DOCSLIB.ORG

Helmut Schelsky's 3

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Helmut Schelsky's 3 Social Thought &Research r and Couze Venn, "Beyond Enlightenment? After the Subject of Foucault, Who Comes?," Theory, Culture &Society, Vol. 14, Nr. 3 (August 1997): 1-28. Helmut Schelsky's 3. Herbert Marcuse, "The Realm of Freedom and the Realm of Necessity: A "German' Hobbes Interpretation Reconsideration," Praxis 5, 1 (Zagreb: 1969): 24. 4. In CR&R 63ff., Marcuse connects his notion of the new sensibility with the analysis of the early Marx on the liberation of the senses; his conception is also CARL-GORAN HEIDEGREN influenced by Schiller's conception of aesthetic education. Lund University 5. For an argument parallel to mine developed through an engagement-with French feminism and poststructuralism, see Kelly Oliver, Subjectivity without Abstract Subjects (New Jersey: Rowman and Littlefield, 1998). Oliver provides an ex­ tended argument that we can talk about subjectivity (and agency) without pre­ Helmut Schelsky (1912-19~4) is certainly one of the most supposing or needing.a subject, claiming that subjectivity does not necessarily importantandinfluential Germansociologists ofthepostwar­ imply a "subject" and that we are better off without such a concept. She devel­ period. He heldprofessorial chairs in sociology in the Federal ops notions of subjectivity as relational and intersubjective at its "center" and Republic for thirty tears (1948-1978): in Hamburg, Munster, contrasts varying discoursesand forms of masculine and feminine subjectivity. Bielefeld and, again, Munster. Owing to the lack of This project is parallel, I suggest, to Marcuse and the Frankfurt School, disclos­ translations Schelsky is, however, not verywellknown in the ing a surprising affinity between Critical Theory, French feminism, and English-speaking world. It's also difficult to point out one or poststructuralism. two principal writings from his hand; rather we have to do with a continuous stream ofpublications on a wide range of 6. Herbert Marcuse, "The Reification of the Proletariat," Canadian Journal of topics. 1 In this article, however, I'll focus on Schelsky's Philosophy and Social Theory, 3, 1 (Winter 1979): 21. See also Marcuse's reflec­ controversial postdoctoral thesis on Thomas Hobbes, whichhe tions on Bahro in "Protosocialism and Late Capitalism: Toward a Theoretical presented ontheeveoftheSecond WorldWar. Mydiscussion is Synthesis Based on Bahro's Analysis," in RudolfBahro: Critical Responses, ed. furthermore intended as a contribution to the much wider Ulf Wolter (Whit Plains, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe, 1980): 24-28. theme: German intellectuals and NationalSocialism. 7. This paperwas first presented in a panel at SPEP (Denver, 1998)in which my colleagues David Sherman and Pierre Lamarche presented the contributions of I. Adorno and Benjamin in rethinking subjectivity. See, in addition, Oliver's ac­ count of the contributions to refiguring subjectivity in poststructuralism and feminism, Ope cit.. In February 1939 Schelsky defended his postdoctoral thesis in philosophy and sociology on Hobbes at the University of 8. See,for example, R&R261f£,; "RevolutionarySubject and Self-Government,"; Konigsberg. It was planned and prepared to appear as a book in and" "Proto-Socialism," 32££. Yet there are also places in the later Marcuse where he speaks of radical or revolutionary subjectivity, the new sensibility, and new 1942, but due to war circumstances it never did. Not until a few modes of experience, and I am arguing here that while such notions of transfig­ years before his death did Schelsky decide to publish the ured subjectivity are still useful, the notion of a "revolutionary subject" should manuscript in an unchanged form. It appeared in 1981 under the be discarded. title Thomas Hobbes. Einepolitische Lebre? 9. See Georg Lukacs, History and Class Consciousness. Cambridge: MIT, 1971. In a new preface Schelsky quite openly states that at the time of writing and rewriting his thesis (1938-1940) he was in no wayan 24 ····,, ··· .,A . F··· •:m.~. Social Thought &Research .. 4! ; Helmut Scbelsky's "German" Hobbes Interpretation opponent of National Socialism. On the contrary his work on reduce scientific theories and doctrines to merely statements Hobbes was in his own view a way of summing up his about reality, but takes them to be essentially related to and experiences from the university seminars and political activity as rooted in human action. To show this relatedness and rootedness an engaged young Nazi student. At the same time he insists that is furthermore said to be "the task of philosophy in our time," serious independent scientific work in a liberal spirit was still with the reservation that " the methods of this thinking are possible. Hwe take Schelsky at his word, his thesis on Hobbes is manifold."6 