Outhwaite 2023 book review Civilization Modernity and Critique Engaging Johann P. Arnason's Macro-social Theory (original) (raw)
Related papers
Civilization, Modernity, and Critique Engaging Jóhann P. Árnason’s Macro-Social Theory
Routledge, 2023
Civilization, Modernity, and Critique provides the first comprehensive, cutting-edge engagement with the work of one of the most foundational figures in civilizational analysis: Johann P. Árnason. In order to do justice to Árnason's seminal and wide-ranging contributions to sociology, social theory and history, it brings together distinguished scholars from a variety of disciplinary backgrounds and geographical contexts. Through a critical, interdisciplinary dialogue, it offers an enrichment and expansion of the methodological, theoretical, and applicative scope of civilizational analysis, by addressing some of the most complex and pressing problems of contemporary global society. A unique and timely contribution to the ongoing task of advancing the project of a critical theory of society, this volume will appeal to scholars of sociology and social theory with interests in historical sociology, critical theory and civilizational analysis.
Sociology, Philosophy, History: A Dialogue
The dialogue focuses on the sources, contexts, and configuration of Johann P. Arnason’s intellectual trajectory. It is broadly framed around the interplay of philosophy, sociology, and history in his thought. Its scope is wide ranging, spanning critical and normative theory, phenomenology and hermeneutics, and contemporary and classical sociology. It explores the importance of Castoriadis, Merleau-Ponty and Patočka for Arnason’s understanding of the human condition from a comparative civilizational perspective; his engagement with Habermas and Eisenstadt for the development of his hermeneutic of modernity and multiple modernities; his ongoing, albeit subterranean, dialogue with Charles Taylor; and concludes with a discussion of his recent focus on the religio-political nexus.
The study of the forms of society, culture, polity, religion and economy that ordinarily envelop human beings throughout their lives is an integral part of historically informed social analysis. This tradition of analysis stems back to the ancient scholars of war -Thucydides -and geoculture -Herodotus, gaining new impetus with the study of industrial capitalist societies (Marx and Weber), the rise and overthrow of noble or decadent values (Nietzsche) and, more recently, the formation of nation-states and nationalism. The comparative and historical analysis of the different ways in which Heidegger's 'being-in-the-world' can be understood has been a central tenet of social analysis oriented towards conceptualizing the deeply historical, social nature of being (ontos). To be human is, as Aristotle first observed, to give expression to our essentially gregarious nature as mediated and realized through various forms of social intercourse, deliberation and institutionalization. This gregariousness takes on various colourations according to time, space, symbolism, corporeality, affect structures and long-term social learning processes. The complex ways in which the latter perform their work to produce the interesting human being 1 may be denoted as a civilizational complex. In this chapter, I will expound upon different aspects and conceptions of this complex, discussing the necessity to conceive of late modern individuals (and social forms) within the parameters of a civilization-analytic framework. The comparative dimension of this discussion will serve to also highlight the heuristic value of conceiving of social life in all its multifarious forms, particularly when the person is now constantly subjected to media-saturated images of 'globalization' that misleadingly suggest the overcoming of diverse civilizational lineages, that is, cultural traditions.
Thesis Eleven, 2019
This essay unpacks Johann Arnason's theory of culture. It argues that the culture problematic remains the needle's eye through which Arnason's intellectual project must be understood, his recent shift to foreground the interplay of culture and power (as the religio-political nexus) notwithstanding. Arnason's approach to culture is foundational to his articulation of the human condition, which is articulated here as the interaction of a historical cultural hermeneutics and a macro-phenomenology of the world as a shared horizon. The essay discusses Arnason's elucidation of his theory of culture as a contribution to debates on the 'meaning of meaning'. It traces its beginnings from his critique of Habermas's theory of modernity to its development via a trialogue with Max Weber, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, and Cornelius Castoriadis. It argues that Arnason's theory of culture moves beyond socio-centric perspectives, and, in so doing, offers a critique of what we might call sociological solipsism. In decentring society/anthropos, a more nuanced understanding of the human condition as a unity in diversity is achieved. The essay concludes with a discussion of some tensions in Arnason's understanding of culture, and argues for the importance for incorporating a qualitative notion of 'movement' in order to make sense of historical novelty and social change.
