Gruppensolidarität zwischen Rationalität und Ritualität

Ulf Tranow
{"title":"Gruppensolidarität zwischen Rationalität und Ritualität","authors":"Ulf Tranow","doi":"10.14361/zkkw-2022-080103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Group solidarity requires that members are committed to solidarity norms. Addressing the question of how such commitments are socially (re)produced, the starting point of this article is Lindenberg's Theory of Social Rationality (TSR) and its notion of solidarity frames. These frames consist of solidarity as a goal of action and associated stocks of knowledge and moral feelings. TSR makes it clear that solidarity frames are fragile and precarious. They must be regularly recharged with motivational energy and symbols in order to prevail over compet-ing motives. However, TSR cannot satisfactorily explain how this works. This shortcoming is addressed by Collins' Interaction Ritual Chains Theory (IRCT). It is argued that solidarity frames are a potential outcome of interaction rituals and it is clarified under which conditions this can be expected. A distinction is made between three essential types of rituals: identity rituals, governance rituals, and exchange rituals.","PeriodicalId":106948,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift für Kultur- und Kollektivwissenschaft","volume":"166 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift für Kultur- und Kollektivwissenschaft","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14361/zkkw-2022-080103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Group solidarity requires that members are committed to solidarity norms. Addressing the question of how such commitments are socially (re)produced, the starting point of this article is Lindenberg's Theory of Social Rationality (TSR) and its notion of solidarity frames. These frames consist of solidarity as a goal of action and associated stocks of knowledge and moral feelings. TSR makes it clear that solidarity frames are fragile and precarious. They must be regularly recharged with motivational energy and symbols in order to prevail over compet-ing motives. However, TSR cannot satisfactorily explain how this works. This shortcoming is addressed by Collins' Interaction Ritual Chains Theory (IRCT). It is argued that solidarity frames are a potential outcome of interaction rituals and it is clarified under which conditions this can be expected. A distinction is made between three essential types of rituals: identity rituals, governance rituals, and exchange rituals.
理性和仪式之间的团体团结
群体团结要求成员遵守团结规范。为了解决这样的承诺是如何在社会上(再)产生的问题,本文的出发点是林登伯格的社会理性理论(TSR)及其团结框架的概念。这些框架包括作为行动目标的团结以及相关的知识和道德情感储备。TSR清楚地表明,团结框架是脆弱和不稳定的。为了战胜竞争的动机,他们必须定期补充动力和符号。然而,TSR不能令人满意地解释这是如何工作的。柯林斯的互动仪式链理论(IRCT)解决了这一缺陷。有人认为,团结框架是互动仪式的潜在结果,并澄清了在哪些条件下可以预期。仪式分为三种基本类型:身份仪式、治理仪式和交换仪式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信