Search

Since its publication in the 1920s, Mannheim's essay, 'The Problem of Generations' (1952[1928]), has attained seminal status in marked contrast to Norbert Elias's theoretical formulations on generations. Despite Elias's close relationship over many years with Mannheim, the symmetries in their sociological programmes, and, crucially, that Elias's work specifically addresses generational conflict, he remains invisible within the sociology of generations literature. Yet Elias's contributions on this subject are quite extensive, traversing many of his major works. This article begins by reviewing Mannheim's and Elias's formulations on generations and goes on to consider the relevance of Elias's theoretical ideas in relation to contemporary work on generations. The paper contends that Elias's approach is a more empirically employable theoretical frame and also a stronger one for explaining intergenerational conflict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper considers the way social theorists draw on affective imagery to convey ideas about complex social processes such as the formation of subjectivity within a given habitus. The argument focuses on discussions of art in the work of Elias and Foucault to question whether imagery, and particularly imagery drawn from art, serves to simplify more complex processes of reasoning, or whether the image can be understood as a type of conceptual consolidation of an argument rather than a means to simply illustrate or augment it. The paper also raises the question of whether art is a more complex form of social agency than it was sometimes understood to be in its original social context. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

So far there have usually been only two answers to the question of what to do with dichotomies in sociology, either embrace them or attempt to synthesize them. However, this has produced merely an endless vacillation between the two positions, and a paradoxical constant reproduction of dichotomous thinking, rather than its transformation. This paper works towards a 'third answer' to the question, first, by outlining how the concept of the 'Hobbesian problem of order', as proposed by Talcott Parsons, underpins all sociological dichotomies, and why it is important to re-read Hobbes and revisit the so-called 'problem of order'. Second, it explains how Bruno Latour's model of the 'Constitution' of modern thought helps us to understand the dynamics of oppositions like nature/society or agency/structure, and how the problems with dichotomies derive from only perceiving part of the Constitution, rather than all of it. The paper concludes with a discussion of one example of a type of sociology that does operate across all of Latour's Constitution because it is based on a different conception of what is problematic about social order, Norbert Elias' 'figurational sociology', as well as some observations about what we might do with sociology's Constitution from this point onwards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper begins with a critique of orthodox renditions of the social unconscious which (a) retain divisions between a personal sphere and a social sphere, and (b) which are said to be in conflict with each other. The ways in which these are instituted in various psychoanalytic and group-analytic theorizations are briefly delineated. Next, the two versions of the social unconscious (an orthodox and a radical) that are found in Foulkes are described. Elias's notion of process reduction is then used to deconstruct the philosophical basis of the orthodox version of the social unconscious. The thoughts of Radical Foulkes are extended by drawing on Elias and Matte-Blanco, bringing the notion of power into the theoretical schema. This is followed by an examinantion of the impact of the notion of power on Foulkes's conception of the communicational field. Finally, the article describes the consequences of the impact of power on the construction of the psyches of individuals as well as interpersonal relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]