Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 11

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

The death of class?

100%
EN
Artykuł zawiera krytyczną analizę tezy o „śmierci klas”, sformułowanej przez Jana Pakulskiego i innych badaczy struktury klasowej, która okazała się błędna, zarówno na gruncie teoretycznym, jak i na poziomie faktów.
2
100%
EN
Borderland and the social theory
EN
Whether I study or watch television is a choice to invest or to consume that parallels the decision whether to use my income to spend or to save. At the forefront of such an understanding of society as if a market, based on atomized individual decision making, has been Gary Becker. As Becker puts it in his Nobel Prize acceptance speech in 1992: “My research uses the economic approach to analyze social issues that range beyond those usually conceived by economists”. According to Becker many activities thought to be noneconomic in nature are actually economic problems. Economic theory can thus help explain phenomena traditionally located outside the scope of economics, in the areas of law, sociology, biology, political science, and anthropology. The development of this economic imperialism is the most characteristic feature of his approach. Whilst Becker’s economic approach claims universal applicability, both its name and its content, despite disclaimers to the contrary, betray their origins within mainstream neoclassical economics. As Becker unwittingly confi rms, his concern is the universal projection of the market model.
EN
The essay deals with the issue of contemporary Marxist notions of exploitation, using Monika Abucewicz’s recent book as a point of reference. It is indeed the case, as Abucewicz claims, that there are in the Marxist camp two distinct approaches to the issue of exploitation, which could be roughly rendered as a political and economic theory of exploitation, respectively. It should be kept in mind, however, that Marx himself subscribed definitely to the economic perspective, and what is being dubbed political perspective on exploitation is a much later invention, and-as it is demonstrated in the essay-much less valuable, if not outright misleading. Among other things, the said framework does not respect an inherent to Marx's approach differentiation between the economy and polity, wherein the latter -identified with the state domain-is being conceived as based on the means of public coercion, which both for Marx, Trotsky, and Max Weber or Florian Znaniecky, for that matter, constituted the hallmark of this sphere, distinguishing it from the economic structure.
5
Content available remote

ECONOMY AND SOCIETY IN THE THEORY OF MAX WEBER

100%
EN
The paper is devoted to Weber’s economic sociology, as presented in his monumental treatise entitled ‘Economy and Society’. The very juxtaposition of the title terms prompts one’s interest in their interrelation, i.e. how the boundaries of the economy as a specific substructure of society as a whole are to be delineated. An element which plays an important role in Weberian notion of economic activity is its treatment as a peaceful one, which the author of ‘Economy and Society’ uses to delimit the area of the economy, in particular, to underline its difference from the politico-legal structure. The distinction between a socio-economic approach to property and a legal one is also applied by Weber, which in his theory is conceived as a central component of the economy. However, according to Weber it is disposal that constitutes the most fundamental component of property. This notion is criticized in the paper on the grounds of indispensable distinction between disposal and benefit, which, it is argued, constitutes the essence of property. It is further argued that it is property relations that Weberian theory of class relies upon. However, this theory includes a controversial concept of social class, which violates the rule of formal elegance and coherence that should pertain to scientific theory.
EN
The purpose of the present paper is to analyse a number of aspects to today’s commodification of human body; as the latter is inherently gendered, the following comments also have the said dimension to them, with particular, but not exclusive reference to the female body.
PL
Although social sciences do not ignore sports altogether, they do not attempt to analyse the class position of players in team sports. Yerefore, the aim of this paper is to conduct such analysis. Ye starting point is introduction of the idea of socio-economic class based on the theory of economic ownership understood as rent. As the term "economic rent" is used in neoclassical economy, I explain the di>erences between that approach and the one used in this paper. Building on theory and on empirical data on the earnings of players, I conclude that while the sports elite undoubtedly represent ownership and bourgeoisie class, the less !nancially attractive leagues or less earning players represent workers owning labour and sometimes that ownership is severely limited.
EN
The paper sets out to present an outline of what is in fact a fully-fledged social theory, termed socioeconomic structural ism. The paper focuses on a number of concepts regarding the economic sphere, such as property and various types of labor. The style of presentation is-although not deliberate drawn on-nevertheless akin to that of Weber’s.
EN
The hallmark of French thinker undoubtedly is worthy of critical attention. To make this task feasible, the paper focuses not on the secondary literature, but on Bourdieu’s work itself. Thanks to what follows, one is able to establish whether the conception of various capitals stands up to analytical scrutiny. And an outcome of this examination has even broader relevanceBourdieu is the most prolific exponent of an entire trend, much in vogue in social science recently. It would be difficult to indicate a field of inquiry in which this or that unorthodox, extra-economic concept of capital has not been deployed as a research tool. The result of this critical analysis are not encouraging; Bourdieu’s framework is plagued by economism or economic imperialism, and suffers from other limitations as well.
10
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Klasa średnia: mit czy byt?

100%
PL
Celem tekstu jest analiza tzw. klasy średniej. Artykuł składa się z czterech części. Rozpoczyna się on od podkreślenia, że „klasa średnia” to kategoria – by posłużyć się określeniem Leona Petrażyckiego – „skacząca” (pozbawiona ściśle określonego desygnatu), najczęściej luźno powiązana z dochodem gospodarstwa domowego. W kolejnej części porównuje się teorie klasowe z teoriami uwarstwienia, zwracając uwagę na częste ich mylenie. Następnie omawia się specyfikę uwarstwienia (hierarchii społecznej) i klasowości (struktury społecznej). Ostatni rozdział skupia się na – często błędnych – reprezentacjach koncepcji klasowej Williama Lloyda Warnera, dokonywanych przez czołowych polskich socjologów.
EN
The aim of this paper is to analyze issue of the so-called middle-class. Article contains four parts. Firstly, author stresses that 'middle class' is – to use Leon Petrażycki's term – 'jumping' concept (without strictly defined referent), usually based loosely on an household income. Then text is focused on comparison between class and stratification theories, many scholars are deceiving themselves with free uses of both categories. Next chapter is devoted to the questions of hierarchy (social strata) and structure (social class). Then author describes representations and misrepresentations of the William Lloyd Warner's work on classes, as it is introduced by leading Polish sociologists.
11
100%
EN
The paper sets out to deconstruct two concepts featuring in the title. Firstly, a novel definition of the welfare state based on economic ownership is presented, used then throughout the paper to examine the facts behind the widespread view of the welfare state finding itself in a crisis. Upon scrutiny, it turns out that empirical evidence to support the thesis under investigation is weak at best; neither globalisation nor Europeanization bring about any significant quantitative or qualitative worsening of welfare parameters. In addition, it is imperative not to put all the welfare states into one bag, as they in fact represent a plethora of diverse social-protection regimes.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.