LAST PRINTED ISSUE

LATEST FREELY ACCESSIBLE MATERIALS

S.Eisenstadt’s civilizational analysis in the contexts of sociological theorising

stmm. 2019 (3): 62-81

UDC 316.2

DOI: http://10.15407/sociology2019.03.062

Viktor Stepanenko - Doctor of science in Sociology, Principal Research Fellow at the Department of History and Theory of Sociology, Institute of Sociology, National Academy of sciences of Ukraine (Kyiv).

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3623-0057

Scopus Author ID: 57189273050

Abstract. The article represents an overview of S. Eisenstadt's theoretical heritage, focusing on its theoretical and methodological core, that is, civilizational analysis. Theoretical sources, synthesis and links of civilizational analysis, its conceptual coordinates on the map of sociological theoretical knowledge are examined. It is argued that the formation of this theoretical direction meant the restoration of classic sociological tradition, in particular approaches indicated by E. Durkheim, M. Mauss and M. Weber to the problematic of historical civilizations. This theme has acquired its new meanings and actualizations in reflections on peculiarities and challenges of modernization from the end 1970-s in Eisenstadt’s and some other researchers’ works. Conceptual interpretation of modernity as a distinctive civilizational pattern and Eisenstadt’s concept of multiple modernities are also important aspects of this theoretical direction. The main idea of Eisenstadt’s concept of multiple modernities is a recognition of many possible patterns of modernization as a not purely Western civilization phenomenon. Some methodological implications of Eisenstadt’s civilizational analysis for the prospects of sociological research, particularly with focus on peculiarities of social transformation and modernization in Ukraine are suggested. It is argued that socio-cultural and political dynamics of Ukraine’s transformation could be analyzed as the combination of various civilizational programs. This is explained by the fact that modernization in Ukraine does not follow the classical scheme - from traditional to modern society, but rather occurs as a parallel transformation from one type of modernization (former Soviet) to another (market and democratic). In addition this transformation is undergoing in the context of the conflict between two geopolitical modernization projects – Western, European and Eurasian (“Russian world”). Keywords: civilizational analysis, S. Eisenstadt’s sociology, Axial civilizations, civilizational dynamics, modernization, multiple modernities

Publication in: ukr | rus

References

Arnason, J. (2003). Civilizations in dispute: historical questions and theoretical traditions. Leiden, Boston: Brill.

Arnason, J. (2009). Civilizational analysis: a paradigm in the making. In R. Holton, W. R. Nasson (Eds.), World Civilizations And History Of Human Development (pp. 1–34). EOLSS Publishers / UNESCO.

Durkheim, E. and Mauss, M. (1971). Note on the notion of civilization, translated and introduced by Benjamin Nelson. Social Research, 38 (4), 808–13.

Eisenstadt, S. N. (1963). Political Systems of Empires. New York: Free Press of Glencoe.

Eisenstadt, S. N. (1982). The Axial Age: The Emergence of Transcendental Visions and the Rise of Clerics. European Journal of Sociology, 23 (2), 294–314. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003975600003908

Eisenstadt, S. N. (1989). Cultural Tradition, Historical Experience, and Social Change: The Limits of Convergence. The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, delivered at The University of California, Berkeley. May 1–3, 1989. Retrieved from https://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/...

Eisenstadt, S. N. (1992). The Axial Age: The Emergence of Transcendental Visions and the Rise of Clerics.[In Russian] Orientation — search: the East in theories and hypothesis. Moscow, Russian Federation: Nauka. [=Айзенштадт, 1992].

Eisenstadt, S. N. (1996). Japanese Civilization: A Comparative View. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Eisenstadt, S. N. (1999). Revolutions and the Transformations of Societies. A Comparative Study of Civilizations. [In Russian]. Moscow, Russian Federation: Aspekt Press. [=Эйзенштадт, 1999].

Eisenstadt, S. N. (2000). Multiple Modernities. Daedalus, 129 (1), 1–29.

Eisenstadt, S. N. (2002). The Paradox of Democratic Regimes: Fragility and Transformability. [In Russian]. Polis, 2, 67–81. [=Эйзенштадт, 2002].

Eisenstadt, S. N. and W.Schluchter (2006). Paths to early Modernities — A Comparative View. [In Russian]. In A. A. Fisun, Democracy, neopatrimonialism and global transformations (pp. 261–282). Kharkov, Ukraine: Konstanta. [Эйзенштадт, Шлюхтер, 2006].

