Trust, distrust and the paradox of democracy

According to the three-dimensional theory of trust which the author develops in his recent work, the measure of trust that people vest on their fellow citizens or institutions depends on three factors: the reflected trustworthiness as estimated by themselves in more or less rational manner, the attitude of basic trustfulness deriving from socialization, and the culture of trust pervading their society and normatively constraining for each member. The culture of trust is shaped by historical experiences of a society - the tradition of trust, and by the current structural context -the trust-inspiring milieu. The author presents a model of a structural context conducive for the emergence of the culture of trust, and then argues that the democratic organization contributes to the trust-generating conditions, like normative certainty, transparency, stability, accountability etc. The mechanism of this influence is found to be doubly paradoxical. First, democracy breeds the culture of trust by institutionalizing distrust, at many levels of democratic organization. And second, the strongest influence of democracy on the culture of trust may be expected when the institutionalized distrust remains only the potential insurance of trustworthiness, a resource used sparingly and only when there appear significant breaches of trust. Of all three components in the three-dimensional model of trust, the cultural dimension is most susceptible to practical, political measures. And the most promising method to elicit the culture of trust is designing democratic institutions and safeguarding their viable functioning. --

The ambivalence of social change: triumph or trauma?

"Sociological approaches to social change have evolved in three typical forms: the discourse of progress in the period of classical sociology, the discourse of crisis characteristic for the middle of the XXth century, and the discourse of trauma, which seems to emerge at the end of the XXth century. The concept of trauma, borrowed from medicine, suggests that change per se, irrespective of its content, but provided that it is sudden, comprehensive, fundamental and unexpected, may produce painful shock for the social and particularly cultural tissue of a society. Paradoxically, this applies also to changes which Are otherwise progressive, welcome, and intended by the people. Cultural trauma begins with disorganization of cultural rules and accompanying personal disorientation, culminating even in the loss of identity. This condition is made more grave by the traumatizing events or situations which occur as the effect of major change in areas other than culture, and affect the whole 'lifeworld' of the people. The traumatic mood which spreads in a society is countered by various coping strategies. If they Are successful trauma turns out into mobilizing force for human agency, and stimulates creative social becoming. Such theoretical model is applied and tested with data referring to the radical political, economic and cultural transformations in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe after the collapse of communism. The Analysis of the Polish case suggests that the model of trauma and slow re-consolidation of culture may be an adequate interpretative tool for this unique historical process." (author's abstract)"Für das Verständnis des sozialen Wandels haben sich in der Soziologie drei typische Zugangsweisen herausgebildet: der Fortschrittsdiskurs in der Periode der klassischen Soziologie, der Krisendiskurs in der Mitte des 20. Jahrhunderts und der 'Trauma'-Diskurs, der am Ende des 20. Jahrhunderts hervortritt. Der Begriff des Traumas, übertragen aus der Medizin, legt nahe, daß Wandel per se - gleichgültig welchen Inhalts, vorausgesetzt er ist plötzlich, umfassend, fundamental und unerwartet - einen schmerzhaften Schock für das soziale und insbesondere das kulturelle Gefüge einer Gesellschaft auslöst. Paradoxerweise trifft dies auch auf Fälle des Wandels zu, die ansonsten als fortschrittlich, willkommen und als von den Betroffenen intendiert anzusehen sind. Kulturelles Trauma beginnt mit der Auflösung kultureller Regeln und persönlicher Desorientierung und kann sogar zu Identitätsverlust führen. Dieser Zustand wird verschärft durch traumatisierende Ereignisse und Situationen, die sich als Folgen von Veränderungen in anderen Bereichen ergeben und die gesamte 'Lebenswelt' der Menschen betreffen können. Der traumatischen Stimmung, die sich in einer Gesellschaft verbreitet, wirken unterschiedliche Bewältigungsstrategien entgegen. Sind sie erfolgreich, wird Trauma zur mobilisierenden Kraft menschlichen Handelns und zum Stimulans kreativen Zusammenlebens. Ein darauf gerichtetes theoretisches Modell wird in dem Beitrag angewandt und mit Daten getestet, die sich auf die radikalen politischen, wirtschaftlichen und kulturellen Transformationen in den Ländern Mittel- und Osteuropas nach dem Zusammenbruch des Kommunismus beziehen. Die Analyse des polnischen Falls legt nahe, daß das Modell von Trauma und langsamer kultureller Neukonsolidierung sich als angemessenes Interpretationsinstrument für diesen einzigartigen historischen Prozeß eignet." (Autorenreferat

