Pokaż uproszczony rekord

dc.contributor.authorKonecki, Krzysztof
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-13T12:25:24Z
dc.date.available2018-09-13T12:25:24Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.issn1733-8069
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11089/25597
dc.description.abstractCan we learn about the art of living from sociology? Sociology teaches us that we are the part of a broader group called society. We are taught that society should be first described in order to be understood and/or explained, and that the cognitive function is the most important part in understanding the role sociology should play in a democratic and modern society. Is this understanding (cognition) enough? What more can we get to better our quality of life and live a wholesome life from studying sociology or society using a sociological perspective? Is sociology a tool for the art of living or is it just a play of the “sophisticated”? In this paper, we analyze the sociology from the philosophy of Zen Buddhism to show the connection between the work of mind and the sociological concepts that are used to analyze “society.” Moreover, we analyze the approaches of George H. Mead, Robert Merton, and especially and separately Anthony Giddens that created, very important for our considerations, the concept of “ontological security.” We also reconstruct the structural conditions of the art of living and happiness, analyzing the concept of greedy institutions by Lewis Coser. We analytically connect the structural conditions of work in contemporary greedy institutions (working on projects) with the loss of ontological security. We analyze the displacement of the meaning of work, career, autonomy, time structure, identity, privacy and happiness, and finally the sociology. We try to use a Buddhist inspiration to analyze issues of suffering and, associated with it, so called ontological insecurity and the welfare of the individual and/or society.en_GB
dc.description.abstractCzy możemy nauczyć się sztuki życia z socjologii? Socjologia uczy nas, że jesteśmy częścią szerszej grupy zwanej społeczeństwem. Nauczono nas, że społeczeństwo powinno być najpierw opisane, aby mogło być zrozumiane i/lub wyjaśnione, a funkcja poznawcza jest najważniejszą częścią zrozumienia roli, jaką powinna odgrywać socjologia w demokratycznym i nowoczesnym społeczeństwie. Czy to zrozumienie (poznanie) jest wystarczające? Co jeszcze może możemy uzyskać od socjologii, by ulepszyć jakość naszego życia? Czy socjologia jest narzędziem sztuki życia, czy jest grą „wyrafinowanych” naukowców? W niniejszym artykule analizujemy socjologię z punktu widzenia filozofii buddyzmu zen, aby pokazać związek pomiędzy pracą umysłu a koncepcjami socjologicznymi, które są używane do analizy „społeczeństwa”. Ponadto analizujemy podejścia George’a H. Meada, Roberta Mertona, a zwłaszcza i osobno Anthony’ego Giddensa, który stworzył bardzo ważne dla naszych rozważań pojęcie „bezpieczeństwa ontologicznego”. Odtworzymy również strukturalne warunki sztuki życia i szczęścia, analizując koncepcję tak zwanych chciwych instytucji Lewisa Cosera. Analitycznie połączymy strukturalne warunki pracy we współczesnych chciwych instytucjach (szczególnie tych pracujących nad projektami) z utratą bezpieczeństwa ontologicznego. Analizujemy przesunięcie znaczenia pracy, kariery, autonomii, struktury czasu, tożsamości, prywatności i szczęścia, i wreszcie socjologii. Staramy się używać inspiracji buddyjskich do analizowania problemów cierpienia i związanych z nimi: ontologicznej niepewności oraz dobrostanu jednostki i/lub społeczeństwa.pl_PL
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherWydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiegoen_GB
dc.relation.ispartofseriesPrzegląd Socjologii Jakościowej;2
dc.subjectart of livingen_GB
dc.subjectZen Buddhismen_GB
dc.subjectsociologyen_GB
dc.subjectontological insecurityen_GB
dc.subjectminden_GB
dc.subjectselfen_GB
dc.subjectmeditationen_GB
dc.subjectsufferingen_GB
dc.subjectgreedy institutionsen_GB
dc.subjectsztuka życiapl_PL
