Search

Copyright of Socioloski Pregled is the property of Srpsko Sociolosko Drustvo 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.)

Education system is situated in formal educational and pedagogical institutions. However, considering that schools are not the only places for education, this paper examines the possibilities of teaching sociology in museums as a form of out-of-classroom learning. Teaching sociology in a museum provides opportunities for developing lasting basic knowledge and life-long learning, establishing and developing aesthetic and critical thinking aspects of students' personalities, and observing personal lives and experiences within a wider social context. The paper shows suggestions for this type of out-of-classroom learning, teacher's role in planning and visiting museums, teaching methods and units that can be attained in this form of learning, and a museum as an educational instrument. Learning through collaboration with other institutions in the local community shifts the learning context towards more complex cognitive processes. In the process of joint processing of a phenomenon, constructive discussion is encouraged and carried out in an unconventional form of class. At the same time, the cooperation between the local community and the school is being improved because the school upgrades its role of knowledge transfer to the role of a living centre in the community, and the school is actively involved in the needs of the local community. Among the teaching methods applicable to teaching in a museum, we have singled out a dialogical method and an interactive method because of their closeness to the constructivist approach in which the process of acquiring knowledge is conceived as the creation of the individual and the product of constructions. The essence of the teaching process in modern education lies in competencies among which the most important is that a student learns to learn and apply the acquired knowledge in practice.

This paper gives a concise overview of two specific methods – photo-elicitation and photovoice – which originated in anthropology, but found an application in sociology as well, mostly because of the closeness of these two disciplines on the theoretical and methodological level, as well as on the institutional. This closeness is, among other things, noticeable in the highly specific academic directions of these disciplines, such as those oriented towards the visual sphere, like visual anthropology and visual sociology. The specificity of the two mentioned methods is reflected in the fact that they are based on the visual and visual materials in general, and their use is, to a large extent, legitimated by a specific social context characterised by the predominance of the visual in many aspects (representational, communicative, political, urban to mention just a few) at both the global and local levels. Despite this situation, the mentioned methods, as well as those similar to them, are still used quite ‘shyly’ in research approaches to contemporary society. This paper discusses the central features and epistemological potential of photo-elicitation and photovoice, as well as their different formal variations, especially in the case of photo-elicitation. Basically, both methods are based in traditional research approaches like classic interviews and focus group discussions. Despite this, their use represents a visible and certainly significant expansion of the methodological range. In that sense, special attention is paid to the possible advantages of these methods which separate them in a certain way from other methodological practices. In order to prevent their uncritical glorification, the limitations and disadvantages of these methods are also discussed, which should offer a more nuanced methodological picture.

Copyright of Socioloski Pregled is the property of Srpsko Sociolosko Drustvo 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 paper discusses the need for an interdisciplinary approach in the study and understanding of society as a whole. An interdisciplinary approach through the study of sociology and social work is a necessity for both scientific approaches in the 21st century. In the first part of the paper, we talk about society and man, as well as the subject of study of sociology and social work. We emphasize that both scientific approaches, sociology, and social work, are relatively young in the context of their establishment. The basic conceptual determinants of sociology and social work are given, as well as the places of meeting and perspectives for both scientific approaches. The first part of the paper also talks about the Chicago School as a meeting place for sociology and social work, and about the causes and consequences of divergence, between sociology and social work, within the Chicago School. In the second part of the paper, we talk about the challenges in the demarcation of sociology and social work, where we emphasize the problem of partialization of scientific fields and processes present in the so-called „identification confusion“ and „jurisdiction“ of scientific fields. The content on the dialectical understanding of sociology and social work is thematic, with special reference to the branches of sociological theory – social spheres, spiritual life, and management. We emphasize that there is an inseparability in understanding between social work and sociology, especially in areas such as marriage and family, gender, age, education, deviant behavior, leisure, socialization, personality, social groups, lifestyle and health, youth, regulatory mechanisms, etc. We conclude our paper with special reference to the relationship between sociology and social work from the perspective of Bosnian society.

Copyright of Socioloski Pregled is the property of Srpsko Sociolosko Drustvo 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 Socioloski Pregled is the property of Srpsko Sociolosko Drustvo 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 Sociologija/Sociology: Journal of Sociology, Social Psychology & Social Anthropology is the property of MOD International 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.)

