Search

Copyright of Soziologische Revue is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Max Scheler and Siegfried Kracauer met during World War I and remained in correspondence until the early phase of the Weimar Republic. The two exchanged ideas and plans, and at times Kracauer sent his early essays for Scheler's comments on and recommendations for publishing them. The correspondence brings to light some revealing philosophical similarities between the two authors: both Scheler and Kracauer were interested in material phenomenology, the philosophy of emotions, formal sociology; moreover, they also enthusiastically supported the German war. In 1921, the conversation broke off, presumably because of the sharp criticism of Scheler's study "Vom Ewigen im Menschen," which Kracauer published in the Frankfurter Zeitung that same year. But even after the end of the exchange, Scheler remained an intellectual point of reference in Kracauer's thinking. This becomes evident from the detailed reviews he wrote of Scheler's works until the end of the Weimar period. The essay attempts to historically situate and philosophically reconstruct the correspondence between Scheler and Kracauer presented in this issue. In this way, a constellation of thought in the 1910s and 1920s becomes visible – one that that has received little attention to date. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How do sociologists know what they know? Although sociology around the world is deeply shaped by processes of internationalization, strong regional, linguistic, and cultural differences persist. This concerns general production of knowledge, applied theories, methods as well as questions posed. In the present contribution, we discuss the development of and differences inherent to epistemic cultures in qualitative and interpretive research in French and German Sociology since the 1960s. In doing so, we refer to a document and interview based research project we directed in 2012-2014. Epistemic cultures are conceived of as the forms, ways, and practices of producing and legitimizing scientific (sociological) "output" involved in sociological knowledge-making. The production of knowledge is the core "action problem" that sociological inquiry is confronted with. This problem is addressed in rather different ways. French qualitative sociology trusts in researchers' skills, competencies, and inspirations in order to establish new knowledge. German qualitative and interpretive sociology prefers establishing "legitimacy through procedure" (procedural legitimation). We illustrate the unfolding of this difference between French and German based qualitative sociology in the early 1960s and discuss how it shapes their further development. In doing so, we intend to contribute to a current reflexive movement in sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a report on a conference about German sociologist Helmut Schelsky, held in Chemnitz, Germany, from October 25-26, 2012. Topics of discussion included Schelsky's place within the broader history of German sociology in the twentieth century, his reception of the works of sociologist Max Weber, and Schelsky's writings on such subjects as English political philosopher Thomas Hobbes, institutionalism, and the sociology of sexuality.

Copyright of Österreichische Zeitschrift für Soziologie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article presents a response to Frank Welz' article about the relationship between sociological history and theory, focusing on Welz' criticism of Robert K. Merton as representative of an obsolete concept of this relationship. The author contrasts Merton's ideas from 1967 as interpreted by Welz and himself. Topics discussed include methodologies and materials employed by historians and theoreticians of sociology, their different aims and approaches, and their possible integration.

The article presents a report on a conference about German sociologist Dieter Claessens, held in Dresden, Germany, from February 3-5, 2011. Topics discussed included Claessens' attempt to link sociology and philosophical anthropology, his ideas about social evolution, and the influence on him of German sociologist Arnold Gehlen.

Copyright of Soziologie is the property of Campus Verlag GmbH and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Historical Social Research - Supplement is the property of GESIS - Leibniz-Institute for the Social Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Soziologie is the property of Campus Verlag GmbH and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Soziologie is the property of Campus Verlag GmbH and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Österreichische Zeitschrift für Soziologie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Leviathan: Zeitschrift für Sozialwissenschaft (Springer Science & Business Media B.V.) is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses the membership and ideology of the so-called Leipzig School of sociology during the years of National Socialist Party (Nazi) rule in Germany from 1933-1945. The author claims that the principals were involved less with a scientific school of sociology than with pseudo-scientific apologetics for the Nazi regime and its worldview. The role of these professors during World War II and their subsequent postwar de-Nazification is examined. National Socialist political leanings and roles played by the sociologists Hans Freyer, Arnold Gehlen, and Helmut Schelsky are reviewed.