dc.subjectbuddyzm zenpl_PL
dc.subjectsocjologiapl_PL
dc.subjectniepewność ontologicznapl_PL
dc.subjectumysłpl_PL
dc.subjectjaźńpl_PL
dc.subjectmedytacjapl_PL
dc.subjectcierpieniepl_PL
dc.subjectchciwe instytucjepl_PL
dc.titleThe Problem of Ontological Insecurity. What Can We Learn from Sociology Today? Some Zen Buddhist Inspirationsen_GB
dc.title.alternativeProblem ontologicznej niepewności. Czego możemy się nauczyć od socjologii dzisiaj? Inspiracje buddyzmem zenpl_PL
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.rights.holder©2018 PSJen_GB
dc.page.number50-83
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationUniversity of Lodz
dc.identifier.eissn-
dc.referencesAmes, Van Meter. 1973. “No Separate Self.” Pp. 43-58 in The Philosophy of George Herbert Mead, edited by Walter Robert Corti, ed. Winerthur: Amriswiler Bucherei.pl_PL
dc.referencesBauman, Zygmunt. 2001. The Individualized Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesBauman, Zygmunt. 2000. Liquid modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesBeck, Ulrich. 1992. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. New Delhi: Sage.pl_PL
dc.referencesBentz, Valerie M. and Jeremy J. Shapiro. 1998. Mindful Inquiry in Social Research. London: Sage.pl_PL
dc.referencesBerger, Peter and Thomas Luckmann. 1991. The Social Construction of Reality. A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Harmondsworth: Penquin Books.pl_PL
dc.referencesBlumer, Herbert. 1969. Symbolic Interactionism. Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.pl_PL
dc.referencesBlumer, Herbert. 2004. George Herbert Mead and Human Conduct. Walnut Creek: Altamira Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesCharon, Joel M. 1998. Symbolic Interactionism. An Introduction, An Interpretation, An Integration. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.pl_PL
dc.referencesChuang, Rueyling and Guo-Ming Chen. 2003. “Buddhist Perspectives and Human Communication.” Intercultural Communication Studies 12(4):65-80.pl_PL
dc.referencesChurchard, Clair. 2009. “Google HR algorithm identifies unhappy workers.” Retrieved June 28, 2014 (http://www.cipd.co.uk/pm/peoplemanagement/b/weblog/archive/2013/01/29/google-hr-algorithm-identifies-unhappy-workers-2009-05.aspx).pl_PL
dc.referencesCoser, Lewis A. 1972. “The Alien as a Servant of Power: Court Jews and Christian Renegades.” American Sociological Review 37:574-581.pl_PL
dc.referencesCoser, Lewis A. 1973. “The Militant Collective: Jesuits and Leninists.” Social Research: An International Quarterly 40(1):110-128.pl_PL
dc.referencesCoser, Lewis. 1974. Greedy Institutions: Patterns of Undivided Commitment. New York: The Free Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesCsikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. 2008. Flow. The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper Perennial.pl_PL
dc.referencesEgger de Campo, Marianne. 2013. “Contemporary Greedy Institutions: An Essay on Lewis Coser’s Concept in the Era of the ‘Hive Mind.’” Czech Sociological Review 49(6):969-987.pl_PL
dc.referencesElcioglu, Emine Fidan. 2010. “Producing Precarity: The Temporary Staffing Agency in the Labor Market.” Qualitative Sociology 33:117-136.pl_PL
dc.referencesEllis, Carolyn. 1993. “‘There are survivors’: Telling a story of a sudden death.” The Sociological Quarterly 34(4):711-730.pl_PL
dc.referencesEllis, Carolyn. 1995. Final negotiations: A story of love, loss, and chronic illness. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesEllis, Carolyn. 2002. “Shattered lives: Making sense of September 11th and its aftermath.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 31(4):375-410.pl_PL
dc.referencesEpitectus. 2012. The Handbook of Epitectus. Start Publishing LLC (ebook, Kindle Edition).pl_PL
dc.referencesFoucault, Michel. 2003. Society must be defended: lectures at the Collège de France 1975-1976. New York: Picador.pl_PL
dc.referencesGarfinkel, Harold. 1967. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.pl_PL
