Suchergebnisse

This article synthesizes a range of sociological views on time and space, and presents a departure point for future research on cyber social reality. Using basic sociological categories of culture, structure, and interaction, the cyber social reality is drawn into a matrix that further illustrates the embeddedness in technology, time, and space. The matrix is a theoretically and empirically grounded tool for exploring, describing, analyzing, and comparing the variety existing within online communities and communication. In the article, the matrix is illustrated step by step to show its inherent dimensions, and in conclusion it is proposed to be a useful systematic for, on the one hand, ensuring ethnographically thick descriptions of online social life, and on the other, comparing the various reality constructions found.

ABSTRACT . One aim of this paper is to make visible the connection between Searle's views on social reality and his general ontology, and at the same time to show that some peculiar features of his analysis of social reality are a natural outcome of his general ontology. The paper contains five sections. In the first Searle's naturalism is philosophically situated and its differentia specifica explained. Then, Searle's view that intentional states exist only in brains is presented. One might say that, according to Searle, each mind is, although caused by a material brain, a Leibnizian monad. This view is related to an important, but neglected, distinction that Searle himself has made between requirement conditions of satisfaction and required conditions of satisfaction. In the third section, it is pointed out that, necessarily, sometimes there has to exist some kind of relation of satisfaction between the two kinds of conditions of satisfaction. Searle, however, has never really discussed what this satisfaction relation may look like. The upshot of all the remarks is that, fourth, Searle's general ontology automatically implies an ontology of social reality according to which a social fact can only exist as a scattered aggregate whose items exist in the brains of the people who constitute it. Finally and fifth, I try to think with Searle against Searle. His monadological view of social reality cannot, Searle notwithstanding, be regarded as being close to the direct realism of common sense. Searle's realism is an indirect realism. However, if Searle's view that intentional states exist only in brains is rejected, then the rest of his ontology has features that may take us closer to a direct realism. Such a move, which in one respect takes us closer to common sense, takes us in another respect away from common sense. The title of the last section is "Social Reality and the Impossibility of Common Sense."

The philosophical analysis of social reality is necessarily carried out in the ratio "man-society". After all, a person can realize his essence only in society, therefore, the subject of social philosophy is society as an integral system. Social philosophy as a branch of philosophy considers and explains social phenomena and processes at the most general level, and this allows us to present society as a system capable of self-development and self-reproduction. Based on the accumulated knowledge over the entire history of studying this problem, a number of philosophical concepts have been formed regarding the interpretation of the concept of society: naturalistic, sociological, psychological, active, dialectical-materialistic, praxeological, etc.

This article is devoted to the analysis of the impact of digital technologies on the contours of modern society. The author emphasizes that "digitalization", as an element of a new social reality, has become the subject of numerous discussions and disputes, the key vectors of which are: 1) differentiation of digitalization from similar but not identical processes; 2) scope and breadth of digitalization of various spheres of economic and social life; 3) advantages and disadvantages of digitalization of social reality; 4) directions, social consequences and the future of digitalization. At the same time, each of the selected vectors entails a number of questions that require scientifically based answers.In particular, within the framework of the first discussion, such questions are: how does digitalization differ from automation, informatization or computerization? What indicators indicate the success of the digitalization process? The second discussion raises the following questions: Which areas of social life are covered by digitalization? What exactly does this manifest itself in? The third discussion raises questions about the undoubted advantages and obvious disadvantages of digitalization, and the fourth discussion focuses on the problem of the social consequences of accelerated digitalization. The search for scientifically based answers to these questions is the main subject of this article.The author concludes that digital transformation gradually covers all spheres of life of both society and each individual, and over time it will become more and more obvious. However, today it is most noticeably manifested in the field of social communication, which is rapidly being embraced, even "enslaved" by electronic and digital technologies.The danger of accelerated and unconditional digitalization lies in the fetishization of the role and place of digital technology and science in modern social development, which inevitably leads to the strengthening of technocratic determinism and scientism associated with the absolutization of natural sciences as the only scientific knowledge. However, the leveling of the value of the humanities leads to the leveling of the actual analyzing, reflexive activity of a person, to a decrease in the importance of a person in many, and first of all, social processes, which are supposed to be better handled by "artificial intelligence technologies" or cyborgs. But then digitalization, as in its time – liberalization, and then globalization – can become another manipulatively controlled political project or a totalitarian dogma, on the basis of which an active process of establishing a new world order will be launched.

The current essay draws upon the problem of visibility of social reality generated by Brazilian and Spanish TV news broadcasts through the selection and production of the same news contents that represent the social space of both countries. Given this scenario, we aim both to develop a methodology that allows establishing how and in what extent social reality is framed in Brazilian and Spanish TV news programs and to identify cross-cultural dynamics of mediatization of social reality in both contexts. By developing empirical content analysis of two months of coverage of current affairs and events in four television news programs from Brazil and Spain, it was found that most of the information production process concerning political, cultural and social current affairs leads to reduction, distortion and immediacy of the facts.

ABSTRACT . The paper presents an account of social institutions on the basis of collective acceptance. Basically, collective acceptance by some members of a group involves the members' collectively coming to hold and holding a relevant social attitude (a "we‐attitude"), viz. either one in the intention family of concepts or one in the belief family. In standard cases the collective acceptance must be in the "we‐mode," viz. performed as a group member, and involve that it be meant for the group. The participants must be collectively committed to what they have accepted. Social institutions are taken to be norm‐governed social practices introducing a new social and conceptual status on the practices or some elements involved in those practices. This requires that some of the involved norms be constitutive norms as opposed to merely "accidentally" regulating ones. A classification of social institutions is presented. The account is broader in scope than is Searle's.