Georg Simmel

Exchange of Sacrifices: Symbolizing an Unpopular War in Post-Soviet Russia.

by Serguei Alex. Oushakine (Сергей Ушакин)

In: Fighting Words and Images: Representing War across the Disciplines. Ed. by Elena V. Baraban, Stephan Jaeger, and Adam Muller. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2012, pp. 185-208.

Brevísima Introducción a la Antropología Urbana

by Daniel Malet Calvo

First theoretical chapter of doctoral thesis: "A ver quem passa". O Rossio. Proceso social y dinámicas interactivas en una plaza del centro de Lisboa.

A.Destro - M.Pesce, “Die zentrale Rolle des Konflikts in Verkündigung und Handeln Jesu”, in G.Gelardini – P.Schmid (Hrsg), Theoriebildung im christlich-jüdischen Dialog. Kulturwissenschaftliche Reflexionen zur Deutung, Verhältnisbestimmung und Diskussionsfähigkeit von Religionen, Stuttgart, Kohlhammer, 2003, 131-149.

by Mauro Pesce

Book Review: Kauko Pietila, Reason of Sociology: George Simmel and Beyond

by Daniel Silver

Though it refers to Simmel as ‘George’ in its title, readers should not judge this book by its cover. Kauko Pietilä... more Though it refers to Simmel as ‘George’ in its title, readers should not judge this book by its cover. Kauko Pietilä provides a clear, sensitive, and critically sympathetic account of Simmel’s relational conception of society. He finds in that conception possibilities, only partially tapped by Simmel himself, for reenergizing sociology as an ethical practice. I found this book stimulating and challenging and I expect others would as well. It could be assigned in contemporary theory courses for advanced undergraduates and graduate students and would be of interest not only to Simmel scholars and sociological theorists but also to social thinkers exploring potential normative missions for their work.

Simmel in early American sociology: Translation as social action

by Gary Jaworski

El rol de la 'sociedad'como ideal regulativo

by Daniel Chernilo

A Quest for Universalism

by Daniel Chernilo

The Particular Stream-of-Consciousness in Alfred Döblin's "Berlin, Alexanderplatz"

by Abraham Friedman

Lüzumsuz Adam'da Yalnızlığın Toplumsal Dolayımı

by Fatih Altug

"Bir İnsanı Sevmek: Sait Faik" kitabında çıkmış "Lüzumsuz Adam'da Yalnızlığın Toplumsal Dolayımı" yazısı. Sait Faik Abasıyanık'ın "Lüzumsuz Adam" hikayesine dair çözümleme.

L’appartenenza alle cerchie sociali e la condizione di straniero in George Simmel

by Isabella Crespi

Andriani Valentina e Crespi Isabella , L’appartenenza alle cerchie sociali e la condizione di straniero in George Simmel, Working Papers DiSEF, 2011, n. 5, ottobre 2011, pp. 74-87 , Eum, Macerata, ISSN 2239-7299

Abstract in italiano
Nel contributo viene presentata la teoria di Simmel relative alle cerchie sociali e al... more Abstract in italiano
Nel contributo viene presentata la teoria di Simmel relative alle cerchie sociali e al concetto di appartenenza. Tale dimensione dell‟appartenenza si declina poi nel suo studio interessante e aniticipatorio sulla concezione dello straniero come elemento interno ed esterno alla società



English abstract
The topic of the paper is Simmel‟s theory on social networks and on belonging. The dimension of belonging is used to define the concept of stranger as an internal and external element of the society.

VERTIGES MÉTROPOLITAINS. Enquêtes sur les déséquilibres dans les métropoles modernes.

by Olivier Jacques

'Author', 'Master Thesis', 'Final Version'

Metropolises are common contexts of unevenness and disproportions. In architectural and social theory, writings on the... more Metropolises are common contexts of unevenness and disproportions. In architectural and social theory, writings on the ‘great cities’ introduce a similar imbalance in the definition of the metropolitan psychological condition. The human body, naturally aroused by the subtlest sound or movement, is forced to a blasé mind-set in the midst of the ever-shifting metropolis. This resistance against over stimulation and involuntary body proximity is achieved through intellectual distance; a mental interval between the individual and the crowd, between the individual and the metropolis and between the individual and his own subjectivity. Beyond the blasé is the alienated mind, studied with Georg Simmel’s highly synchronized money metropolis. The research then looks at three modern metropolises, Paris, Berlin and New York through products of their civilization process, namely boulevards, crowds, monuments, exhibitions, neurasthenia, electricity, skyscrapers, or amusements. One finds metropolitan vertigo in instances of subjective asynchronism with the rational modern metropolis.

Social Dimensions of Action in Classical Sociological Theory

by Daniel Silver

Draft Only

One of the central problems of sociological theory has always been to demarcate the social domain of reality and to... more One of the central problems of sociological theory has always been to demarcate the social domain of reality and to thereby provide sociological research with its own distinctive topic.  Because the social domain is created and sustained by human actions, sociology’s classical theorists have naturally been at pains to understand how action can come to acquire a social  character. But sharing the question “what is action?” does not mean that we should force their different answers into an artificial unity in the mode of standard philosophies of action.  Though one often speaks of the action-theoretical approach in sociology, clearly the notion of action in the sociological classics is not as homogeneous as it may seem. Far from being unsystematic or contingent, the meaning of action is nevertheless too widespread and “polyphonic” to be restricted to one distinct and consistent approach. Current and contemporary theories would provide further evidence. Even theorists who do not call themselves “action theorists” at all, like Bourdieu or Luhmann, cannot avoid considering different notions of action, whether for apologetic or critical reasons. Thus, talk of the “action- theory”-approach in general and its alleged counterparts (like “systems theory” or “structuralism”) has to be treated cautiously. 

