Institute of Sociology NASU

Sociology of the expected future in domestic realities — in search of an epistemological basis (Part 1)

stmm. 2025 (2): 135–152

DOI https://doi.org/10.15407/sociology2025.02.135

Full text: https://stmm.in.ua/archive/ukr/2025-2/9.pdf

LYUBOV BEVZENKO, Doctor of Sciences in Sociology, Senior Research Fellow, Leading Research Fellow at the Department of Social Psychology, Institute of Sociology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine (12, Shovkovychna St., Kyiv, 01021)

lbevzenko@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4020-1937

Most works on the sociology of the future, presented mainly in the fields of Western sociology, are based on the epistemology of methodological individualism and the theory of rational choice. This means that the expected image of one’s own future is only one’s own project, the implementation of which in the form of a life trajectory occurs due to one’s expected own resources (human, educational capital), as well as due to expected resources that can be designated as social capital. Expectations regarding the state of the macrosocial contour of the implementation of the life trajectory are reduced to its complete or relative stability and predictability. Possible deviations from the chosen life trajectory can be corrected due to the traditionally defined agency as a conscious and rational choice of the optimal way out of the situation. But this epistemology does not work in a situation of a large-scale macrocrisis, when systemic stability is no longer a resource for the implementation of the life project. In this case, those methodological settings and integrative models of social change that are provided by the combination of the basic provisions of critical realism and the complexity paradigm can work as an alternative epistemology. The first suggests considering the ontology of social reality as having three levels — “real”, “actual” and “empirical”. The complexity paradigm shows how the activity of the system in moments of crisis creates several variants of expected scenarios of the macro-future at the “real” level. Expectations about one’s own future in these cases depend on the scenario that will move from the “real” level to the “actual” level. In this case, each social actor must adjust the life strategies of the pre-crisis period. Three different ways of such correction are highlighted, and they primarily concern the macro-level as the main resource for their implementation. The first is to ignore the macro-level crisis, the second is to change it by physically moving to more stable regions (countries). The third, most interesting and unusual option for the previous epistemology is to put on hold all previous life plans, to identify one's life trajectory with the trajectory of changes at the system level. The life strategy in this case will consist in trying to translate the desired version of the expected scenarios of the macro-future from the level of "real" to the level of "actual". This is a special type of agent action, which cannot be considered the result of rational calculation. The topic of such agency requires both theoretical and empirical refinement, and the proposed epistemology provides certain paradigmatic heuristics for this.

Keywords: Sociology of the future, epistemological choice, сritical realism, complexity paradigm, expected future, life strategy, life trajectory, two types of agency in conditions of macro-crisis

References

1. Аrcher, M., Bhaskar, R., Collier, A., Lawson, T., & Norrie, A. (2013). Critical realism: Essential readings. USA: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315008592

2. Allana, S., Clark, A. (2018). Applying meta-theory to qualitative and mixed-methods research: A discussion of critical realism and heart failure disease management interventions research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406918790042

3. Allen, M. (2017). Narrative Interviewing / Ed. by M. Allen. In: The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483381411

4. Archer, M. (1995). Realist social theory: The morphogenetic approach. Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from: http://uberty.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Margaret_S. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511557675

5. Beckert, J., Suckert, L. (2020). The future as a social fact. The analysis of perceptions of the future in sociology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2020.101499

6. Bevzenko, L. (2018). Integrative concept of social tension - methodology, conceptual scheme, pragmatics. Part. 1; 2. [In Ukrainian]. Sociology: Theory, Methods, Marketing, 3, 43-74; 4, 73-104.

7. Bevzenko, L. (2024). War and the new world order: variants of expected scenarios in the context of the complexity paradigm. [In Ukrainian]. Sociology: Theory, Methods, Marketing, 2, 150-178. https://doi.org/10.15407/sociology2024.02.056

8. Bhaskar, R. (1975). Forms of realism. Philosophica, 15(1), 99-127. Retrieved from: http://www.philosophica.ugent.be/fulltexts/15-8.pdf https://doi.org/10.21825/philosophica.82713

9. Bourdieu, P. (1973). The three forms of theoretical knowledge. Social Sciences Information, 12, 53-80. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901847301200103

10. Bourdieu, P. (1980). The Logic of Practice. Cambridge: Polity.

11. Bulle, N. & Di Irio, F. (2023). Methodological individualism and critical realism: Question for Margaret Archer. In: N. Bulle & F. Di Irio (Eds), The Palgrave Handbook of Methodological Individualism (pp. 659-668). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41508-1_28