This paper deals with the many-faced crisis in the Orthodox Church in Serbia, visible in almost all aspects of its contemporary existence. Among the examples are those that point to the existence of the crisis of criteria, the crisis of consistency, the crisis of the sacred, the crisis of indiscriminate interpretation of history and its heritage, the crisis of "feeling for others", and the crisis of the sense of "the spirit of the times" and "the spirit of place". The paper also features the possible reasons why the professional community, primarily in the field of sociology, psychology, and (art) history, did not adequately deal with the aforementioned issues, with the view that this endeavour requires deep elaboration, as well as courage and objectivity, including the willingness to interpret all sides of history, ancient and modern, regardless of whether it is (predominantly) "light" or "dark". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author in this discussion opens a great theme from the spiritual creation of the Belgrade, Montenegro, ex-Yugoslav and European philosophers of culture, prof. dr. Ratko Bozovic (1934). It is a reception of sociological, philosophical and literary points of view, this excellent reader, critical intellectual and writer, or emeritus professor at the Faculty of Political Sciences, University of Belgrade. The life path of R. Božović went from his native Banja Luka through Montenegro (he finished high school in Nikšić), and then he was educated in Belgrade, where he studied and graduated in sociology and literature, master's and master's degree at the Belgrade University. He worked for a short time in several institutions, the culture of the federal administration, and then devoted himself to a professorial career at several universities. His opus is very impersonal and diverse, content and moves in several philosophical and sociological disciplines. He is the author of over fifty works and more than 300 debates and studies, published in the country and abroad. Translated into several world languages. In many democratic environments, a guest and a lecturer are very pleased. Prof. R. Bozovic is a participant in many tribunes and gatherings, which he gave the impression of an extraordinary critical reader, and many call him a modern Demonstration of Belgrade. In this paper, we intend to present a critical review of Božović's work, and on the occasion of the 83rd year of life and six decades of scientific and research work. The aim and task of this paper is to make a modest contribution to reflecting Božović's philosophical literary.

This paper represents a contribution to the consideration of the characteristics of the case study research method in sociological researches. In the first part of paper, some specifics of case study method are described, in the second part we represented ways of use of this method in field research. finally, third part of this paper indicates certain „sub methods“ within case study method, such as „building blocks“ and „process tracing“, which are, at the same time, conditions for developing typological theories. Those „sub methods“ indicate evolution of case study method in social sciences during last few decades, as well as importance of existence and use of such „elastic“ method in all, especially field researches where researcher is facing with a series of cognitive concerns. [Projekat Ministarstva nauke Republike Srbije, br. 178028: Duhovna i materijalna kultura Kosova i Metohije]

This paper is a sociological analysis of the development, possible range, and real effects of one of the latest disciplines to emerge - neuroethics as well as bioethics. The starting premise is that the humanities perspective to a medical and philosophical discipline contributes to the very research done by neuroethics itself. This premise is significant given that the study of the brain surpasses current epistemological frameworks, forcing the examination of whether we perhaps need a new “brain” epistemology. New research on the brain, consciousness, and artificial intelligence has presented the public at large with a myriad of benefits in medicine and illness prevention; however, at the same time, it has opened certain social and ethical questions. The projected possibilities in the development of brain medication and interventions have motivated certain scientists today to speak of neuroscience exclusively from the perspective of bioethics. In other words, the challenges to human survival are directly linked to artificially caused advancements in human consciousness, cognition, intelligence, and to an extent even morality, insofar as these characteristics and capacities depend on biochemical and molecular processes. Considering the potentially real societal consequences of such development of a single discipline, we thought it relevant to seek certain answers by analyzing dilemmas and particular medical cases, along with their effects, through the optics of social, humanities, and biomedical phenomena. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the influences of feminist thought on sociological theory and research, refracted through the conceptualization of the sphere of everyday life. It is argued that there are important theoretical affinities between feminism and the sociology of everyday life, as it has developed since mid-20th century. Main feminist contributions to sociological study of everyday life are identified at two levels: substantive (the study of formerly neglected social phenomena, particularly the private sphere), and epistemological (the questioning of positivistic ideals of objective and neutral social science). The position of the feminist theorist Dorothy Smith is selected for a more detailed critical discussion. In the concluding part of the paper some controversial points in the feminist concept of the sociology of everyday life are indicated.

Copyright of Sociologija/Sociology: Journal of Sociology, Social Psychology & Social Anthropology is the property of MOD International 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 Sociologija/Sociology: Journal of Sociology, Social Psychology & Social Anthropology is the property of MOD International 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.)

Sociological and similar researches of family in Serbian society have significant tradition. Regardless of development difficulties, criticism of its theoretical (UN) foundedness, Serbian sociology of family exists as recognizable scientific discipline with noteworthy authorial opus. Considering social circumstances that shaped transformation of Serbian family life, but sociology of family as well, we can speak of four major periods in its development: pre-sociological, early-sociological, post-war/socialist and post-transition/contemporary period. We have presented standing points of four authors that marked first period - Karadžić, Bogišić, Marković and Cvijić. Based on relevant references, the aim of the paper is to point out on specific circumstances that have shaped authors' perspectives, their main findings and their significance, but also to identify major similarities and differences in their analyses of family characteristics and transformation.

The modern university is a subject to notable changes during three previous decades. The Bologna concept of higher education is primarily focused on market principles and thus has caused stagnation in the field of social sciences and humanities, because the principle is not in accordance with the principles of critical thinking, which is a base of these sciences. Nowadays university is expected to be organized according to the model of market business, and this model requires that the knowledge is a profitable category. Social sciences and humanities have never been able to be successful within market and commercial framework because their nature and role in the society is quite different. Technical and specialist concept of higher education is primarily is concerned with the necessity of acquiring of certain skills necessary for economy and neglects the concept of education of an individual and development of his/her critical and free thinking. In this paper we will consider the consequences this concept have had on social sciences and humanities, especially regarding the position of Sociology as an academic discipline at two public universities in the Republic of Srpska: University of Banja Luka and University of East Sarajevo. We will analyze all study programs from these two universities in order to check how the Bologna reform of higher education in syllabi neglects general educational subjects like Sociology. The general tendency is that study programs, especially natural and technical sciences, do not offer disciplines from social sciences and humanities. It is illusory to expect that pragmatism, positivism and market principles without critical discourse of social sciences and humanities lead to advancement and development of the society. Social sciences, especially Sociology, should have a much better position in the system of higher education because it is the only science whose theoretical and methodological apparatus is able to detect causal connections of social processes and problems and to offer solution for them as well.