Nevertheless, we think that the classical social theorists share much in common that sets them apart from most philosophers of action and allows for a systematic comparison of the action- theoretical alternatives they offer. First, they do not confine the matter of action to the more or less metaphysical distinction between what is action and what is not; nor do they reduce action to an “exercise of reason” in the Kantian mode. Instead, they treat action and its sociality as practical problems that emerge in the course of life, such as when actors find it difficult to understand one another or experience resistances and constraints. In other words: rather than deal with the question, “what ontological criteria must a behavior meet to count as ‘an action’?” they instead elaborate on the fact that acting and/or activity in daily life takes place under “imperfect” conditions of time pressure, sympathy, dependency, power, role-taking, drives, interests, solidarity. “Action” and “actor” are results, often contested, of dealing with these imperfect conditions. The “idealized rational actor” forecloses analysis of these conditions from the start; furthermore, breaking down these complex social entanglements to a handy difference between “reason” or “instinct” – as we come across in e.g. Korsgaard – is also not an option the sociological “classics” took into consideration. 


What is more, the classical sociologists articulated “thick” historic examples to show that “action” and “agency” are interweaved with social institutions, habits, values and forms. The analyses of this interpenetration of action and sociality they undertook go much deeper than simply taking note that some, mostly self-evident, process of socialization shapes the conditions of agency and identity. For our protagonists, the social dimension of action stands for more than the social dependency of children or a “deficient” mode of individual autonomy. Their theories are meant to enable systematic analyses and observations of the world of sociable action, in all of its types, objects, and forms. 

Our discussion of some of these theoretical efforts is organized as follows. We begin with the two uncontested classics of sociology, Max Weber and Emile Durkheim, and highlight crucial divergences between their methodological statements and their material investigations. In the case of Weber, his theoretical statements about the methodological priority of instrumentally rational individual actions are belied by his research into the origins of the capitalist work ethic, which stresses instead customs and common values. In the case of Durkheim, his theoretical statements about the “thing-like” and coercive character of society are belied by his research into religious rites, which stresses instead how ritual action generates a meaningful and attractive social world. The remainder of our essay turns to Talcott Parsons and Georg Simmel as representatives of two classical approaches to theorizing the implicit connections between action and sociality never fully addressed by Weber and Durkheim. Simmel’s formal sociology focuses on forms rather than objects of social action and situates the social form of experience as one among many. Parsons’ general theory of action treats systems of social roles as one sub-system of action alongside personality systems and cultural systems, all of which emerge from the problems and contingencies inherent to acting in situations. 

The View of Life: A Simmelian Reading of Simmel's 'Testament'

by Daniel Silver

Published in 'Simmel Studies'

Simmel referred to his final book, Lebensanschauung, as his ‘testament.” This essay is an attempt to take Simmel at... more Simmel referred to his final book, Lebensanschauung, as his ‘testament.” This essay is an attempt to take Simmel at his word. It treats Lebensanschauung as his testament and asks how we might read Lebensanschauung as in fact capturing what it means to think in a “Simmelian” way. We explicate Simmel’s mature notion of life as simultaneously “more-life” and “more-than-life,” and then highlight proto-forms of these ideas throughout Simmel’s œuvre. We show how these vitalistic themes become increasingly separated from questions about the vitality of particular sociological, moral, or aesthetic questions, before, spurred by his encounter with Bergson and the First World War, Simmel arrived at the task of elaborating “the view of life” in its own terms. For sociological theory to authentically lay claim to its Simmelian heritage, we suggest, a deeper understanding of this crucial element of Simmel’s thought is necessary.

Simmel’s Law of the Individual and the Ethics of the Relational Self

by Daniel Silver

Forthcoming in 'Theory, Culture, and Society'

Georg Simmel’s final work The View of Life concludes his lifelong engagement with Immanuel Kant by “inverting” Kant’s... more Georg Simmel’s final work The View of Life concludes his lifelong engagement with Immanuel Kant by “inverting” Kant’s Categorical Imperative to produce an ethics of authentic individuality. While Kant’s moral imperative is universal to all individuals but particular to their discrete acts, Simmel’s Law of the Individual is particular to each individual but universal to all the individual’s acts. We assess the significance of Simmel’s formulation of the Law of the Individual in three steps: First, as an articulation of an ethical moment consonant with his relational approach to formal sociology, hinted at earlier in Sociology but not developed as such. Second, as a completion of the framework for Simmel’s formal sociology: the Law of the Individual conceptualizes a decisive but undertheorized relationship in Simmel’s vision of a “society” that is a woven fabric of social relationships, namely one’s relationship with oneself. We follow with a third proposal about how Simmel might have continued the line of thought he opens in The View of Life, suggesting that we can take the Law of the Individual as an invitation to fold the self-relation back into analysis of social relations and to theorize how forms of association are shaped by forms of self-relation. We thus narrow the theoretical gulf between Simmel’s vitalism and his sociology, which commentators usually hold apart. And in so doing, we sketch a distinctively Simmelian approach to an ethics of individuality in sociological inquiry.

La sociologie de Georg Simmel

by Frederic Vandenberghe

Immanent transcendence in Georg Simmel's sociology of religion

by Frederic Vandenberghe

Une Histoire critique de la sociologie allemande

by Frederic Vandenberghe

A Philosophical History of German Sociology

by Frederic Vandenberghe

Simmel and Weber as idealtypical founders of sociology

by Frederic Vandenberghe

(2010) Misunderstanding faith: when ‘capital’ does not fit the ‘spiritual’.

by Francesca Montemaggi

The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences vol.5, n.5, pp.179-192.

The paper provides a critique of rational choice theory and sketches a framework for the study of religion building on... more The paper provides a critique of rational choice theory and sketches a framework for the study of religion building on Georg Simmel’s insights.