarises some of the central themes of realism and
its relations with other philosophical traditions. Realism is seen as
essentially an ontological doctrine which means that it shares with
neo-pragmatism a critique of the predominantly epistemological
stress – most evident in rationalism – of much recent philosophy.
It is argued that on the relation between science and philosophy,
realism adopts intermediate position between the anti-philosophical
philosophy of the pragmatists and the rationalist conception as the
judge of science. In conclusion, new realist philosophy of science
– newly defined against earlier versions of realism – is offered as
a sufficient tool with which the endemic problems of the social
sciences might be addressed.


Předpoklady sociologické metateorie a filosofie vědy
Miloslav Petrusek
Premises of the Sociological Metatheory and the Philosophy
of Science
Abstract
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 their
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.


Styly intelektuálních publik
Michael Warner
Styles of Intellectual Publics
Abstract
The essay attempts to rethink the relationships between styles, publics,
and politics, as well as the position of intellectuals in it. Any
writing, even in the most private form of a diary, as an example
from the George Orwell’s novel 1984 shows, is addressed to a public.
Paradoxically, the public only exists, as Warner asserts, by virtue
of its own address. In this sense, style does perform a political function.
However, the critics of the opaque writing of some leftist academics
overlook that the public can have a temporal span into the
future when they view it only horizontally in terms of its size and
deduce the political efficacy of writing on that account. The confusion
of the public with citizens in general leads to the undermining
of politics by the headline temporality of journalistic publics.
Aspirations of some academics for the role of public intellectuals
are faced with the fact that for the most part there are currently no
conditions for public circulation between these spheres. As a possible
counterweight, Warner recalls the approach of Michel Foucault,
not merely as a reminder of how it relocated the limits of the political,
but also in order to suggest how the path between intellectual
work and politics could be bridged by the method of “problematization”:
the development of a domain of acts and practices on the
scene of a tentative counterpublic.


Sociologie po sociologii
Alain Touraine
Sociology after Sociology
Abstract
The unity of the sociology now termed classical was not that of
a theory or discourse about social organization, social actors or the
ways in which social wholes change; it was the study of society defined
as a set of interdependent mechanisms ensuring the integration
or combination of mutually opposed elements: the individualism
of the actors and the internalization of institutional norms in
the service of collective integration. The primary historical reason
for the decline of this classical sociology is that its most stable foundation,
the opposition between haves and have-nots along with that
between men and women, was slowly undermined by a series of
great social movements based at once on a quest for liberation and
on the idea of equality It was the crisis in the earlier representations
of social life which provoked, beyond the decline of the earlier sociology,
the creation of a new intellectual space in which a constellation
of forms of thought arose which constitute today what may be called
contemporary sociology, and which is a sociology of ultramodernity.
It is no longer in terms of objective situations or evaluations,
economic or otherwise, that the social actor is explained. It is the
cultural actor, his image of himself and his demands that govern
a rapidly increasing part of social life. Throughout the world and
in all sectors of social life, actors are making a comeback. Reversal
of the conception and role of institutions leads us to see them as
instruments for the defence of individuals against norms. Today’s
sociology is better explained by its future than by its past. The new
sociology is already constituted as a set of questions and sensibilities,
more widespread across the planet than any other previous
form of social thought. But this de facto existence of the new sociology
is not – not yet – accompanied by sufficient self-reflection.


Durkheim a epistemologie,
Durkheimova epistemologie
Jiří Chvátal
Durkheim and Epistemology, Durkheim’s Epistemology
Abstract
Based especially on The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (1912)
the text tries to delimitate contours of „Durkheim’s epistemology“
(i. e. relatively coherent group of assertions). It argues that the deep
„objective“ of this connection is to ensure autonomy and specific
field for the new-born scientific province, sociology, through the
claim that this contribution can solve and actually does solve (from
the French sociologist’s point of view) „traditional epistemological
hardships“ into which philosophical empiricism and rationalism
fall. Durkheim’s sociological deduction of categories (instead of
transcendental deduction), as Ernst Cassirer calls it, is presented
in contrast to the „holy positivists interpretations“ of his writing,
exclusively intentional conceptualizations of action and notion
formation, and correspondence theory of truth. The text concludes
that despite noticeable inconsistencies Durkheim’s suggestions provide
inspiring material even for today’s sociological production in
this field.


Peter Winch a idea sociální vědy
Tomáš Dvořák
Peter Winch and the Idea of a Social Science
Abstract
Firstly, this article outlines the main points made by Peter Winch in
his breakthrough book The Idea of a Social Science. Its fundamental
thesis, inspired by Wittgenstein and his accounts on the relation
between language and reality, is the assumption that social sciences
engage in philosophical endeavor, because the problems they deal
with are not empirical, but conceptual. Following Wittgensteinian
line of thought he comes up with the idea that all social action
can be explained as rule following and therefore it should be approached
by conceptual means other than those used by natural
sciences. Secondly, this article explores the impact that The Idea of
a Social Science had on the discussion about the nature of social
sciences. It outlines it‘s main critiques which deal with (1) Winch‘s
conception of philosophy (2) the notion of rule following and (3)
descriptive nature of Winch‘s approach. Finally, Winch‘s critique
of positivism in social sciences is identified as his main and lasting
contribution to social thought.


Suverenita, stát a demokracie v českém politickém diskursu
Petra Gümplová
Sovereignty, the state and democracy in the Czech political
discourse
Abstract
The text analyzes the discourse on sovereignty in the Czech politics
in the light of current processes of the transformation of sovereignty
caused by the globalization and Europeanization. The author discusses
the dispute between liberal-conservative critics of the European
integration and cosmopolitan critics of the sovereign statehood
and points to the limits of both positions. It is argued that
the conservatives who warn against the loss of sovereignty in the
ongoing process of Europeanization and who call for the protection
of the Czech statehood cling to an obsolete and invalid concept of
sovereignty that is no longer adequate to changing social and geopolitical
conditions. Similarly, it is pointed out that the defenders
of cosmopolitan Europe who take sovereignty to be an old and useless
category hindering the process of democratization are unable
to offer an alternative capable of responding to growing concerns
regarding the democratic deficit and the loss of political autonomy.
The text tries to show that both positions misconstrue the challenges
of globalization and Europeanization for the state and democracy.


Přesocializovaná koncepce člověka v moderní sociologii1
Dennis H. Wrong
The Oversocialized Conception of Man
in Modern Sociology
Abstract
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.