Eisenstadt, S. N. (2007). Note on Society. Reconstitution of Collective Identitities and Inter-Civilizational Relation in the Age of Globalization. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 32 (1), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.2307/20460618

Eisenstadt, S.N. (2010). Modernity and modernization, Sociopedia.isa, DOI: 10.1177/205684601053.

Eisenstadt, S. N. (2010). Disruptions of modernization. [In Russian]. The Inviolable Reserve, 74 (6), 42–67. [=Эйзенштадт, 2010].

Eisenstadt, S. N. (2011). The Axial conundrum: Between transcendental visions and vicissitudes of their institutionalization: constructive and destructive possibilities. Anбlise Social, 199, 210–217. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674067400.c11

Erasov, B. S. (1999). Comparative study of civilizations. Text-book for high school. [In Russian]. Moscow, Russian Federation: Aspekt Press. [=Ерасов, 1999].

Fisun, А. А. (2006). Democracy, neopatrimonialism and global transformations. Kharkov, Ukraine: Konstanta. [=Фисун, 2006].

Gupta, D. (2013). Against multiculturalism and multiple modernities. Retrieved from http://www.india-seminar.com/2013/649/649_dipankar...

Kutuev, P. V. (2007). Comparative-historical sociology of modernization: theorizing of S. Eisenstadt. [In Ukrainian]. Social psychology: Ukrainian scientific-practical journal, 4, 17–26. [=Кутуєв, 2007].

Kutuev, P. V. (2017). Modernity(-ies): histories, theories and practices. Sociological interpretation. [In Ukrainian]. Kherson, Ukraine: Helvetica. [=Кутуєв, 2007].

Pye, L. W. (1958). The Non-Western Political Process. Journal of Politics, 20 (3), 468–486.

Swedberg, R. (2010). A Note on Civilizations and Economies. European Journal of Social Theory, 13 (1), 15–30.

Vaschynska, I. I. (2018). Regionalism in Ukraine: rethinking through the prism of social identities and group loyalties. [In Ukrainian]. Ukrainian socium, 4 (67), 9–18. https://doi.org/10.15407/socium2018.04.009 [=Ващинська, 2018].

S.Eisenstadt’s civilizational analysis in the contexts of sociological theorising

stmm. 2019 (3): 62-81

UDC 316.2

DOI: http://10.15407/sociology2019.03.062

Viktor Stepanenko - Doctor of science in Sociology, Principal Research Fellow at the Department of History and Theory of Sociology, Institute of Sociology, National Academy of sciences of Ukraine (Kyiv).

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3623-0057

Scopus Author ID: 57189273050

Abstract. The article represents an overview of S. Eisenstadt's theoretical heritage, focusing on its theoretical and methodological core, that is, civilizational analysis. Theoretical sources, synthesis and links of civilizational analysis, its conceptual coordinates on the map of sociological theoretical knowledge are examined. It is argued that the formation of this theoretical direction meant the restoration of classic sociological tradition, in particular approaches indicated by E. Durkheim, M. Mauss and M. Weber to the problematic of historical civilizations. This theme has acquired its new meanings and actualizations in reflections on peculiarities and challenges of modernization from the end 1970-s in Eisenstadt’s and some other researchers’ works. Conceptual interpretation of modernity as a distinctive civilizational pattern and Eisenstadt’s concept of multiple modernities are also important aspects of this theoretical direction. The main idea of Eisenstadt’s concept of multiple modernities is a recognition of many possible patterns of modernization as a not purely Western civilization phenomenon. Some methodological implications of Eisenstadt’s civilizational analysis for the prospects of sociological research, particularly with focus on peculiarities of social transformation and modernization in Ukraine are suggested. It is argued that socio-cultural and political dynamics of Ukraine’s transformation could be analyzed as the combination of various civilizational programs. This is explained by the fact that modernization in Ukraine does not follow the classical scheme - from traditional to modern society, but rather occurs as a parallel transformation from one type of modernization (former Soviet) to another (market and democratic). In addition this transformation is undergoing in the context of the conflict between two geopolitical modernization projects – Western, European and Eurasian (“Russian world”). Keywords: civilizational analysis, S. Eisenstadt’s sociology, Axial civilizations, civilizational dynamics, modernization, multiple modernities

Publication in: ukr | rus

References

Arnason, J. (2003). Civilizations in dispute: historical questions and theoretical traditions. Leiden, Boston: Brill.