Schelsky presents his intention to treat Hobbes as a and was intended as both a kind of Nazi philosophy and as a contemporary, to understand him "philosophically and scientific work in a liberal vein. politically...in the light of the forces of the present," rathe~ than treating him historically as a figure of the past. The actuality of Schelsky arrived at Leipzig as a young man in 1932 and Hobbes is seen in the fact that he was a pronounced opponent to immediately came under the spell of the "revolution from the the "System" that erected its dominion in Europe with the right" as advocated by his teachers Hans Freyer (1887-1969) and Glorious Revolution in 1688. A question of utmost importance Arnold Gehlen (1904-197(».3 Especially the latter became then becomes not what is wrong in Hobbes' doctrine, but "what Schelsky's much admired teacher and friend. Already during his is lacking there." But at the center of the presentation are, first year in Leipzig Schelsky joined the National Socialist according to Schelsky, the "truths" to be found in Hobbes Student Association and, for two years, the Storm troops (S.A.). doctrine, and the picture of a political theorist of "European He took part in the Reichsparteitagen in Niirnberg in 1933, 1934 significance." and 1935,and worked from 1933for the Amt Rosenberg. In 1934 he published asmall work on Sozialistische Lebenshaltung and one Paraphrasing Nietzsche it can be said: This isnot (only) a preface, year later defended his doctoral thesis on Theone der this is dynamite! It furthermore poses the question if Schelsky's Gemeinschaft nach Fichtes Naturrecbt von 1796. Another two work can be all the above-mentioned and still be an independent years later, in May 1937, he joined the National Socialist Party scientific work in a liberal spirit (asthe prefacefrom 1981states). and the following year the N ational Socialist Teachers Association. Schelsky worked as an assistant for Gehlen first in II. Leipzig (1934-38) and then in Konigsberg (1938-40) and for Freyer in Budapest (1940-41). From the Summer 1941 he took Well into the text Schelsky speaks of "two important keys" to the part as soldier and officer in the campaign on the Eastern front. understanding of Hobbes' political philosophy (cf. 279): on the The original preface to Thomas Hobbes. Eine politische Lehre is one handits "anthropological foundation," on the otherhandthe dated "In the field, 1941."4 fact that it addresses the "citizen" and intends to have a certain "effect" on him." I will proceed backwards and start with the The above-mentioned original preface is interesting for several latter key and from there move on to the first. reasons (cf. 13f.). It informs us that the work has its origin in a controversy between the author and Carl Schmitt over "the Hobbes' standpoint, as interpreted by Schelsky, can be German Hobbes interpretation in its opposition to the West­ summarized in the following way (cf. 321ff.): a doctrine that European interpretation."? What's specific about this "German" intends to have a formative influence on men has to orient itself Hobbes interpretation, the text also informs us, is that it doesn't by its recipients and the means to reach and act on them, must 26 27 fl' j ~..J,. Social Thought &Research Helmut Schelsley's "German"Hobbes Interpretation further take into consideration the situation at the time, and not is the opposite of a neutral retreat into an unpolitical inner space, least who the opponents are and how to counteract their it is rather the politicalization of man's whole existence. The goal influence. Hobbes' adressee is the citizen (not the ruler as is the of the state is to establish a concrete orderin the form of an "order case for Machiavelli), his intention is to develop a disposition of of values" (382)-today, Schelsky adds, we would rather talk loyalty to the state, i.e., to make the citizen freely accept the rule about a Weltanschauung-and a corresponding order of life. This he is subjected to. Hobbes' primary antagonist is the Pope as concrete order must be anchored among the citizens as habit, representing a competing claim to power, his primary means of conduct and disposition. In this wayan identity i~ established struggle are to establish a state consciousness founded not on between ruler and ruled, between state and nation. "The religion but on science. In this sense Hobbes' political democratic consent to dominion, that Hobbes' doctrine of the philosophy wants to be both a political doctrine and a political state contract presents, is at the same time a consent to the deed.8 For this reason Hobbes is furthermore said to be the domination or leading ofconsciousness [BewuBtseinsbeherrschung "precursor of a political science that only today is becoming bzw. -fiihrung]!" (427) Democracy for Hobbes means, in visible in outline" (44). Schelsky's interpretation, the recognition of state authority by the people, not the exerciseof it. In this way poweris transformed Carl Schmitt, in his book on Hobbes from 1938) diagnosed a into right, and it's no longer adequate to talk of.obedience pure "break" in Hobbes' doctrine.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Helmut Schelsky