dc.referencesGiddens, Anthony. 1984. The Constitution of Society. Outline of theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesGiddens, Anthony. 1990. The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesGiddens, Anthony. 1991. Modernity and Self Identity: self and socjety in the late modern age. Cambridge: Polity Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesGoffman, Erving. 1961. Asylums: Essay on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates. Harmondsworth: Penguin.pl_PL
dc.referencesGoffman, Erving. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face to Face Behaviour. New York: Doubleday.pl_PL
dc.referencesGoogle. 2009. “Life at the Googleplex.” YouTube video, 3:27. Retrieved September 26, 2011 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFeLKXbnxxgfeature=youtu.be).pl_PL
dc.referencesGoogle. 2011. “Mountain View Googleween: Home Video Contest Entry.” YouTube video, 3:00. Retrieved September 26, 2011 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfKZC94nsxkfeature=youtu.be).pl_PL
dc.referencesHiscock, Rosemary et al. 2001. “Ontological security and psychosocial benefits from the home: qualitative evidence on issues of tenure.” Housing, Theory and Society 18(1-2):50-66.pl_PL
dc.referencesHochschild, Arlie Russell. 1983. The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling. Berkeley: University of California Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesHochschild, Arlie Russell. 1997. The Time Bind: When Work Becomes Home and Home Becomes Work. New York: Metropolitan Books.pl_PL
dc.referencesJacobsen, Michael Hviid. 2014. “Sociology and happiness: An interview with Zygmunt Bauman.” The Journal of Happiness Well-Being 2(1):207-2015.pl_PL
dc.referencesKey, Andre E. 2012. What’s My Name? An Autoethnography Of The Problem Of Moral Evil And Ethnic Suffering In Black… Pro-Quest, UMI Dissertation Publishing.pl_PL
dc.referencesKonecki, Krzysztof T. 2005. Ludzie i ich zwierzęta. Interakcjonistyczno-symboliczna analiza społecznego świata właścicieli zwierząt domowych. Warsaw: Scholar.pl_PL
dc.referencesKonecki, Krzysztof T. 2010. “Procesy tożsamościowe a dialogiczność jaźni – problem anamnezie.”Pp. 331-339 in Procesy Tożsamościowe. Symboliczno - interakcyjny wymiar konstruowania ładu i nieładu społecznego, edited by Krzysztof T. Konecki and Anna Kacperczyk. Lodz: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.pl_PL
dc.referencesLewis, Helen B. 1971. Shame and guilt in neurosis. New York: International University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesLoy, David. 2003). A Great Awakanings. A Buddists Social Theory. Sommerville: Wisdom Publication.pl_PL
dc.referencesLoy, David. 2008. Money, Sex, War, Karma. Notes for a Buddhist Revolution. Somerville: Wisdom Publications.pl_PL
dc.referencesLuhmann, Niklas. 2002. Das Erziehungssystem der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.pl_PL
dc.referencesManis, Jerome and Bernard Meltzer. 1978. Symbolic Interaction. Rader in Social Psychology. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.pl_PL
dc.referencesMauss, Iris B. et al. 2011. “Can seeking happiness make people unhappy? Paradoxical effects of valuing happiness.” Emotion 11(4):807-815.pl_PL
dc.referencesMead, Georg H. 1934. Mind Self and Society from the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. Chicago: University of Chicago.pl_PL
dc.referencesMerton, Robert. 1968. Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: The Free Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesNhat, Hanh Thich. 1976. The Miracle of Mindfulness: An Introduction to the Practice of Meditation. Boston: Beacon Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesNhat, Hanh Thich. 1999. The Heart of the Buddha’s Teaching. London: Rider.pl_PL
dc.referencesNhat, Hanh Thich. 2006. Understanding Our Mind. Berkeley: Parallax Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesNhat, Hanh Thich. 2012. Awakening of the Heart. Essential Buddhist Sutras and Commentaries. Berkeley: Unified Buddhist Church.pl_PL