The condition of sociology in East-Central Europe

Im Oktober 2001 und Januar 2002 fand im "Collegium Budapest" eine internationale Konferenz statt, in der die Situation der Sozialwissenschaften in Mittel- und Osteuropa aus dem Blickwinkel von Soziologen, Politologen und Ökonomen diskutiert wurde. Der Autor möchte in seinem Aufsatz über die Bedingungen der Soziologie in Ostmitteleuropa einige Hauptlinien der Debatte skizzieren, die Fragestellungen systematisieren und eine vorläufige zusammenfassende Bilanz ziehen. Wesentliche Fragen der Debatte waren z.B.: Sind die Soziologien in den ost- und mitteleuropäischen Ländern gleich oder unterschiedlich? Wie weit sind sie von den Kontexten der europäischen Soziologie entfernt? Und wie werden sie durch die fortschreitende Internationalisierung der Soziologie im Zeitalter der Globalisierung beeinflusst? Der Autor erörtert einige allgemeine Probleme der Disziplin und regionale Probleme, die unter den Soziologen von postkommunistischen Ländern diskutiert werden, sowie spezifische Fragestellungen nationaler Soziologen, bei denen ideosynkratische historische oder kulturelle Erfahrungen und die besondere gegenwärtige Situation in den postkommunistischen Ländern im Vordergrund standen. (ICI)Universal problems of the discipline; Regional problems shared among sociologists of post-communist countries; Specific problems of national sociologies

The ambivalence of social change: Triumph or trauma?

Sociological approaches to social change have evolved in three typical forms: the discourse of progress in the period of classical sociology, the discourse of crisis characteristic for the middle of the XXth century, and the discourse of trauma, which seems to emerge at the end of the XXth century. The concept of trauma, borrowed from medicine, suggests that change per se, irrespective of its content, but provided that it is sudden, comprehensive, fundamental and unexpected, may produce painful shock for the social and particularly cultural tissue of a society. Paradoxically, this applies also to changes which are otherwise progressive, welcome, and intended by the people. Cultural trauma begins with disorganization of cultural rules and accompanying personal disorientation, culminating even in the loss of identity. This condition is made more grave by the traumatizing events or situations which occur as the effect of major change in areas other than culture, and affect the whole lifeworld of the people. The traumatic mood which spreads in a society is countered by various coping strategies. If they are successful trauma turns out into mobilizing force for human agency, and stimulates creative social becoming. Such theoretical model is applied and tested with data referring to the radical political, economic and cultural transformations in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe after the collapse of communism. The analysis of the Polish case suggests that the model of trauma and slow re-consolidation of culture may be an adequate interpretative tool for this unique historical process. --

Kolejna socjologiczna utopia

Another sociological utopia The polemics between Piotr Sztompka and Michael Burawoy was originally published in Contempo­rary Sociology. A Journal of Reviews no 40/4 as Debate on International Sociology. The starting point of discussion between Piotr Sztompka and Michael Burawoy was the publication entitled Facing an Unequal World: Challenges for a Global Sociology (Volume One: Introduction, Latin America and Africa, 316 pp.; Volume Two: Asia, 362 pp.; Volume Three: Europe, and Concluding Reflections, 296 pp.), edited by Michael Burawoy, Mau-kuei Chang and Michelle Fei-yu Hsieh (Taipei, Taiwan: Institute of Sociology at Academia Sinica, Council of National Associations of the International Sociological Association & Academia Sinica, 2010). Kolejna socjologiczna utopiaPrezentowana niżej polemika pt. Debata o socjologii międzynarodowej ukazała się w „Contemporary Sociology. A Journal of Reviews” 40, nr 4. Punktem wyjścia do dyskusji między Piotrem Sztompką i Michaelem Burawoyem była książka z 2010 roku Facing an Unequal World: Challenges for a Global Sociology (t. 1: Introduction, Latin America and Africa, ss. 316; t. 2: Asia, ss. 362; t. 3: Europe, and Conclu­ding Reflexions, ss. 296), pod redakcją Michaela Burawoya, Mau-kuei Changa i Michelle Fei-yu Hsieh, wydana w Tajpej przez Institute of Sociology at Academia Sinica, Council of National Associations of the International Sociological Association & Academia Sinica

On the concept of culture once again

Autor definiuje pojęcie kultury przez odniesienie do szczególnej kategorii znaczeń normatywnych, czyli wartości. System wartości zorganizowany jest wokół trzech wartości najbardziej ogólnych i fundamentalnych: prawdy, dobra i piękna. Odpowiednio mówić można o trzech domenach kultury: kulturze poznawczej, kulturze moralnej i kulturze estetycznej. Desygnatami kultury poznawczej są przekonania, poglądy, opinie podzielane przez członków społeczeństwa. Desygnatami kultury moralnej są relacje łączące jednostki w przestrzeni międzyludzkiej. Desygnatami kultury estetycznej są szczególnego typu wytwory należące do sztuki artystycznej lub użytkowej. Podobieństwo wartości w każdym z tych trzech obszarów stanowi silny czynnik wytwarzający więzi społeczne i wspólnoty, a także tożsamości społeczne. Kultura jest fundamentem żywej i bogatej tkanki społecznej, społeczeństwa obywatelskiego.The concept of culture is defined by reference to a particular category of normative meanings, namely social values. This system is organized around three highly abstract and fundamental values: truth, goodness and beauty. Respectively, one may distinguish between three domains of culture: cognitive culture, moral culture and aesthetic culture. While the referents of cognitive culture are beliefs, views and opinions shared by members of a given society, the referents of moral culture include relations binding individuals in the inter-human space. Particular products of art or design are referents of aesthetic culture. The similarity of values in each of these three domains is a powerful factor that generates social bonds and communities as well as social identities. Culture is the foundation of a lively and rich social fabric, the civil society