OBSAH





John Holmwood:
Sociologie a její publikum:
proměny vnímání sociologické argumentace 5
Miloslav Petrusek:
O nezbytnosti dialogu s klasiky aneb na cestách
k nové sociologické kultuře 43
Jan Balon:
Obrat k dialogu v současné sociální teorii 63
Hans Joas:
Proměny role sociálních věd :
teoretická perspektiva zaměřující se na jednání 75
Immanuel Wallerstein:
Aktér v sociálních vědách 95

Recenze :
Jiří Chvátal: Orientalismus Edwarda Saida 103
Tomáš Dvořák : Poradci mediálních poradců 113













SOCIOLOGIE A JEJI PUBLIKUM: PROMENY VNIMANI SOCIOLOGICKE ARGUMENTACE
John Holmwood

Sociology and Its Audience(s): Changing Perceptions of Sociological Argument
Abstract
This article begins from a perceived crisis in mainstream sociological theory and the ‘Enlightenment’ reason held to be intrinsic to it. It is my contention that the present crisis – or, at least, talk of crisis – is significantly different from any that has preceded it. The sense that profound changes in the terms of sociological argument were taking place first entered sociological self-consciousness in the 1960s, and their impact has become increasingly acute since then. In my article I try to demonstrate that changes in the form of sociological argument have culminated in an impasse where, in an apparent openness to multiple voices and a reflexive application of sociology to its own undertaking, sociology has seemed to lose its own distinctive voice. Much of the disquiet with the project of a science of society seems to be because the ‘closure’ which is apparently necessary to scientific truths would be at odds with the ‘openness’ necessary to human creativity. The issue is not how to represent different understandings as equally valid, but to recognise that such difference must imply the problematic validity of any account. The task becomes the explanatory one of finding the means to resolve specific problems of understanding in a more inclusive account. Conceived as a problem-solving activity, sociological argument would necessarily be turned towards the world and problems of public relevance, of social life in the communities of which sociologists are members.



O NEZBYTNOSTI DIALOGU S KLASIKY ANEB NA CESTÁCH K NOVÉ SOCIOLOGICKÉ KULTUŘE
Miloslav Petrusek

On the Necessity of the Dialogue with the Classics: Towards the New Sociological Culture
Abstract
This article discusses the role of the classics in contemporary sociology. Especially, it concentrates on the debates on the viability of classical sociological theories. Given the persisting interest in the classics, it is claimed that for sociology, as a multiparadigm science, is the dialogue with the classics inevitable and enriching. The argument begins with the consideration of the status of sociology as a science, continues with the general account of the differences between social and natural sciences (especially with regard to the problem of the inability – manifested evidently by the sociologists – of reaching consensus as to the basic understanding of the nature of their discipline. The argument ends with the attempt to demonstrate what would be missing in sociological analysis, if we stopped listening to the incentives of the influential thinkers of the past.



„OBRAT K DIALOGU“ V SOUČASNÉ SOCIÁLNÍ TEORII
Jan Balon

The Dialogical Turn in Contemporary Social Theory
Abstract
In my paper, I concentrate on the so–called “dialogical turn” in social inquiry. I do not intend to enter the debates on transcendental or transcontextual structure of dialogue. I want to argue that the “dialogical turn” in social sciences is first of all an attempt to retire from the game of approaches claiming to complete a “synthesis” of divergent orientations and perspectives in social inquiry with the ambition to arrive through dialogue at some non–dialogical end, at some “truth” transcending the context of concrete dialogue. In my argument, I address the specific character of the dialogue between social scientists and their audiences; especially the limits, possibilities and presuppositions of the dialogue between social scientists and lay actors (put shortly, what constitutes, forms or restricts their mutual interest in dialogue). I try to follow the argument that the problem solving activity of sociology as a science is basically constituted as a question of incompetence (either on the side of the researcher or the researched). The mutual interest in knowledge, explanation or understanding arises in practice as an answer to an identified problem. If social science is not able to identify problems, it becomes irrelevant both to the public and to its own audience.



PROMĚNY ROLE SOCIÁLNÍCH VĚD
Teoretická perspektiva zaměřující se na jednání
Hans Joas

The Changing Role of the Social Sciences
An Action-Theoretical Perspective
Abstract
In his article, Hans Joas reconsiders the report of the Gulbenkian Commission for the Restructuring of the Social Sciences published in 1996 under the title ‘Open the Social Sciences’. He argues for the action-theoretical perspective and suggests six points that in his opinion have to be high on the agenda of the social sciences of the future and also constitute possible foci of interest for true interdisciplinarity. None of them, he claims, can appropriately be dealt with in the framework of one of the existing social-scientific disciplines. He believes the points on his list form a whole of a ‘rehumanized’ social science and can help to formulate a theoretically grounded agenda for the social sciences today.










AKTÉR V SOCIÁLNÍCH VĚDÁCH
Odpověď Hansi Joasovi
Immanuel Wallerstein

The Actor in the Social Sciences
A Reply to Hans Joas
Abstract
In his reply to Hans Joas, Immanuel Wallerstein suggests that if we are to be relevant to the debate on the future of the social sciences, we must try to overcome the still very powerful concept of the ‘two cultures’ in the university and scholarly arenas, and that amid the chaotic bifurcation that the modern world-system as an historical system is undergoing. Particularly, he sees three urgent questions on his agenda: (1) clarification of the historical choices before us as the modern world-system passes through its anarchic period of disintegration; (2) developing a language that will permit us to dissolve the categories of the political, the economic and the sociocultural into the unified kinds of action in which actors in the real world engage; (3) finding the right balance in our role as intellectuals in pursuing analytic truth, moral choice and political wisdom to enable us to move from here to where we want to go.