Implementing practical religious rules in his personal and social life, a Muslim is approaching secrets of eternal bliss and supreme realities of the universe. In fact, these rules are the result of God's knowledge. B rilliant representatives of Islam's juristic heritage found their final formulation in religious sources - through a professional process called ijtihad. In order to get to know the subject of these rules, they were necessarily focused on empirical achievements and social contexts of their time. Under the influence of the dominant modern science, Muslim reformers identify ijtihad with empirical research. In this way, they reject sublime and unchanging cognitive bases of ijtihad, which comprise religious revelation and rational knowledge. However, they ignore the fact that modern science has absolutely no power to judge all the realities and values as scientists from XIX century naively wanted. In this paper, we try to follow fundamental changes in the meaning of ijtihad, primarily using a detailed content analysis of popular works of two famous Muslim reformist thinkers, Muhammad Iqbal and Ali Shariati. The former insists that today only modern, empirical knowledge has scientific credibility and that it is the only one to follow in all aspects of life. In the works of the latter, we read that in the light of ijtihad, Islam has to change and go in line with modern science and new social needs.

Endeavours to secure status of exact science for economics led to the exclusion of social and historical component from economic analysis. It is a long term process which started within classical political economy, gradually diverging the postulate upon which economic science is based from economic reality. Above mentioned changes are result of the long-term process during which holistic, social and historical aspects had been gradually removing from economic analysis. In this paper we will analyze the role of marginalism in the extrusion of social and historical from economic analysis.

The micro-macro or agency-structure question is indisputably one of the most important theoretical issues within the human and social sciences. The main purpose of this paper is to carefully explore, fruitfully overview and comprehensively critique the contemporary sociological literature on micro (agency) and macro (structure), from a reflexive-dialectical standpoint. This particular standpoint strategically emphasizes both the circularity and the relative autonomy of structures vis à vis actors, or of institutions vis à vis individuals. In this analytic context, it is critically discussed the varied notion of a middle position on the ongoing theoretical debate between positivism and constructivism, as well as the epistemologically beneficial role that meta-theoretical reflexivity and the internal conversation can potentially play in this debate. In specific, the internal conversation (Margaret Archer) gives a reflexive-dialectical impetus to the micro-macro relationship, while embracing a needed analytical dualism (not necessarily an ontological one).

In the first section of the paper the profession of clinical sociologist in relation to other related professions in psychiatry is defined. Then various aspects of the position of clinical sociologist in a psychiatric institution, as well as specific features of various functions and roles of clinical sociologist in psychiatry and medicine are discussed. The conclusion points to some contradictions inherent in this profession. Advantages to be gained by introducing the profession of clinical sociologist in psychiatric institutions in our country are identified.

The paper analyzes the theoretical opus of Bruno Latour and his treatment of the concept of critique. In the first section "actor-network theory" is presented through its key notions (actant, network, translation, associations) together with Latour’s theory of modernity. In the second section various aspects of the relation between Latour and critique are discussed - first his own criticism of others (standard sociology and especially "critical", i.e. Bourdieu’s sociology), then the criticisms aimed at his work, to conclude with the political ambivalences of Latour’s attempt to develop an "acritical" social theory. .

Because of the significant analytical advantages, the author prefers social action as initial sociological concept in the relation to social phenomenon. Its basic elements are: actors, subjects and tools, needs and interests, values and norms, positions and roles. Actors set in motion and unify the rest of elements, guide to the magic triangle of sociology (movement, change, order), reaffirm actor paradigm to systemic paradigm. Subjects and tools materialize an action and its overestimate results in technological determinism or (by means of property as institutional appropriation of nature) in the (un)classed historical type of society. Needs and interests are the basis of person's motivation and starting point for depth analysis of sociability. The expansion of legitimate interests circle develops techniques of normative regulation. Values and norms guide to institutional-organizational, positions to vertical and roles to horizontal structure. Values give the meaning to the action as well as to human existence, they are orientations of motivate system of personality but also basic aspect of society. As abstractions, values are latent background of norms and they tell to us what to do, and norms how to do something. Norms are specified instructions for suitable behavior Without normative order, not to be possible the satisfying of needs and the conciliation of interests. Riches, power and prestige are components of social position, and legal status is the determination of rights and obligations of the position. Roles are normative expectation of behavior. Toward kinds of sanctions roles are classified. Roles but also other elements of social action are starting point for sociological analysis of legal norms and institutes. On the other side, the observation of legal component of social actions enriches, strengths and precises sociological analysis of them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]