YOU CAN BUY FULL TEXT PDF ARTICLES AT: www.ceeol.com - C.E.E.O.L. (Central and Eastern European Online Library)

 

Contents

This Issue Editor: Kolyo Koev

ORDINARY COMPETENCE: TWO LECTURES BY HARVEY SACKS

Doing ‘Being Ordinary’

Harvey Sacks

Omnirelevant Devices; Settinged Activities; ‘Indicator terms’

Harvey Sacks

EVERYDAY UNDERSTANDING AS A PERFORMATIVE EVENT

Socio-logics of Everyday Understanding: from Formulations towards Practical Formalizations

Kolyo Koev

The Declaration I Know” (Its Primitive Meaning)

Dimitar Vatsov

Power and Understanding in Common-sense Arguments

Todor Hristov

The Biographical Interview as an Event: the Preliminary Phase

Teodora Karamelska

ETHOS OF EVERYDAY LIFE AND SOCIAL OBJECTIFICATIONS

Everyday Morals. Questions with and to Alfred Schütz

Bernhard Waldenfels

The Rise of a Social Problem

Milena Yakimova

From a priori to Historical a priori and the Commentary. The Problem of Objectification in Kant through Foucault

Lea Vajsova

INTERPRETATIONS AND IDENTITY:

LANGUAGES OF UNDERSTANDING

Interpretations of Taste in the Language of Wine

Yassen Zahariev

The Literary Work of Art: Possibility, Uniqueness, Identity

Darin Tenev

DEbuts

The Other as a Different and Strange Body: Reconsideration of the Notion of Disability“

Boryana Bundzhulova

THE PAST: INTERPRETATIONS AND REWRITINGS

Saving the Bulgarian Jews“: a 70 Years War of Interpretations

Stilian Yotov

Ivan Hadjiyski, Zhivko Oshavkov, and Us

Petar-Emil-Mitev

ANTICIPATING THE FUTURE: BEYOND THE TRANSPARENCY OF THE SOCIAL
Reconnaissance of Reality. The New Invisibility of the Social in the Works of Daniel Innerarity

Blanca Navarro Pardiñas, Luc Vigneault

OUR GUEST: ULRICH BECK

I believe modernity can be a creative thing, and not something settled once and for all, as the technocrats are trying to make us believe“

Svetla Marinova Interviews Ulrich Beck

The Crisis of Europe

Ulrich Beck

PUBLIC VISIBILITY OF THE HUMAN BODY

The Dead Human Body in Science and Art: In the Perspective of Bulgarian Legislation

Stoyan Stavru

Public Display of Plastinated Human Cadavers: Between Harm and Offense

Ina Dimitrova

MARGINS

Human Dignity in Medicine

Stilian Yotov

Reviews and Comments

On History and Memory (The Deportation of Jews from Vardar Macedonia, Western Thrace and Pirot. March 1943. Ed. by N. Danova, R. Avramov. 2013)

Daniela Koleva

The Shameful Family Secret of the Post-communist Transitions (V. Ganev, Preying on the State. Bulgaria 1989–1997. 2013)

Georgi Dimitrov

A Policy for Science in Sofia University (Policies for Science in Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridsky, Ed. by G. Dimitrov. 2012)

Anna-Maria Totomanova

New books

Contents of the 45th YEAR OF THE JOURNAL SOCIOLOGICAL PROBLEMS

 TOPIC OF THE ISSUE:

EVERYDAY LANGUAGE AND UNDERSTANDING

 Abstracts

SOCIO-LOGICS OF EVERYDAY UNDERSTANDING: FROM FORMULATIONS TOWARDS PRACTICAL FORMALIZATIONS

KOLYO KOEV

The analysis aims at redirection of the sociological view from the theorizing assumptions of the world (irrespective of the starting position: „theoretical“, „empirical“ or seeking balance between scientific and everyday constructs) to the ordinary practices over the course of their development. The work which is coming out from this redirection is indicated by the term „socio-logics“ with an emphasis on the „practical logics“ opening before the researcher and on the resulting sociological commitments. The analysis is focused on two key socio-logical texts – Harvey Sacks and Harold Garfinkel’s paper „On Formal Structures of Practical Actions“ and Sacks’ lecture „Omni-relevant Devices“ – and points to some practico-logical problems of everyday understanding. By putting the two texts together under the rubric „socio-logics“ the common point of interest of Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis is indicated and a field of analysis, ignored by the contemporary sociology is outlined. Keywords: ethnomethodology, formal analysis, socio-logic, practical logic, reflexivity, indicators, formulations, practical formalizations

THE DECLARATION „I KNOW“ (ITS PRIMITIVE MEANING)

