Lévi-Strauss’s Critique of Durkheim

Jing Xie
{"title":"Lévi-Strauss’s Critique of Durkheim","authors":"Jing Xie","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190679354.013.26","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Lévi-Strauss’s critique of Durkheim is considered an important one for two reasons. First, it is a discussion about the nature of social reality, and it therefore raises questions about the philosophical foundations of Durkheimian sociology. Second, it is regarded as a turning point in the French tradition of social anthropology, Lévi-Strauss’s purpose being to put forward structuralism as a solution to Durkheimian difficulties. In this chapter, first I outline Lévi-Strauss’s core arguments, and then I reassess the significance of his critique in light of the recent debates about his structuralist program in France. I will show that the orthodox view on the relation between the Durkheim school and Lévi-Strauss’s structuralism is oversimplified because it relies heavily on Lévi-Strauss’s own claims, and as a consequence, also oversimplifies Durkheim’s account of social reality. By examining concepts such as “symbolism,” “obligation,” “institution,” “norm,” and “action” in both Durkheim’s and Lévi-Strauss’s theory, I will show that Lévi-Strauss’s structuralist turn is in fact a cognitivist one, which, instead of offering solutions to Durkheimian questions, dismisses those questions.","PeriodicalId":355110,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Émile Durkheim","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Oxford Handbook of Émile Durkheim","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190679354.013.26","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

Lévi-Strauss’s critique of Durkheim is considered an important one for two reasons. First, it is a discussion about the nature of social reality, and it therefore raises questions about the philosophical foundations of Durkheimian sociology. Second, it is regarded as a turning point in the French tradition of social anthropology, Lévi-Strauss’s purpose being to put forward structuralism as a solution to Durkheimian difficulties. In this chapter, first I outline Lévi-Strauss’s core arguments, and then I reassess the significance of his critique in light of the recent debates about his structuralist program in France. I will show that the orthodox view on the relation between the Durkheim school and Lévi-Strauss’s structuralism is oversimplified because it relies heavily on Lévi-Strauss’s own claims, and as a consequence, also oversimplifies Durkheim’s account of social reality. By examining concepts such as “symbolism,” “obligation,” “institution,” “norm,” and “action” in both Durkheim’s and Lévi-Strauss’s theory, I will show that Lévi-Strauss’s structuralist turn is in fact a cognitivist one, which, instead of offering solutions to Durkheimian questions, dismisses those questions.
斯特劳斯对迪尔凯姆的批判被认为是重要的,原因有二。首先,它是关于社会现实本质的讨论,因此它提出了关于迪尔凯姆社会学的哲学基础的问题。其次,它被认为是法国社会人类学传统的一个转折点,斯特劳斯的目的是提出结构主义来解决迪尔凯姆的困难。在这一章中,我首先概述了lassivi - strauss的核心论点,然后根据最近在法国关于他的结构主义纲领的辩论,我重新评估了他的批评的意义。我将表明,关于迪尔凯姆学派和l -斯特劳斯结构主义之间关系的正统观点过于简单化了,因为它严重依赖于l -斯特劳斯自己的主张,因此,也过度简化了迪尔凯姆对社会现实的描述。通过考察迪尔凯姆和拉斯特劳斯理论中的“象征主义”、“义务”、“制度”、“规范”和“行动”等概念,我将表明拉斯特劳斯的结构主义转向实际上是一种认知主义转向,它不是为迪尔凯姆的问题提供解决方案,而是否定了这些问题。
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