The text discusses the following questions about the origins of sociological theory in the Czech lands: When was it established? Who, where and how participated in the process of its development? Czech sociological theory is divided into general sociological theory, meta-theory, concrete sociological theory and sociological journalism. The most important for current development in sociological theory is the general sociological theory which receives most attention. Czech sociological functionalism is compared with general functionalism (especially with T. Parsons´ theory). The classical sociological theory is considered in relation to contemporary developments in Czech sociology. With regard to the elaboration of general sociological theory, Brno played a more important part than Prague. The 1930s are identified as a period of its full constitution. I. A. Bláha, J. L. Fischer and E. Chalupný were the main figures in the field. The tension between positivism and anti-positivism is a characteristic feature of the Czech classical sociological theory, together with its ethical dimension which is a common feature of Czech thought in general.
2
Dostęp do pełnego tekstu na zewnętrznej witrynie WWW
This text examines Anton Štefánek´s sociology, one of the first scholars in the field in Slovakia, in the context of the journals of that day. Especially, it examines the topics of Štefánek’s publications in relation to other articles in sociological journals, relying on the overall results of a content analysis of those journals. This presentation of Štefánek’s journal publications brings out some of his lesser-known or more difficult-to-find publications, and places them in the overall context of his sociology. The study shows that Štefánek’s sociological interests, who were dominated by the themes of the rural countryside and the nation, were not unusual either for the period between the wars, or after the Second World War. Nevertheless the breadth of Štefánek’s approach and his focus on Czechoslovak national unity (so-called Czechoslovakism) was somewhat unique in the context of academic journals at the time. Analysis of commentary in the journals on Štefánek’s sociology allows us to evaluate over a limited area his colleagues’ understanding of his importance. It shows that perceptions of his importance were different in the Czech and Slovak parts of sociological discourse (the Czech journals were dominated by attention given to Masaryk, about whom nothing was written in Slovakia, with attention being focused on Štefánek instead), even though he was a prominent figure not only in Slovakia but in the Czech lands as well, and was made even more important by his political involvement during the First Republic.
3
Dostęp do pełnego tekstu na zewnętrznej witrynie WWW
This article compares the Brno and Prague schools of sociology, whose existence was among the most important characteristics of Czech interwar sociology. The comparison is performed on three levels: institutional affiliation (affiliation with a university, a learned society, and the publishing platform of a journal); objective conceptual agreement or variance (the degree to which general sociological theories, methodological opinions, evaluative judgements in science are shared); and subjective affiliation with a certain school (the existence of declared support for one school over the other, the antagonism of ‘us’ versus ‘them’ in reviews and debates, ties between a teacher and a student). The opposition between the two schools is most apparent on the institutional level and to some degree on the level of subjective affiliation. On the level of conceptual agreement within one school and opposition to the other, a number of alleged dichotomies and differences are found to be more a myth than a reality. The biggest difference found on that level is a greater inclination towards quantitative methods in the Prague school and towards qualitative methods in the Brno school. As it is impossible to generalise these and other characteristics, the author argues that the concept of academic schools in Czech interwar sociology is best understood using the paradigm of ideal types, rather than as a reflection of a real dividing line, and additionally, for a description of reality, by applying the concept of centre and periphery employed in subculture studies.
4
Dostęp do pełnego tekstu na zewnętrznej witrynie WWW
This article summarises the results of a content analysis of Sociologicka revue (The Sociology Review), the main Czech journal of sociology during the interwar and immediate post-war periods (the journal was published in 1930–1940 and 1946–1949). It focuses primarily on the structure of authors and themes published in the journal, studied using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods of text analysis. Some of the most productive contributors to Sociologicka revue were the important Czech sociologists I. A. Blaha, E. Chalupny and J. L. Fischer and from abroad P. Sorokin. In terms of thematic structure, the majority of texts published in Sociologicka revue focused on domestic and foreign sociology. Another prominent theme was the nation and nation-related issues, with texts devoted to the analysis of German fascism, national liberation struggles, and Czech-Slovak national co-existence. Broad thematic areas included the somewhat interrelated topics of crisis, rural areas, work, and politics and democracy. Texts devoted to the theme of crisis tended to focus on the period of the Great Depression, but crisis was also examined in a much broader than just economic sense. The theme of rural areas underwent a transformation over time and particularly after the war was replaced by the theme of folk and folk culture. The issue of work encompassed two themes: the working class and unemployment.
5
Dostęp do pełnego tekstu na zewnętrznej witrynie WWW
This article examines the sociology of Edvard Beneš and looks in particular at the questions of whether and how his sociology came to be reflected in his political work, in particular in connection with nationality issues, and whether and how it played a role in the construction of Czechoslovak national identity (based on a synthesis of Czech and Slovak national identities). The article consists of two main parts, the first of which focuses on how Beneš made the conceptual and practical transition from theory to practice, from sociology to politics, a form of politics described here as ‘academic’, while the second is devoted to the issue of nationality in Beneš’s sociology and politics from the perspective of the sociology of social identities. Beneš’s sociology had an instrumental role in the formation of Czechoslovak national identity, most notably with respect to the construction of social boundaries of ‘us’ and ‘them’ in relation to Germans (especially between Czechs on one hand and Germans on the other), and it offered objects of national identification typical for the national movements of small nations and specifically of Czech society. The article devotes special attention to Beneš’s discursive construction and legitimation of Czechoslovak nationality and to the issue of the definition of nationality in the ‘Beneš decrees’.
6
Dostęp do pełnego tekstu na zewnętrznej witrynie WWW
This study stakes stock of the work of the Czech journal Sociologický časopis and the Slovak journal Sociológia in the post-1989 state of development of Czech and Slovak society. It conducts a synchronous and a diachronic comparison for this purpose. It presents the structure of authors and themes in Sociologický časopis and Sociológia both in a temporal perspective, covering the years from 1989 to 2013, and in relation to journals published in the interwar and post-war periods. Probably the most interesting trend observed in the Slovak journal is the increase in the number of Czech authors and decrease in the number of Slovak authors. In relation to the interwar journals, most notable are the metareflection of sociology itself and of some nationally-specific themes.
This study deals with a still not sufficiently studied phenomenon of social exclusion in the Czech rural regions. On the case of Osoblaha, we point out the influence of regional characteristics of social inclusion on the transformation of the region’s social structure. The disadvantage of a region in the spheres of employment, education, community facilities and transport services contributes to emigration of relatively educated population able to work; such population is, to certain degree, substituted by socially excluded persons seeking relatively cheaper housing; and that contributes to increasing local social tension. Together with the analysis of the current status of social exclusion in the Osoblaha Region, based on quantitative and qualitative data, we present, as the main finding, the need of further dealing with the impact of public policies on shaping of social exclusion in excluded rural regions.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.