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

Results found: 6

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Talcott Parsons
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
100%
EN
Since the turn of the 1960s, Talcott Parsons’ social thought has met with criticism that his image of society is conservative inasmuch as he places consensus and systematic concept formation over and above conflict and ‘sociological imagination’. The hidden agenda in this criticism is political: the charges are that Parsons supposedly disavows democracy in his implicit or explicit knowledge aim, and that his sociology presumably makes society function even at the expense of freedom of the individual. Here the author argues that these accusations cannot stand if archival materials such as lecture notes, correspondence, and unpublished memoranda are taken into account. She claims that Parsons in his sociology conceptualised society from the standpoint of the real world of the day, including the major historical confrontations from the 1930s to the end of the 1970s. The first such scenario and the earliest confrontation that his work faced was in the era of the New Deal and the Second World War as the Anglo-Saxon democracies fought the racist imperialism of Nazi Germany; his ‘middle phase’ from the 1950s to the mid-1960s coincides with the Cold War at its height, the standoff between the capitalist United States and the communist Soviet Union; and his ‘late oeuvre’ has yet another agenda, namely the Watergate Affair, but also the struggle for racial equality and university reform in the United States. In his theoretical positions and in his opposition to his critics, Parsons defended liberal democracy against the powerful social and intellectual forces that put it to the test.
PL
The aim of the article is to trace the concept of the “iron cage of capitalism” attributed to one of fathers-founders of sociology, Max Weber. The author presents the origin of the concept – a controversial decision of Talcott Parsons, a famous sociologist and the first translator of Weber’s work The Ethics of Protestantism and the Spirit of Capitalism into English. Moreover, the presence of the “iron cage” in selected translations and original works in Polish and English is discussed.
EN
Since the early 1980s, specialized problem-solving courts known as drug courts emerged in the United States as a response to the backlog of drug and alcohol-related cases plaguing the U.S. criminal justice system. In a few decades, with the seeming success of the drug court in helping AOD defendants achieve sobriety while reducing recidivism, the drug court model has achieved international prominence as well. This paper discusses a pilot study which seeks to analyze the feasibility of connecting a website, drughelp.care, developed at the host institution of the co-authors, to the everyday operations of local drug courts. Talcott Parsons’ AGIL schema is utilized as a conceptual template for organizing our thinking about how the website could improve services to administrators and clients according to the unique functional elements of the drug court.
EN
The article concerns the problem of the boundary between the disciplines of anthropology and sociology, and changes in the way of understanding the concept of culture. The main thesis of the article the concept of culture. The main thesis of the article is the claim that the socio-economic changes, after the Second War, lead to a redefinition of the concept of culture, and for blurring the boundary between anthropology and sociology. Culture today becomes a social issue. It is no longer a matter of discovering new lands, tropics and orient. Culture has become something ordinary today, something that seems to be among ordinary people, who living in ordinary cities. The subject of the article goes around Clifford Geertz’s theory of culture, because he is an anthropologist who notices this blurring of boundaries. In order to achieve the aim of the article and confirm the thesis put forward in it, the author divided the text into three parts. In the first one she presents – in outline – the turns and changes that took place both in science and in the social sphere. In the second part, she refers to Geertz’s theory and tries to show what his understanding of the concept of culture looks like. In the third point, she tries to grasp this transitioning of culture into the area of sociology. In this context, the name of Talcott Parsons comes in. 
PL
Artykuł dotyczy problemu granicy między dyscyplinami: antropologią i socjologią, oraz zmian w sposobie rozumienia pojęcia kultury. Główną tezą artykułu jest twierdzenie, że zmiany społeczno-gospodarcze, które dokonały się w drugiej połowie XX wieku, i które wciąż dokonują, prowadzą do redefinicji pojęcia kultury, a tym samym do zacierania się granicy między antropologią i socjologią. Kultura staje się dziś bowiem zagadnieniem społecznym. Nie jest już kwestią odkrywania nowych lądów, tropików i orientu. Kultura – można powiedzieć – stała się dziś czymś zwyczajnym; czymś, co znajduje się jakby pośród zwykłych ludzi, zamieszkujących zwykłe miasta. Artykuł dotyczy teorii kultury Clifforda Geertza, jako antropologa dostrzegającego ową nieostrość granic. Aby zrealizować cel artykułu i potwierdzić postawioną w nim tezę, autorka podzieliła tekst na trzy części. W pierwszej przedstawia – w zarysie – zwroty i zmiany, które dokonały się zarówno w nauce, jak i w sferze społecznej. W drugiej części odnosi się do teorii Geertza i próbuje pokazać, jakie jest jego rozumienie pojęcia kultury. W trzecim punkcie stara się uchwycić przechodzenie kultury w obszar socjologii  i to, jak kultura staje się przedmiotem badań tej dyscypliny. W tym kontekście pojawia się nazwisko Talcotta Parsonsa. 
PL
Artykuł, w oparciu o wybrane aspekty konkretnych teorii społecznych, zwięźle przedstawia trzy rodzaje wpływu myśli psychoanalitycznej Zygmunta Freuda na teorię socjologiczną. W pierwszej części pracy ukazane zostały wpływy psychoanalizy freudowskiej na sposób ujmowania dynamiki zjawisk oraz procesów społecznych na przykładzie niektórych komponentów teorii Jürgena Habermasa. Następnie pokazano rodzaj oddziaływania, polegający na zapożyczeniu pojęć i konstruktów teoretycznych opracowanych przez Freuda do analizy i opisu zjawisk społecznych. Do zilustrowania tego rodzaju oddziaływania posłużono się elementami myśli Talcotta Parsonsa. Artykuł zamyka syntetyczna analiza trzeciego rodzaju oddziaływania, przyjmującego formę samodzielnego paradygmatu, a przejawiającego się w ramach ukształtowania nowego sposobu myślenia o zjawiskach społecznych.
EN
This article concisely outlines three types of influence that Sigmund Freud's psychoanalytical thought has had on sociological theory, based on selected aspects of various social theories. In the first part of the paper the impact of Freudian psychoanalysis is shown with regards to describing the dynamics of social phenomena and processes, as illustrated by chosen components of Jürgen Habermas’ social theories. The next influence discussed consists of adopting concepts and theoretical constructs developed by Freud for the purpose of analyzing and describing social phenomena. The argument is exemplified by elements of Talcott Parsons’ social thought. The paper concludes with a synthetic analysis of the third type of influence, which manifests itself in the form of a separate paradigm, which can be observed as a completely new way of thinking about social phenomena.
6
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

COVID-19 and Social Control

58%
EN
The COVID-19 pandemic has once again brought into relief and tension the delicate balancing act modern governments must strike in assuring individual liberties of its citizens, while at the same time dealing with infectious diseases and other public health risks. It is not clear how best to strike this balance, or how to judge which countries are doing an adequate job and which others are failing (on either or both fronts). What is clear, however, is that by virtue of it being available to the state, public health is based not merely on medical expertise but also on power, insofar as it part of the regulative apparatus of the administrative state which can be implemented by decree at the behest of the executive
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.