Alle Publikationen

  • Erweiterte Suche öffnen

Treffer: 6
  • <<
  • 1
  • 2017

  • Danner, Leno Francisco; Bavaresco, Agemir; Danner, Fernando (2017): The aesthetics of minorities against the correlation of strong institutionalism, scientism and technicality. on the voice-praxis of the minorities as art-literature. In: CLAREIRA-REVISTA DE FILOSOFIA DA REGIAO AMAZONICA (4/1), S. 13-48

    Abstract: In the paper, we defend that the aesthetic voice-praxis allows to social movements, citizen initiatives and political-cultural minorities the self-expression and self-affirmation from themselves and by themselves in terms of lyrical-political I-We, so that to frame and overcome the correlation of strong institutionalism, scientism and technicality which characterizes the constitution, legitimation, evolution and social-political linking of modern institutions, such as science, law, political parties and economy. These modern institutions or social systems are logical-technical, non-political and non-normative structures-subjects, marked and streamlined for a self-referential and self-subsisting dynamics which is eminently endogenous, autonomous and overlap in relation to the spontaneity and informality of the epistemological-political subjects, values and practices proper to civil society, centralizing and monopolizing the constitution, programming and functioning of their fields of research and objects and, from here, framing the own voice-praxis of these civil society's epistemological-political subjects in their nowadays action and relatively to institutions. In this sense, in the correlation of strong institutionalism, scientism and technicality, the institutions become the basis, the arena, the value and the epistemological-political subject par excellence and exclusive of the foundation of themselves and even relating to the social-cultural structuration and evolution, peripherizing the informal and spontaneous epistemological-political subjects of civil society. Against this apolitical and depoliticizing tendency assumed by modern social systems, we argue in favor of an aesthetics of the minorities that enables both their spontaneous and informal, political, politicizing and normative self-affirmation and self-expression, with no scientist and institutionalist mediations, and a political-normative praxis which is alternative and opposed to strong institutionalism and its scientism and technicism, because it is inclusive, participative and direct. Therefore, the social criticism, political-normative praxis and cultural resistance need a non-systemic, non-institutionalist, non-technicist and non-scientificist voice-praxis that can be founded and allowed by aesthetics in its anti-paradigmatic, non- institutionalist and anti-scientificist sense.

  • Krippendorff, Klaus (2017): Monologic versus Dialogic Distinctions of Selves. In: CONSTRUCTIVIST FOUNDATIONS (13/1), S. 18-21

    Abstract: This commentary contrasts the monologic accounts of self-reference pursued in Kauffman's target article with natural language notions of referring to one's self, drawing distinctions, and constructing identities collaboratively. It suggests that mathematical calculi, which assume the perspective of observers, are fundamentally incapable of accounting for how the selves of interactively involved participants in social systems come to be. It questions the claim that a mathematical notion of "self" can shed light on the being of humans and argues for dialogical distinctions of identities. Finally, it suggests that publishing and enacting monological conceptions of selves can have undesirable social consequences.

  • 2016

  • Sawyer, R. K. (2016): The Mechanisms of Emergence. In: Philosophy of the Social Sciences 34 (2), S. 260-282. DOI: 10.1177/0048393103262553

    Abstract: This article focuses on emergence in social systems. The author begins by proposing a new tool to explore the mechanisms of social emergence: multi agent based computer simulation. He then draws on philosophy of mind to develop an account of social emergence that raises potential problems for the methodological individualism of both social mechanism and of multi agent simulation. He then draws on various complexity concepts to propose a set of criteria whereby one can determine whether a given social mechanism generates emergent properties, in the sense that their explanation cannot be reduced to a mechanistic account of individuals and their interactions. This combined account helps to resolve the competing claims of methodological individualists and social realists. The author's conclusion is that the scope of mechanistic explanation may be limited due to the extreme complexity of many social systems.

  • Viskovatoff, Alex (2016): Foundations of Niklas Luhmann’s Theory of Social Systems. In: Philosophy of the Social Sciences 29 (4), S. 481-516. DOI: 10.1177/004839319902900402

    Abstract: Of all contemporary social theorists, Luhmann has best understood the centrality of the concept of meaning to social theory and has most extensively worked out the notion's implications. However, despite the power of his theory the theory suffers from difficulties impeding its reception. This article attempts to remedy this situation with some critical arguments and proposals for revision. First, the theory Luhmann adopted from biology as the basis of his own theory was a poor choice since that theory has no explanatory power, being purely descriptive; furthermore, that theory is fundamentally flawed since it implies that viruses are impossible. Second, Luhmann's theory of meaning cannot coherently make the social domain autonomous as he desires since Luhmann does not take into account the distinction between syntax and semantics. By introducing this distinction, making clear that social systems consist of rules, not just communications, and raising the rule concept to the same prominence in social theory as those of actor and system, autonomy can be maintained while avoiding the counterintuitive aspects of Luhmann's theory.

  • 2015

  • Momdzhyan, Karen; Podvoyskiy, Denis G.; Krjevov, Vladimir S.; Antonovskiy, Alexander Yu.; Barash, Raisa E. (2015): Systematic Theoretical Approach to the Explanation of The Social Reality. Philosophical or Sociological Methodology?

    Abstract: Studying the relation of sociology and philosophy, the authors distinguish between two different types of philosophy: scientific philosophy that studies the world and man's place in it and evaluative philosophy that seeks meaning of human existence in the world. The authors examine different interpretations of sociology, stopping at one of them, which studies the social life as a system, it's integrity and historical types of existence (Momdzhyan K.Kh).The article discusses the validity of the proposed current interpretations of two key concepts - the "social" and "society" (Krzhevov VS.). Special attention is paid to describe characteristic obstacles to a potential constructive dialog between sociological and philosophical communities (Podvoyskiy D.G.). Some prospects of systemic philosophy of sciences (in framework of the sociology of knowledge) are considered in their consequences for the philosophical theory of truth (Antonovskiy A.Yu). Some resources of the theory of social systems (especially the concepts of double contingency and self descriptions) are drawn as an interdisciplinary methodology of analyze of culture and multiculturalism (Barash R.E.).

  • 2005

  • Bertuglia, Cristoforo Sergio; Vaio, Franco (2005): Nonlinearity, chaos, and complexity. The dynamics of natural and social systems. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press. Online verfügbar unter http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=177022

     

    Abstract: Covering a broad range of topics, this text provides a comprehensive survey of the modelling of chaotic dynamics and complexity in the natural and social sciences. Its attention to models in both the physical and social sciences and the detailed philosophical approach make this an unique text in the midst of many current books on chaos and complexity. Part 1 deals with the mathematical model as an instrument of investigation. The general meaning of modelling and, more specifically, questions concerning linear modelling are discussed. Part 2 deals with the theme of chaos and the origin of chaotic dynamics. Part 3 deals with the theme of complexity: a property of the systems and of their models which is intermediate between stability and chaos. Including an extensive index and bibliography along with numerous examples and simplified models, this is an ideal course text.

  • <<
  • 1