Copyright of Soziologie is the property of Campus Verlag GmbH and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article presents a speech given by German sociologist Hans-Georg Soeffner at the 34th conference of the German sociologists' association on October 6, 2008 in Jena, Germany, in which he discusses the history of German sociology, the relations between sociological and economic reasoning, and the impact of religious doubt on culture.

The article presents information about the 34th congress of the German sociological society Deutsche Gesellschaft für Soziologie, held on October 6-10 in Jena, Germany. Subjects under discussion at the conference included the social and sociological aspects of uncertainty in 21st century culture, the history of sociological studies in Germany, and social aspects of the 2008-2009 global financial crisis. Participants included German sociologists Dirk Kaesler, Ulrich Beck, and Claus Offe.

Copyright of Historical Social Research - Supplement is the property of GESIS - Leibniz-Institute for the Social Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses the publication of the Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe (MEGA - Complete Edition of Marx and Engels' Works) and the "Max-Weber-Gesamtausgabe" (MWG - Complete Works of Max Weber). Both editions by German authors are said to monumentalize two German thinkers whose reputations have undergone reversals since the fall of the Berlin Wall. A history of the respective publication projects is provided.

The article discusses the origins and history of sociology and in particular the multiple metaphorical underpinnings of the concept of "Gesellschaft" ("society"), beginning with the contending scientific visions of the societal world of Giovanni Vico and René Descartes. That contention hinged on society as a metaphorical ascription or projection, just as art is an act of metaphorical transformation, versus a Cartesian view of the body politic as subject to objective study as a body in itself. Auguste Comte's view of the bourgeois society is described, as is the use of the corporeal metaphor for society in the works of such sociologists as Talcott Parsons and Nikolas Luhmann.

The article presents information from a 2006 report by the German sociological study group for sociology and ecology. The study group's founding in 1996 at a sociology congress in Dresden, Germany is described. An overview is given of the historical relationship between German sociology and the environment, and the first German sociological environmental movement is dated to the 1980s. Publications by sociologists Ulrich Beck and Niklas Luhmann are also described as influential to the movement.

The author presents a response to an essay by Peter L. Berger titled "Does Sociology Still Make Sense?" that was printed in the March 1994 issue of the publication. She discusses sociology within a historical context, focusing on the role of expectations in sociological research as well as the necessity of constructing logical and objective hypotheses. Additionally, she discusses sociological trends and the role of generalizations in research.

The article discusses the history of Russian sociology before the 1917 revolution. Information is offered on the social theories of Russian sociologists of the "Moscow School" at the University of Moscow, Russia founded by Wasili Kljutschewski, historical political conditions for Russian sociologists are considered, and the role of positivism in Russian humanities is emphasized.

The cognitive and institutional developments of sociology in Finland are reviewed from the perspective of the unique problems of science in peripheral countries. In terms of the different colonizing effects on the orientations of national sociology one or more world centers of the field are identified. These correspond to shifts in exogeneous influences from one to two centers, and eventually to multiple center influences. At the same time the institutional expansion of sociology went hand in hand with growing societal demands for sociological research addressed to problems of specifically national relevance. Consequently, contemporary sociology is a reflection of attempts to balance dualistic, but not necessarily complementary goals of nationally relevant research and increasing participation in and recognition of the discourse of the international scientific community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstracts of the articles "Die Zukunft der Soziologie", by Hans-Gerog Soeffner, and "Fundamentale Erkentnisse der Soziologie?", by Norman Braun and Christian Ganser are presented.

The article discusses the 35th conference of the Gesellschaft für Soziologie (German Society for Sociology), titled "Transnationale Vergesellschaftungen" ("Transnational Socialization"), that was held in Frankfurt am Main, Germany from October 11-15, 2010. Topics discussed included global economy, global technology, and global knowledge, the history of scientific research in Frankfurt am Main, and the diversity of the fields of study within sociology.

The article introduces the issue by describing its reports on the history of sociology in Germany, the self-evaluation of sociology, and sociological conference reports.