O mikrosociološkim temeljima makrosociologije

master's thesis

• Title (english): On the microsociological foundations of macrosociology
• Author: Luka Pavić
• Mentor: Krešimir Žažar (mentor)
• Committee member: Dragan Bagić (predsjednik povjerenstva)
• Granter: University of Zagreb; Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences; (Department of Sociology); Zagreb
• Defense date and country: 2020-10-15, Croatia
• Scientific / art field, discipline and subdiscipline: SOCIAL SCIENCES; Sociology; Sociological Theory

Abstract

Od svojih rudimentarnih oblika iz razdoblja socijalne filozofije pa sve do njezine emancipacije od filozofije i afirmacije u posebnu znanost, dijakronijski razvitak sociologije i njezinog predmeta proučavanja obilježila je rastuća interna diferencijacija, heterogenost i složenost. Popraćeno razvitkom znanosti i rastućom kompleksnošću društveno-političkih procesa, sociologiju je neizbježno obilježilo postojanje polarizirajućih škola mišljenja glede proučavanja društvenih fenomena i pojava te primjerene metodologije koja bi se trebala koristiti za njihovo izučavanje. Upravo je postojanje brojnih socioloških dihotomija i motiviralo ovaj rad, koji započinje analizom oprečnih teorijskih koncepcija u sociologiji. Ugrubo sumirano u genus proximum, uvriježena je klasifikacija ortodoksnih teorijskih socioloških pristupa u mikrosociološke i makrosociološke pristupe. Dok prvotna orijentacija društvene fenomene definira kao agregat ili zbir pojedinaca, tj. njihov rezultantni proizvod te društvene fenomene proučava isključivo u terminima individua i njihovih interakcija, dotle potonja, s druge strane, društvo definira kao uređenu i jedinstvenu cjelinu nedjeljivu na pojedince od kojih se sastoji te slijedi metodologiju da društvene fenomene nije moguće izučavati bez uporišta u društvenim cjelinama čiji su sastavni dio. Oba pristupa stoga karakterizira epifenomenalizam, jednostrano analiziranje društva u kojemu se jednom entitetu pridaje ontološki prioritet nauštrb onog drugog. Tako mikrosociološki pristupi individuumu pridaju status nezavisne varijable, a društvu zavisne, dok makro pristupi čine suprotno. Pojavom teoretičara i teorijskih pristupa kao što su Anthony Giddens, Roy Bhaskar, Margaret Archer ili James Coleman i analitička sociologija, sociološkim se dihotomijama pristupa na inovativan način. Predstavljanje modela ovih autora i načina na koji su opisali međuodnos individualne i društvene ontološke domene središnji je cilj ovog rada.

Abstract (english)

From its earliest rudimentary forms in social philosophy to its emancipation from philosophy into a separate science, diachronical development of sociology and its object of study were characterised by increasing differentiation, heterogeneity and complexity. Parallel with scientific development and increasing complexity of socio-political processes, sociology was inevitably characterised by existence of opposite schools of thought regarding its study of social phenomena and events but also regarding the methodology appropriate to study them. It was the existence of sociological dichotomies that motivated this paper, which starts by analysing opposite theoretical concepts in sociology. Roughly summarised into genus proxmium, two popular orthodox theoretical approaches are microsociological and macrosociological. Whilst first orientation defines social phenomena as aggregate or sum of individuals, (i.e. their resultant product) and studies them exclusively in terms of individuals and their interactions, the latter defines society as an entity irreducible to individuals which are its component parts. Both approaches commit epiphenomenalism, however, a one-sided analysis of society in which one entity is given ontological priority at the expense of other. Microsociological approaches thus treat individual as an independent variable while society is treated as a dependent variable. Macrosociological approaches, on the other hand, treat society as an independent variable, while treating individual as a dependent variable. With the emergence of theorists and theoretical approaches in the works of Anthony Giddens, Roy Bhaskar, Margaret Archer or James Coleman and its adherents in analytical sociology, sociological dichotomies are being treated in an innovative way. Presenting key propositions and components of their models by which they analysed interaction between individual and structural ontological domains is a central goal of this work.

• Keywords: mikrosociologija; makrosociologija; teorija strukturacije; morfogenetički/morfostatički model; transformativni model društvenog djelovanja; analitička sociologija; emergencija; supervenijencija; analitički mehanizmi
• Keywords (english): microsociology; macrosociology; structuration theory; morphogenetic/morphostatic model; transformative model of social activity; analytical sociology; emergence; supervenience; analytical mechanism
• Language: croatian
• URN:NBN: urn:nbn:hr:131:453800
• Study programme: Title: Sociology (single major); specializations in: Research; Course: Research; Study programme type: university; Study level: graduate; Academic / professional title: magistar/magistra sociologije (magistar/magistra sociologije)
• Type of resource: Text
• File origin: Born digital
• Access conditions: Open access
• Created on: 2020-10-16 07:22:27