dc.referencesNyström, Per. 2007. “La interdisciplinariedad y la transdisciplinariedad en la organización del conocimiento científico: Interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in the organization of scientific knowledge.” Pp. 123-132 in Actas del VIII Congreso ISKO - España, León, April 18-20, 2007 Retrieved April 13, 2013 (http://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/2532824.pdf).pl_PL
dc.referencesPuddephatt, Antony J. 2008. “Incorporating Ritual Into Greedy Institution Theory: The Case of Devotion in Amateur Chess.” The Sociological Quarterly 49:155-180.pl_PL
dc.referencesRehoric David A. and Valerie Malhotra Bentz, eds. 2008. Transformative Phenomenology. Changing Ourselves, Lifeworlds, and Professional Practice. Lanham: Lexington Books.pl_PL
dc.referencesRetzinger, Suzanne and Thomas Scheff. 2000. “Emotion, alienation, and narratives: resolving intractable conflict.” Mediation Quarterly 18(1): 71-85.pl_PL
dc.referencesRobertson, Donald. 2010. The Philosophy of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy: Stoicism as Rational and Cognitive Psychotherapy. London: Karnac.pl_PL
dc.referencesSahn, Seung. 1976. Dropping Ashes on the Buddha. New York: Grove Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesScheff, Thomas J. 1990. Microsociology. Discourse, emotion, and social structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesScheff, Thomas, J. 2000. Shame and the social bond, and human reality. New York: Cambridge University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesScheff, Thomas and Suzanne Retzinger. 1997 “Shame, Anger and the Social Bond: A Theory of Sexual Offenders and Treatment.” Electronic Journal of Sociology 1, September. Retrieved September 09. 2006 (http://www.sociology.org/content/vol003.001/sheff.html?PHPSESSID=c9f51dc378f1da0b-2c543eb69f623250).pl_PL
dc.referencesShear, Jonathan and Ron Jevning. 2002. “Pure consciousness: Scientific Explorations of Meditation Techniques.” Pp. 189-210 in The View From Within. First-Person Approaches To The Study Of Consciousness, edited by Francisco Varela and Jonathan Shear. Thorverton: Imprint Academic.pl_PL
dc.referencesShih, Johanna. 2004. “Project Time in Silicon Valley.” Qualitative Sociology 27(2)223-245.pl_PL
dc.referencesShott, Susan. 1979. “Emotion and Social Life: A Symbolic Interactionist Analysis.” American Journal of Sociology 84:1317-1334.pl_PL
dc.referencesSimmel, Georg. 1955. Conflict and the web of group affiliations. New York: The Free Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesStankiewicz, Piotr. 2012. “Stoicyzm i buddyzm zen. Sześć podobieństw i sześć różnic.” Edukacja Filozoficzna 54:135-148.pl_PL
dc.referencesStebbins, Robert A. 2009. Personal Decisions in the Public Square: Beyond Problem Solving into a Positive Sociology. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.pl_PL
dc.referencesStrauss, Anselm L. 1984. “Social Worlds and Their Segmentation Processes.” Studies in Symbolic Interaction 5:123-139.pl_PL
dc.referencesSuzuki, Daisetz T. 1964. Introduction to Zen Buddhism. New York: Grove Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesSuzuki, Daisetz T. 1994. The Zen Koans as a Means of Attaining Enlightenment. Vermont, Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle Co. Inc. of Rutland.pl_PL
dc.referencesTepperman, Lorne and James Curtis. 2006. Principles of Sociology: Canadian Perspectives. Toronto: Oxford University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesThomas William I. and Dorothy S. Thomas. 1928. The child in America: Behavior problems and programs. New York: Knopf.pl_PL
dc.referencesVarela Francisco J., Evan Thompson, and Eleanor Rosch. 1993. The Embodied Mind. Cambridge: MIT Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesUra, Karma et al. 2012. A Short Guide to Gross National Happiness Index. Timphu: The Centre for Bhutan Studies.pl_PL
dc.referencesWilkinson, Iain. 2005. Suffering: A Sociological Introduction. Cambridge: Polity.pl_PL
dc.contributor.authorEmailkrzysztof.konecki@uni.lodz.pl
dc.identifier.doi10.18778/1733-8069.14.2.03
dc.relation.volume14en_GB


Pliki tej pozycji

Thumbnail

Pozycja umieszczona jest w następujących kolekcjach

Pokaż uproszczony rekord