Institutions: a promising topic insufficiently clarified

IF 0.2 Q4 SOCIOLOGY
J. Subrt
{"title":"Institutions: a promising topic insufficiently clarified","authors":"J. Subrt","doi":"10.22363/2313-2272-2022-22-2-249-258","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The basic question of sociology is what sets of rules and order are used in society and how they are maintained. One possible answer is based on the concept of institutions, which still provokes theoretical discussions due to, among other things, a certain ambiguity, since the term ‘institution’ is, figuratively speaking, shrouded in a kind of fog that prevents it from being captured in any direct, clear way. Today, ambitions of philosophy, political science, anthropology or mathematical game theory, which try to solve this problem outside the sociological framework, contribute to the deepening of the ambiguities surrounding the concept of institutions. Some approaches tend to define institutions as a cyber black box with inputs and outputs, whose working remains largely hidden (especially philosophical and mathematical approaches strive to find some common universal principle or even mathematical formula). From the perspective of general sociological theory, the article considers the topic of institutions. The author identifies this topic as a central issue that needs to be reconsidered in sociology. The starting point of the article is the analysis of concepts related to the topic, their definitions and paradigmatic integration. In the following part, the author considers the theoretical interpretations in the works of Peter Berger, Thomas Luckmann, John Searle, and the concepts inspired by game theories and rational behaviour theories. After that, ten basic issues of the current approaches are identified. The author pays particular attention to the fact that methodological individualism tends to dominate, which explains the ignorance of certain issues, especially of a holistic and macro-social nature, thus, leading to some problematic simplifications. The article shows what needs to be changed in the current social-scientific thinking on institutions in order to develop a more appropriate starting point for the further development of sociological theory.","PeriodicalId":42659,"journal":{"name":"RUDN Journal of Sociology-Vestnik Rossiiskogo Universiteta Druzhby Narodov Seriya Sotsiologiya","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RUDN Journal of Sociology-Vestnik Rossiiskogo Universiteta Druzhby Narodov Seriya Sotsiologiya","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2272-2022-22-2-249-258","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The basic question of sociology is what sets of rules and order are used in society and how they are maintained. One possible answer is based on the concept of institutions, which still provokes theoretical discussions due to, among other things, a certain ambiguity, since the term ‘institution’ is, figuratively speaking, shrouded in a kind of fog that prevents it from being captured in any direct, clear way. Today, ambitions of philosophy, political science, anthropology or mathematical game theory, which try to solve this problem outside the sociological framework, contribute to the deepening of the ambiguities surrounding the concept of institutions. Some approaches tend to define institutions as a cyber black box with inputs and outputs, whose working remains largely hidden (especially philosophical and mathematical approaches strive to find some common universal principle or even mathematical formula). From the perspective of general sociological theory, the article considers the topic of institutions. The author identifies this topic as a central issue that needs to be reconsidered in sociology. The starting point of the article is the analysis of concepts related to the topic, their definitions and paradigmatic integration. In the following part, the author considers the theoretical interpretations in the works of Peter Berger, Thomas Luckmann, John Searle, and the concepts inspired by game theories and rational behaviour theories. After that, ten basic issues of the current approaches are identified. The author pays particular attention to the fact that methodological individualism tends to dominate, which explains the ignorance of certain issues, especially of a holistic and macro-social nature, thus, leading to some problematic simplifications. The article shows what needs to be changed in the current social-scientific thinking on institutions in order to develop a more appropriate starting point for the further development of sociological theory.
机构:一个没有得到充分澄清的有希望的主题
社会学的基本问题是社会中使用了哪些规则和秩序,以及如何维护这些规则和秩序。一个可能的答案是基于制度的概念,由于某种模糊性等原因,这一概念仍会引发理论讨论,因为“制度”一词,形象地说,笼罩在一种迷雾中,无法以任何直接、清晰的方式捕捉到它。今天,哲学、政治学、人类学或数学博弈论试图在社会学框架之外解决这一问题的野心,加剧了围绕制度概念的模糊性。一些方法倾向于将机构定义为一个有输入和输出的网络黑匣子,其工作在很大程度上仍然是隐藏的(尤其是哲学和数学方法努力寻找一些共同的普遍原理甚至数学公式)。本文从一般社会学理论的角度对制度问题进行了思考。作者认为这个主题是社会学中需要重新考虑的核心问题。本文的出发点是分析与主题相关的概念、它们的定义和范式整合。在接下来的部分中,作者考虑了彼得·伯杰、托马斯·勒克曼、约翰·塞尔作品中的理论解释,以及受博弈论和理性行为理论启发的概念。之后,确定了当前方法的十个基本问题。作者特别注意到,方法论个人主义倾向于占主导地位,这解释了对某些问题的无知,特别是对整体和宏观社会性质的无知,从而导致了一些有问题的简化。本文展示了当前社会科学对制度的思考需要改变的地方,以便为社会学理论的进一步发展找到一个更合适的起点。
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
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
20.00%
发文量
53
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The mission of the Journal is a broad exchange of scientific information, and of the results of theoretical and empirical studies of the researchers from different fields of sociology: history of sociology, sociology of management, political sociology, economic sociology, sociology of culture, etc., philosophy, political science, demography – both in Russia and abroad. The articles of the Journal are grouped under ‘floating’ rubrics (chosen specially to structure the main themes of each issue), with the following rubrics as basic: Theory, Methodology and History of Sociological Research Contemporary Society: The Urgent Issues and Prospects for Development Surveys, Experiments, Case Studies Sociology of Organizations Sociology of Management Sociological Lectures. The titles of the rubrics are generally broadly formulated so that, despite the obvious theoretical focus of most articles (this is the principal distinguishing feature of the Series forming the image of the scientific journal), in each section we can publish articles differing substantially in their area of study and subject matter, conceptual focus, methodological tools of empirical research, the country of origin and disciplinary affiliation.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信