12. Byrne, D. (1998). Complexity theory and the social sciences: An Introduction. London: Routledge.

13. Castellani, B. & Gerrits, L. (2024). The Atlas of Social Complexity. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789909524

14. Ceccoli, V.C. (2004). Finding home in (an)other: Relational chemistry and its psychoanalytic derivations. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 14(3), 337-348. https://doi.org/10.1080/10481881409348790

15. Chen, L. (2023). Habitus beyond Bourdieu: in and out of translation studies. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2023.2213538

16. Cleveland, J. (1994). Complexity Theory: Basic Concepts and Application to Systems Thinking. http://www.slideshare.net/johncleveland/complexity-theory-basic-concepts

17. Collet, F. (2009). Does habitus matter? A comparative review of Bourdieu's habitus and Simon's bounded rationality with some implications for economic sociology. Sociological Theory, 27(4), 419-434. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9558.2009.01356.x

18. DiCicco-Bloom, B. & Gibson, D.R. (2010). More than a game: Sociological theory from the theories of games. Sociological Theory, 28(3), 247-271. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9558.2010.01377.x

19. Dobronravova, I.S. (1990). The Formation of Non-linear Thinking. [In Russian]. Kyiv: Lybyd.

20. Fodouop Kouam, A.W. (2025). A systematic literature review of post-positivism and critical realism as epistemological frameworks in educational research. International Journal of Changes in Education, February 6. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52024338

21. Gardner, B., Lally, P., & Rebar, A.L. (2020). Does habit weaken the relationship between intention and behaviour? Revisiting the habit‐intention interaction hypothesis. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 14(8), e12553. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12553

22. Giddens, A. & Pierson, Ch. (1998). Conversations with Anthony Giddens Making Sense of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity.

23. Goldberg, S.C. (2018). To the Best of Our Knowledge: Social Expectations and Epistemic Normativity. Oxford University Press.

24. Grobman, G.M. (2005). Complexity theory: a new way to look at organizational change. Administration Quarterly, 29, 3. https://doi.org/10.1177/073491490502900305

25. Lee, J. & Kim, Y.K. (2020). Online reviews of restaurants: Expectation-Confirmation Theory. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 21(5), 582-599. https://doi.org/10.1080/1528008X.2020.1712308

26. Mukumbang, F.C. (2023). Retroductive theorizing: A contribution of critical realism to mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 17(1), 93-114. https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898211049847

27. Mukumbang, F.C. & van Wyk, B. (2020). Leveraging the photovoice methodology for critical realist theorizing. Internation Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920958981

28. Ouellette, J.A. & Wood, W. (1998). Habit and intention in everyday life: The multiple processes by which past behavior predicts future behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 124(1), 54. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.1.54

29. Porpora, D.V. (2024). Realism and Complexity. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 54, 121-133. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12409

30. Reis, H. T., Regan, A., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2022). Interpersonal Chemistry: What Is It, How Does It Emerge, and How Does It Operate? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17(2), 530-558. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691621994241

31. Schiller, C.J. (2016). Critical realism in nursing: An emerging approach. Nursing Philosophy, 17(2), 88-102. https://doi.org/10.1111/nup.12107

32. Sherman, G.L. (2025). Integrating phenomenology and critical realism in qualitative research in psychology. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology. [Advance online publication]. https://doi.org/10.1037/teo0000315

33. Shulga, M. (2025). Imaginations and expectations in images of the future. [In Ukrainian]. Sociology: Theory, Methods, Marketing, 1, 105-138. https://doi.org/10.15407/sociology2025.01.105

34. Suckert, L. (2022). Back to the Future. Sociological Perspectives on Expectations, Aspirations and Imagined Futures. European Journal of Sociology, 63(3), 393-428. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003975622000339

35. Taleb, N.N. (2007). The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable. New York: Random House.

36. Venkatesh, V., Davis, F. D., & Zhu, Y. (2023). Competing roles of intention and habit in predicting behavior: A comprehensive literature review, synthesis, and longitudinal field study. International Journal of Information Management, 71, 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102644

37. Wood, W. & Rünger, D. (2016). Psychology of habit. Annual Review of Psychology, 67(1), 289-314. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033417

38. Yang, Y. (2021). Critical realism and complexity theory: building a nonconstructivist systems research framework for effective governance analysis. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 38(1), 177-183. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2662

39. Zlobina, O. (2024). Identity versus sense of belonging: New approaches in the study of social self-positioning. [In Ukrainian]. Ukrainskyi Sotsium, 4, 35-51. https://doi.org/10.15407/socium2024.03-04.035

Received 29.03.2025

Accepted for publication after review 22.04.2025

Published 2025