    16 | 17 Universitätsarchiv Helmut Schelsky 03 Helmut Schelsky Denker der „skeptischen Generation“, „Stichwortgeber des Zeitgeistes“ Helmut Schelsky, 1912 in Chemnitz geboren, gilt als der 14. Okt. 1912 Helmut Wilhelm Friedrich Schelsky wurde in Chemnitz geboren. erfolg- und einflussreichste Soziologe der frühen Bun- ab 1931 Studium der Philosophie, Germanistik desrepublik. Sozialisiert in der Weimarer Republik setzte und Geschichte in Leipzig, zuvor an der er jugendbewegt und idealistisch 1933 auf die „Revo- Universität Königsberg. lution von rechts“. Dem anfänglich starken Engagement ab 1932 Mitglied der SA. für den Nationalsozialismus und dem Erklimmen der ab 1933 Arbeit für den Nationalsozialistischen ersten Stufen der akademischen Karriereleiter folgten Studentenbund. Desillusionierung und die Teilnahme an den Kämpfen 1935 Promotion mit Dissertation über „Die an der Ostfront. Nach 1945 verabschiedete sich Schels- Theorie der Gemeinschaft nach Fichtes „Naturrecht“ von 1796“. ky von jedwedem Idealismus und entwickelte sich als Eintritt in die NSDAP. geläuterter Demokrat zum nüchternen, sachlichen Be- 1938 gleiter der jungen Bundesrepublik. Helmut Schelsky 1938-1940 Assistent Gehlens in Königsberg. – mal als neokonservativ, mal als progressiv bezeich- 1939 Habilitation über „Die politische Lehre net – wurde mit seinen Veröffentlichungen zu aktuellen von Thomas Hobbes“. Problemen der Bundesrepublik zum „Stichwortgeber 1939 Kurzfristig Dozent in Königsberg. des Zeitgeistes“ (Ludolf Hermann). Zu nennen sind ins- 1940/1941 Assistent Freyers in Budapest. besondere „Wandlungen der deutschen Familie in der 1941-1945 Als Soldat der Wehrmacht eingezogen. Gegenwart“ (1953), „Soziologie der Sexualität“ (1955) Mehrmals zum Teil schwer verwundet. und „Die skeptische Generation. Eine Soziologie der 1942 Lehrstuhlvertretung in Leipzig. deutschen Jugend“ (1957). 1943 Außerordentlicher Professor an der Mit der Berufung auf eine Soziologieprofessur an der Uni- Reichsuniversität Straßburg.
    [Show full text]
  • Humboldt and the Modern German University
    5 Tradition under debate During the final years of the 1950s, the period of actual reconstruction came to an end. Material standards had risen considerably, and the sombre, anxious atmosphere that was typical of the first half of the decade had given way to confidence in a brighter future. An artistic avant-garde broke with prevalent aesthetic principles; a public reckoning with Nazism gradually got under way; and a younger generation began to make itself heard in social debate. Many said farewell to the Adenauer era even before the ageing Federal Chancellor left his post in 1963. These years, c. 1957–1965, stand out as a comparatively distinct phase in West German post-war history, a phase that can be separated from the preceding and ensuing ones. ‘Dynamic times’ is a label given by historians to this period of just under ten years.1 In spite of the growth and spread of prosperity, there was a simmering discontent in many circles. One underlying cause was the incomplete democratisation. True, the parliamentary system had taken hold and been consolidated; but West German society was not seen as entirely democratic. More and more people made more and more insistent demands for reform – a keyword for the 1960s. Especially the younger generation did not feel at home in an order where older men held all the important positions of power. As an 1 Dynamische Zeiten: Die 60er Jahre in den beiden deutschen Gesellschaften, ed. by Axel Schildt, Detlef Siegfried & Karl Christian Lammers (Hamburg, 2000); Schildt & Siegfried, Deutsche Kulturgeschichte, pp. 179–244. Other important interpreters of the history of the Federal Republic use a similar vocabulary: In Die geglückte Demokratie: Geschichte der Bundesrepublik Deutschland von ihren Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart (Stuttgart, 2006), Edgar Wolfrum speaks of the 1960s in terms of ‘dynamism and liberalisation’ while ‘transformation’ and ‘the euphoria of modernity’ are keywords in Ulrich Herbert, Geschichte Deutschlands im 20.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Origins of Carnap's Aufbau from Reductive Empiricism to The
