Везде
On the origins of the methodology of social knowledge in Russia: A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky and contemporary discussions
Table of contents
Annotation Estimate Publication content
References Comments
Share
QR
Metrics
On the origins of the methodology of social knowledge in Russia: A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky and contemporary discussions
Annotation
PII
S0321-50750000621-9-1
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
P. A. Vladimirov  Аnastasia Lebedeva
Edition
Volume 21 Vol 21, No 2 (2021)
Pages
354-364
Abstract

The article considers those aspects of the development of sociological knowledge in Russia that were determined by the scientific and organizational activities of A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky (1863-1919). His contribution to the development of the Russian social and humanitarian thought is associated mainly with the development of the foundations of history, historiography and source studies, which is widely admitted in scientific works. However, Lappo-Danilevsky’s contribution to the development of sociology, to the identification of the specifics of its subject and to the creation of a model of systemic courses on the historical reconstruction of sociological knowledge are still widely discussed. The authors consider the creative component of Lappo-Danilevsky’s legacy and the strategy he developed for creating an interdisciplinary methodology for social sciences. The article aims at describing his contribution to the institutionalization of Russian sociology, which allows not only to clarify the origins of social knowledge in Russia, but also to actualize Lappo-Danilevsky’s legacy. The authors pose new questions and problematize the research potential of the works of Russian scientists at the turn of the 20th century, which has prospects for supplementing the history and methodology of sociology. The description of the activities of Lappo-Danilevsky - from the development of the institutional foundations of Russian sociology to the clarification of the methodological principles of social knowledge - raises the question of the influence of positivism and neo-Kantianism on the scientific community. On the other hand, the study of the scientific and organizational activities of Lappo-Danilevsky allow to expand the field of history and methodology of sociology by supplementing it with a description of the institutionalization of sociology in Russia. The study of the foundations of sociological knowledge emphasizes three points: creation of methodology, separation from related disciplines, and acceptance of the historical component in the development of academic sociology. The article also mentions contemporary discussions which consider the sociological legacy of Lappo-Danilevsky not only as a historical reconstruction of the development of social knowledge, but also in the interdisciplinary perspective of contemporary sociology.

Keywords
history of sociology, methodology of sociology, methodology of history, interdisciplinarity, Russian Sociological Society, Lappo-Danilevsky, Russian Neo-Kantianism
Date of publication
30.06.2021
Number of purchasers
6
Views
106
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Cite   Download pdf