DIMITAR VATSOV

The paper starts with and departs from Wittgenstein’s notes „On Certainty“ (Wittgenstein 1998) in order to elucidate the primitive meaning – e.g. the common function – of the utterance „I know“. Although Wittgenstein forbids raising theses in philosophy, the following theses can and should be raised as analytical generalizations: There is no need to say „I know“ if the basic certainty in our ordinary dealing with things is not broken. Hence „I know“ comes as an answer, as a reaction to a crisis in certainty.
The function of „I know“ is to stop the doubt and to re-build the certainty. Saying „I know“ has the character of a specific performative – an assurance, declaration, that prepares a specific position for its speaker.
„I know“ puts the speaker into the position of an eyewitness who is immediately on the spot.
This position of an eyewitness is paradoxical since it could not be discursively described or argumentatively grounded. The only way someone else to be assured in what is said by the eyewitness is to come closer and to take immediately the eyewitness’s position because the position of the eyewitness is a boundary of the field of vision that could not be seen from within the field.
So the eyewitness’s position of „I know“ is declared as auto-referential point. This auto-referentiality works as a prohibition for doubt.
Declaring such position is a move into a language game, it is a performative effect – the eyewitness’s position is not an instance of certainty but a result of assurance claiming certainty. Hence it cannot be a premise into some a-temporal deduction or reasoning of truths. Accepting or rejecting the certainty of the declared „knowledge“-position is another move into the language game, a matter of further recognition or misrecognition of what has been said to be known.
The utopia for pure knowledge is a utopia for a position of eyewitness sub specie aeternitatis. The demonstration of the performative character of „I know“ shows this utopia as utopia. In the same time the uses of „I know“ are basic practical moves of stopping uncertainty and stabilizing the flow of experience.
Keywords: Wittgenstein, certainty, „I know“, assurance, performative, eyewitness, knowledge, uncertainty

POWER AND UNDERSTANDING IN COMMON-SENSE ARGUMENTS

TODOR HRISTOV
The paper claims that everyday conversations produce power as much as understanding. The claim is substantiated by an analysis of cases of common-sense arguments including ones between a parent and her child accused of drug use, a regional supervisor and a middle-level manager. The analyses lead to a notion of power applicable to common-sense settings via an analysis of the asymmetrical distribution of jurisdiction and veridiction in the sense of Michel Foucault, i.e. the right to say what is to be done and what is to be known.

Keywords: Ethnomethodology, conversation analysis, power, conflict, neoliberalism

THE BIOGRAPHICAL INTERVIEW AS AN EVENT: THE PRELIMINARY PHASE

TEODORA KARAMELSKA

The article presents an analysis of the practical methods whereby a respondent to a biographical interview and the researcher interviewing structure their talk, striving to see each move in their interaction as a ‘document standing in behalf of’ a certain ‘underlying pattern’. The aim is to demonstrate that, from an ethnomethodological viewpoint, even though the interviewer strives to intervene to a minimum, the construction of a biographic narrative is the joint local work of the two participants, and that the first sequences of their talk are of decisive importance for the whole interview.

ALLTAG UND ALLTAGSMORAL. FRAGEN MIT UND AN ALFRED SCHÜTZ

BERNHARD WALDENFELS

Die Restitution der Alltagswelt richtet sich bei Husserl primär gegen die Abwertung der natürlichen Erfahrung durch die Natur- und Geschichtswissenschaften (Naturalismus und Historismus), bei Schütz primär gegen die Abwertung der sozialen Erfahrung durch die Sozialwissenschaften (Soziologismus). Auffällig ist, daß so etwas wie Alltagsmoral kaum vorkommt, desgleichen die Überformung der moralischen Erfahrung durch Gebots- und Verbotssysteme (s. Nietzsche).
Welcher Art ist diese Auslassung? Steht dahinter eine ethische Epoché (Husserl), die das Sollen indirekt in den Blick bringt, oder eine ethische Abstinenz, die es beiseite läßt? De facto scheint eher letzteres zuzutreffen.
Welches sind die Folgen? Die Alltagsmoral wird zerrieben zwischen normativer Geltung: Was man nicht tun darf (Leitdifferenz: richtig unrichtig) – traditioneller Bindung: Was man gemeinhin tut (Leitdifferenz: gut/schlecht) – pragmatischer Wegfindung: Was man jeweils tut und tun kann (Leitdifferenz: praktikabel/impraktikabel). Die Hermeneutik kommt hinzu als Allround-Methode (Anwendung von Regeln, Deutungsmuster, Einschätzung von Situationen etc.). Der Primatsanspruch geht reihum. Der fremde Anspruch, der in jeder Bitte laut wird, entschwindet. Dasselbe gilt für „Narren und Märtyrer“ wie Thales und Sokrates, die zur Genealogie der Philosophie gehören (Gurwitsch).
Was der Normalisierung des Fremden widersteht, ist ein rechtverstandenes Ethos des Alltags. Dieses ist nicht denkbar ohne Regeln und Ziele, Mittel und Wege, aber es geht darin nicht auf. Gleich der Sprache bewegt es sich zwischen Gewöhnung und Erfindung. Es verkörpert sich in einem Prozeß der Veralltäglichung in Form einer stillschweigenden Moral. Es tritt hervor in Formen der Entalltäglichung, die das bestehende Ethos überschreiten. Der Überstieg wird provoziert durch außeralltägliche Ansprüche. Wenn der Alltag ein Ethos enthält, das über Gewöhnung, Anpassung und Kalkül hinausgeht, dann nur deshalb, weil er mehr ist als bloßer Alltag. Der Ort des Ethos liegt zwischen dem Ordentlichen und dem Außerordentlichen, zwischen Eigenem und Fremdem.

Keywords: Alltag, fremder Anspruch, ethische Epoché, Ethos, Moral, Responsivität, Fremdheit

 

Read more: Abstracts

Copyright © 2012 sp-bg.eu. All Rights Reserved.