Arnason, J. (2009). Civilizational analysis: a paradigm in the making. In R. Holton, W. R. Nasson (Eds.), World Civilizations And History Of Human Development (pp. 1–34). EOLSS Publishers / UNESCO.

Durkheim, E. and Mauss, M. (1971). Note on the notion of civilization, translated and introduced by Benjamin Nelson. Social Research, 38 (4), 808–13.

Eisenstadt, S. N. (1963). Political Systems of Empires. New York: Free Press of Glencoe.

Eisenstadt, S. N. (1982). The Axial Age: The Emergence of Transcendental Visions and the Rise of Clerics. European Journal of Sociology, 23 (2), 294–314. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003975600003908

Eisenstadt, S. N. (1989). Cultural Tradition, Historical Experience, and Social Change: The Limits of Convergence. The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, delivered at The University of California, Berkeley. May 1–3, 1989. Retrieved from https://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/...

Eisenstadt, S. N. (1992). The Axial Age: The Emergence of Transcendental Visions and the Rise of Clerics.[In Russian] Orientation — search: the East in theories and hypothesis. Moscow, Russian Federation: Nauka. [=Айзенштадт, 1992].

Eisenstadt, S. N. (1996). Japanese Civilization: A Comparative View. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Eisenstadt, S. N. (1999). Revolutions and the Transformations of Societies. A Comparative Study of Civilizations. [In Russian]. Moscow, Russian Federation: Aspekt Press. [=Эйзенштадт, 1999].

Eisenstadt, S. N. (2000). Multiple Modernities. Daedalus, 129 (1), 1–29.

Eisenstadt, S. N. (2002). The Paradox of Democratic Regimes: Fragility and Transformability. [In Russian]. Polis, 2, 67–81. [=Эйзенштадт, 2002].

Eisenstadt, S. N. and W.Schluchter (2006). Paths to early Modernities — A Comparative View. [In Russian]. In A. A. Fisun, Democracy, neopatrimonialism and global transformations (pp. 261–282). Kharkov, Ukraine: Konstanta. [Эйзенштадт, Шлюхтер, 2006].

Eisenstadt, S. N. (2007). Note on Society. Reconstitution of Collective Identitities and Inter-Civilizational Relation in the Age of Globalization. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 32 (1), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.2307/20460618

Eisenstadt, S.N. (2010). Modernity and modernization, Sociopedia.isa, DOI: 10.1177/205684601053.

Eisenstadt, S. N. (2010). Disruptions of modernization. [In Russian]. The Inviolable Reserve, 74 (6), 42–67. [=Эйзенштадт, 2010].

Eisenstadt, S. N. (2011). The Axial conundrum: Between transcendental visions and vicissitudes of their institutionalization: constructive and destructive possibilities. Anбlise Social, 199, 210–217. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674067400.c11

Erasov, B. S. (1999). Comparative study of civilizations. Text-book for high school. [In Russian]. Moscow, Russian Federation: Aspekt Press. [=Ерасов, 1999].

Fisun, А. А. (2006). Democracy, neopatrimonialism and global transformations. Kharkov, Ukraine: Konstanta. [=Фисун, 2006].

Gupta, D. (2013). Against multiculturalism and multiple modernities. Retrieved from http://www.india-seminar.com/2013/649/649_dipankar...

Kutuev, P. V. (2007). Comparative-historical sociology of modernization: theorizing of S. Eisenstadt. [In Ukrainian]. Social psychology: Ukrainian scientific-practical journal, 4, 17–26. [=Кутуєв, 2007].

Kutuev, P. V. (2017). Modernity(-ies): histories, theories and practices. Sociological interpretation. [In Ukrainian]. Kherson, Ukraine: Helvetica. [=Кутуєв, 2007].

Pye, L. W. (1958). The Non-Western Political Process. Journal of Politics, 20 (3), 468–486.

Swedberg, R. (2010). A Note on Civilizations and Economies. European Journal of Social Theory, 13 (1), 15–30.

Vaschynska, I. I. (2018). Regionalism in Ukraine: rethinking through the prism of social identities and group loyalties. [In Ukrainian]. Ukrainian socium, 4 (67), 9–18. https://doi.org/10.15407/socium2018.04.009 [=Ващинська, 2018].

LAST PRINTED ISSUE

LATEST FREELY ACCESSIBLE MATERIALS

} } } } }