Political Anthropology Agnes Horvath and Arpad Szakolczai (published in
This paper explores the contribution of political anthropology to a sociological understanding of political life. This includes the intellectual background of politics and an in-depth diagnosis of the contemporary ills in political life, especially problems connected to leadership, as they manifested throughout the past century, only intensifying recently, while also restoring attention to the human element in politics. It discusses, in their interrelations, concepts like liminality, trickster, imitation, schismogenesis, and participation, demonstrating their usefulness for understanding contemporary politics, in particular its increasing unreality, corresponding to but also proliferating general trends of depersonalization. Political anthropology thus offers insights about getting out of the contemporary entrapment and returning back to the central, classical concerns of politics, securing the conditions of possibility to a real and meaningful life for everyone within a political community. The striking unreality of modern politics This paper explores the contribution of political anthropology to a sociological understanding of political life. It will combine such an anthropological perspective with a long-term historical orientation, an approach central for some of the most important and influential social theoretical analyses of politics, like the works of Max Weber, Michel Foucault, Reinhart Koselleck or Eric Voegelin, each inspired by Nietzschean genealogy and its effort to overcome 'modernocentrism', especially at the level of concept formation. Such contribution, it will be argued, concerns the intellectual background of politics and an in-depth diagnosis of the contemporary ills in political life, especially problems connected to leadership, as they manifested throughout the past century, only intensifying recently, while also restoring attention to the human element of politics. The special contribution of political sociology to politics lies in the study of factors beyond the narrow scope of politics per se, concerned with the broader sources and effects of political phenomena. It is in this sense that the foundations of political sociology were laid by Alexis de Tocqueville or Max Weber, though these classic figures are also claimed by political science, and of course such boundaries can never be drawn in a rigid manner. Yet, the direction in which political sociology was moving during the past decades made this endeavor considerably more narrow than it was intended by Tocqueville or Weber. The perspective 'social ' in political sociology much came to be interpreted as a way of judging whether politics confirmed to the ideals of the French Revolution, meaning freedom and especially equality, resumed in the
In The Civilizing Process: Sociogenetic and Psychogenetic Investigations (1939) Norbert Elias formulated a theory to explain the long-term process of continuous change that led to the emergence of modern society. His theory encompasses both the development of human personality structures and behaviour (psychogenetic research) and the development of the social structures of inequality, power, and order (sociogenetic research). Violence and its control are central themes of the theory of the civilizing process. On the question of why the de-civilization processes occur, Elias failed to answer satisfactorily. For his students and followers this omission is a motivation to consider furthering Elias's thinking. The concept of civilization is used in the social sciences in both singular and plural. The singular we encounter when considering the universal historical process of development in which what is called civilization takes shape, develops and is transformed. The plural is most often used to compare various civilizations in terms of their socio-cultural formations. The concept of civilization in the singular occurs in roughly four diff erent contexts 1. In the fi rst, which is now often regarded as politically incorrect, the term simply refers to a " civilized way of life " , meaning certain achieved forms of human coexistence, rules and standards. In the second case, civilization becomes a synonym for social progress in terms of the historical development of human capabilities (we can fi nd this understanding in Marx when he speaks of the " civilizing mission " of capitalism which he associated with the development of productive forces and the territorial expansion of the capitalist mode of production). The third concept, associated with an eff ort to draw a certain dividing line between the diff erent stages of history, appears in anthropology , archaeology and prehistory (an example is Lewis Henry Morgan, who uses the expression " civilization " for the third epoch of human development , replacing the stage of savagery and barbarism). The fourth case is the most important in terms of historical sociology because it is represented by the civilization theory of Norbert Elias, in which he talks about the process of civilization, where changes in human behaviour relate to the development 1 Arnason J.P., Šubrt J. Kultury, civilizace, světový systém. Praha: Karolinum, 2010. P. 10.