References



Additional sources and materials

  1. Belov V.N. Filosofiya Badenskoy shkoly neokantianstva [Philosophy of the Baden School of Neo-Kantianism]. Filosofskoe Obozrenie. 2017; 2. (In Russ.).
  2. Vvedensky A.I. O predelakh i priznakakh odushevleniya [On the Limits and Signs of Animation]. Moscow; 2012. (In Russ.).
  3. Lappo-Danilevsky A.S. Istoriya politicheskikh idey v Rossii v XVIII veke v svyazi s obshchim khodom razvitiya ee kultury i politiki [History of Political Ideas in Russia in the 18th Century in Connection with the General Course of the Development of its Culture and Policy]. Koln; 2005. (In Russ.).
  4. Lappo-Danilevsky A.S. Metodologiya istorii [Methodology of History]. Vol. 1. Moscow; 2010. (In Russ.).
  5. Lappo-Danilevsky A.S. Organizatsiya pryamogo oblozheniya v Moskovskom gosudar-stve so vremen smuty do epokhi preobrazovaniy [Organization of Direct Taxation in the Moscow State from the Discord Times to the Era of Transformation]. Saint Petersburg; 1890. (In Russ.).
  6. Lappo-Danilevsky A.S. Russkie promyshlennye i torgovye kompanii v pervoy polovine XVIII stoletiya [Russian Industrial and Commercial Companies in the First Half of the 18th Century]. Saint Petersburg; 1899. (In Russ.).
  7. Lappo-Danilevsky A.S. Sobranie i svod zakonov Rossiyskoy imperii, sostavlennye v tsarstvovanie imperatritsy Ekateriny II [Collection and Code of Laws of the Russian Empire as Compiled in the Reign of the Empress Catherine II]. Saint Petersburg; 1898. (In Russ.).
  8. Malinov A.V. Russkaya sotsiologicheskaya shkola v otsenke A.S. Lappo-Danilevskogo [Russian Sociological School in the assessment of A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky]. Zhurnal Sotsiologii i Sotsialnoy Antropologii. 2016; 19 (3). (In Russ.).
  9. Malinov A.V. Sotsiologicheskoe nasledie A.S. Lappo-Danilevskogo: issledovaniya i materialy [Sociological Legacy of A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky: Research and Materials]. Saint Petersburg; 2017. (In Russ.).
  10. Malinov A.V., Ashcheulova N.A. Nauchnoe nasledie A.S. Lappo-Danilevskogo v oteche-stvennoy istorii sotsialnykh nauk [Scientific legacy of A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky in the Russian history of social sciences]. Sotsiologiya Nauki i Tekhniki. 2019; 4. (In Russ.).
  11. Myslivets N.L., Romanov O.A. Istoricheskaya pamyat kak sotsiokulturny fenomen: opyt sotsiologicheskoy rekonstruktsii [Historical memory as a social-cultural phenomenon: An attempt of sociological reconstruction]. RUDN Journal of Sociology. 2018; 18 (1). (In Russ.).
  12. Olkhov P.A. Problema “Chuzhogo Ya” v metodologii istorii A.S. Lappo-Danilevskogo (kantianskie motivy) [The problem of the “Alien Self” in the methodology of history of A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky (Kantian motifs)]. Kantovsky Sbornik. 2011; 3. (In Russ.).
  13. Olkhov P.A., Shchedrina T.G. Problema “Chuzhogo Ya” v metodologii istorii Gustava Shpeta i Aleksandra Lappo-Danilevskogo [The problem of the “Alien Self” in the methodology of history of Gustav Shpet and Alexander Lappo-Danilevsky]. Metodologiya istorii: N.I. Kareev, A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky, D.M. Petrushevsky, V.M. Khvostov. Moscow; 2019. (In Russ.).
  14. Rumyantseva M.F. Razvitie teoretiko-poznavatelnoy kontseptsii A.S. Lappo-Danilevskogo v nauchno-pedagogicheskoy shkole istochnikovedeniya [Development of the theoretical-cognitive concept of A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky in the scientific-pedagogical school of source studies]. Akademik A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky v pamyati nauchnogo soobshchestva. Saint Petersburg; 2019. (In Russ.).
  15. Rumyantseva M.F. Filosofskie osnovaniya metodologii istorii v russkoy versii neokantianstva: A.I. Vvedensky i W. Dilthey [Philosophical foundations of the methodology of history in the Russian version of Neo-Kantianism: A.I. Vvedensky and W. Dilthey]. Dialog so vremenem. 2018; 62. (In Russ.).
  16. Bandyopadhyay S. Positively: Comte’s positivism and early anthropology in India. Culture and Society. 2018; 1.
  17. Brzechczyn K. Between positivism, narrativism and idealization in Polish methodology of history. Historein. 2014; 14 (1).
  18. Ishfaq Majeed. Understanding positivism in social research: A research paradigm. International Journal of Research in Social Sciences. 2019; 9 (11).
  19. Rosso M.J. Ascension and decline of positivism in Argentina. European Journal of Legal History. 2020; 17.
  20. Steinmetz G. Historicism and positivism in sociology: From Weimar Germany to the contemporary United States. Herman P., van Veldhuizen A. (Eds.). Historicism: A Travelling Concept. London; 2020.
  21. Windelband W. A History of Philosophy. The Formation and Development of its Problem and Concept. New York; 1935.
  22. York R., Clark B. Marxism, positivism, and scientific sociology: Social gravity and historicity. Sociological Quarterly. 2016; 47 (3).

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate