Russia sociology: the problem of getting out of the state of pre-science and finding new strategies

This article looks at sociology as a proto-science, in contrast with natural sciences, which have already developed past the conflicting paradigm phase and managed to achieve a more or less universal consensus in theoretical discourse, as well as define their stance on practical issues. In sociology’s case, this transition is far more complicated, because, unlike natural sciences, sociology is not directly driven by the condition and changes of its main object of study. Instead, it is entwined into the complicated interactions between academia, the government, and society. To review the development path of sociology, we use the typology of theories described by P. Sztompka: theories based on reviewing the viewpoints and texts by other authors; analytical theories, based on generalizing and explaining the concepts introduced in academic literature, as well as on developing typologies and classifications; heuristic theories, based on the images of social phenomena and on the concepts that prompt sociology to pose questions; and explanatory theories, based on generalizing models built upon systemically organized facts. We look at the development of sociologic theory in close correlation to the overall development of science, which is currently experiencing the so-called post-non-classical stage. Post-non-classical science looks at all objects of study as measurable in “human terms”, with their development being rooted in humankind’s world-changing activities. This allows to base the modern scientific worldview on a holistic and universal evolutionary concept and to introduce new ideological milestones for the development of human civilization. The objectively true explanation and description of any and all phenomena occurring in nature, society, and the human life, presupposes the inclusion of axiological factors into the explanations and research standards. Sociology still has not achieved the degree of disciplinary unity that is needed to juxtapose and summarize its knowledge base and leverage the said knowledge for a practical solution of complex, multi-aspect issues. The first obstacle on the road to this unity is the clash of multiple paradigms; the second is the gap between the theoretical and the empirical; and the third, and most prominent, obstacle is a number of methodological challenges that arise when we try to make a distinction between the social and sociological realia. All the above prevents sociology’s escape from the proto-science limbo. What sociology needs is to reconsider its very foundations and practically applied methodological strategies, to design some manner of a unified disciplinary approach, to overcome the excessively fragmented state of the sociological knowledge base, and to make a number of steps to ensure that sociology is recognized as a discipline in its own right. This will allow sociology to move to a whole new, problem-oriented level of fundamental research.

social theory, sociological theory, explanatory sociology, action activist approach, P.Bourdieu, post non-classical science.

1. Tikhonov A. V. Epistemologicheskiy status sotsiologicheskogo znaniya i nekotoryye problemy vnutri nauchnoy refleksii v otechestvennoy sotsiologii [Epistemological status of sociological knowledge and some problems within the scientific reflection in domestic sociology]. Rossiya reformiruyushchayasya. Ezhegodnik. Release 6. Moscow, Institut sotsiologii RAN, 2007 (in Russ.).

2. Tikhonov A. V. Postkrizisnyy sindrom otechestvennoy sotsiologii i problema novoy povestki dnya [Post-crisis syndrome of Russian sociology and the problem of a new agenda]. Rossiya reformiruyushchayasya. Ezhegodnik. Release 7. Moscow, Institut sotsiologii RAN, 2008 (in Russ.).

3. Tikhonov A. V. Rossiyskoye obshchestvo kak novaya sotsial’naya real’nost’ i metaproyekt otechestvennoy sotsiologii [Russian Society as a New Social Reality and Metaproject of Russian Sociology]. Rossiya reformiruyushchayasya. Ezhegodnik. Release 8. Moscow, Institut sotsiologii RAN, 2009 (in Russ.).

4. Kirdina S. G. Sovremennyye sotsiologicheskiye teorii: aktual’noye protivostoyaniye [Contemporary sociological theories: actual confrontation]. Vekhi rossiyskoy sotsiologii (1950‑2000 gg.) Responsible ed. Zh. T. Toshchenko, N. V. Romanovskiy. Moscow, Aleteyya, 2010 (in Russ.).

5. Rakitov A. I. Filosofiya komp’yuternoy revolyutsii [The Philosophy of the Computer Revolution]. Moscow, Politizdat, 1991 (in Russ.).

6. Ionin L. G. Sotsiologiya v obshchestve znaniy ot epokhi moderna k informatsionnomu obshchestvu [Sociology in the Knowledge Society from the Modern Age to the Information Society]. Moscow, Izd. dom GU–VSH·E, 2007 (in Russ.).

7. Prigozhin A. I. Tseli i tsennosti. Novyye metody raboty s budushchim[Goals and values. New methods of working with the future]. Moscow, «Delo» ANKH, 2010 (in Russ.).

8. Sotsiologiya upravleniya: strategii, protsedury i rezul’taty issledovaniy [Sociology of management: strategies, procedures and research results]. Responsible editor A. V. Tikhonov. Moscow, Kanon`1`» ROOI «Reabilitatsiya», 2010 (in Russ.).

9. Polyakova M. L. Obshchestvo i ego osnovnyye sfery [Society and its main spheres]. Tezaurus sotsiologii. Tematicheskiy slovar’-spravochnik. Ed. by Zh. T. Toshchenko. Moscow, YUNITI-DANA, 2009. S. 226 (in Russ.).

10. Zdravomyslov A. G. Pole sotsiologii v sovremennom mire [The field of sociology in the modern world]. Moscow, Logos, 2010 (in Russ.).

11. Yadov V. A. Sovremennaya teoreticheskaya sotsiologiya kak kontseptual’naya baza issledovaniya rossiyskikh transformatsiy [Modern theoretical sociology as a conceptual basis for the study of Russian transformations]. Moscow, Intersotsis, 2006 (in Russ.).

12. Turner B. Introduction. Blackwell companion to Social theory. Oxford: Blackwell, 1996, pp. 1–16.

13. Dogan M. The new social sciences: Cracks in the disciple: nary walls. International Social Science Journal, 1997, Vol. 153, pp. 429–443.

14. Stepin V. S. Teoreticheskoye znaniye. Istoricheskaya evolyutsiya [Theoretical knowledge. Historical evolution]. Moscow, Progress-Traditsiya, 2000 (in Russ.).

15. Shtompka P. Teoreticheskaya sotsiologiya i sotsiologicheskoye voobrazheniye [Theoretical sociology and sociological imagination]. Sotsiologicheskiy zhurnal. Moscow, Logos, 2001, № 1 (in Russ.).

16. Shtompka P. Sotsiologiya. Analiz sovremennogo obshchestva [Sociology. Analysis of modern society]. Moscow, 2005, p. 101 i dr. (in Russ.).

17. Toshchenko Zh. T. Sotsiologicheskoye znaniye: struktura i urovni [Sociological knowledge: structure and levels]. Tezaurus sotsiologii. Tematicheskiy slovar’-spravochnik. Ed. by Zh. T. Toshchenko. Moscow, YUNITI-DANA, 2009, p. 37 (in Russ.).

18. International handbook of Sociology. London, 2000.

19. Yanitskiy O. N. Izmenyayushchiysya mir Rossii: resursy, seti, mesta [The changing world of Russia: resources, networks, localities]. Mir Rossii, vol. XIX, 2010, no 3 (in Russ.).

20. Sistemnyy analiz i analiticheskiye issledovaniya. Rukovodstvo dlya professional’nykh analitikov [System analysis and analytical studies. A guide for professional analysts]. A. I. Rakitov et al. Moscow, RFFI, 2009 (in Russ.).

21. Burd’ye P. Prakticheskiy smysl [Practical Meaning]. Editorial and epilogue N. A. Shmatko. Moscow, Aleteyya, 2001 (in Russ.).