    The publication of this book was supported by the Student Union of ELTE University and the Student Union of the Faculty of Humanities at ELTE University. Published by the Philosophy Workshop of Eötvös József Collegium Budapest, 2016 Director of publication: Dr. László Horváth Edited by Megyer Gyöngyösi, Zsolt Kapelner, Zsófia Ádám, István Faragó-Szabó Cover design by Hunor Gyöngyösi Designed by Zsófia Machó isbn © 2016 Philosophy Workshop of Eötvös József Collegium © The authors On the Origins of Carnap’s Aufbau From reductive empiricism 13 to the Geisteswissenschaften Ádám Tamás Tuboly Rudolf Carnap’s Der logische Aufbau der Welt is considered to be the magnum opus of (early) analytic philosophy. Contrary to this analytic tradition stands, as the saying goes, everything else – the so called continental philosophies. It has been highlighted recently, however, that the contexts of the Aufbaudiffer radically from the usual received view. In order to obtain a better picture of (the influences of) the Aufbau, I will present in Sect. 1 the received view which characterizes the book as a reductive empiricist, foundationalist and phenomenalist work. In Sect. 2 I will show step-by-step that this view is mistaken and the influences on the Aufbau could be located around Neo-Kantianism, the philosophy of Husserl and the human sciences [Geisteswissenschaften]. The contribution of this paper is connected to these approaches and argues for a different and currently unanalyzed and mainly ignored aspect of Carnap’s work, namely his theory of geistige Gegenstände. After all, I will claim that the motivations and continental roots of the Aufbau are just much deeper than it is usually thought.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Systems
    Home Browse Authors Sources Documents Years Theories Subjects Find Sources Authors Search Simple Advanced Help Previous Source Document Document 1 Next Source Document Front Matter by Editor, in Social Systems. [by] Niklas Luhmann and translated by John Bednarz, Jr. with Dirk Baecker. (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, 1995). pp. [N pag]-11. [Bibliographic Details] [View Documents] -- [NA] -- Front Matter [Cover] SOCIAL SYSTEMS Niklas Luhmann TRANSLATED BY John Bcdnarz, Jr. WITH Dirk Baecker -- [NA] -- -- [NA] -- SOCIAL SYSTEMS -- [NA] -- -- [NA] -- WRITING SCIENCE EDITORS Timothy Lenoir and Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht -- [NA] -- -- [NA] -- [Title Page and Credits] SOCIAL SYSTEMS Niklas Luhmann TRANSLATED BY John Bednarz, Jr., with Dirk Baecker FOREWORD BY Eva M. Knodt STANFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS STANFORD, CALIFORNIA -- [NA] -- Assistance for the translation was provided by Inter Nationes Social Systems was originally published in German in 1984 as Soziale Systeme: Grundriβ einer allgemeinen Theorie, © 1984 Suhrkamp Verlag Frankfurt am Main. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California © 1995 by the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University Printed in the United States of America CIP data appear at the end of the book Original printing 1995 -- [NA] -- Contents Foreword ix Instead of a Preface to the English Edition: On the Concepts "Subject" and "Action" xxxvii Preface to the German Edition xlv Introduction: Paradigm Change in Systems Theory 1 1. System and Function 12 2. Meaning 59 3. Double Contingency 103 4. Communication and Action 137 5. System and Environment 176 6. Interpenetration 210 7. The Individuality of Psychic Systems 255 8. Structure and Time 278 9. Contradiction and Conflict 357 10. Society and Interaction 405 11.
    [Show full text]
  • Ernest Manheim Sociologist, Anthropologist, and Composer
    Ernest Manheim sociologist, anthropologist, and composer HUNGARY 1900-1920 Born Ernő Manheim as the elder of two children of the owner of a tailoring József (Joseph) Manheim (1863-1925) and his wife Hermine, née Wengraf (1870-1953; later married Déri), in Budapest on January 27, 1900. Educated bilingual (Hungarian, German) in Budapest, then capital of the Hungarian part of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy. Grammar- school in Budapest IV. 1909-17, matriculation July, 1917. Then educated at the Military Academy of Budapest (“Ludoviceum”); besides student of chemistry at the Technical University of Budapest in 1917 and 1918/19. In-between soldier of the Austro-Hungarian army 1918 at the front in Italy. After the World War I he returned to Budapest to continue his studies. Participated in the Soviet Republic of Hungary (March to July, 1919) as volunteer (lieutenant) in the Red Army, first against Czechoslovakia, then against Romania, where he was imprisoned at Arad. In October, 1919 he could flee to the north-east of Hungary and at the beginning of 1920 to Vienna. AUSTRIA 1920-1923 In Austria as well as in Germany he used the name Ernst Manheim. Student of chemistry and physics, later of philosophy at the University of Vienna 1920-23. Between November, 1921 and June, 1922 in Schwaz (Tyrol), formally student at the University of Innsbruck. GERMANY 1923-1933 1923-25 in Kiel. Student of philosophy at the University of Kiel 1923-25. Followed his teacher, the sociologist Hans Freyer (1887-1969), with whom he became acquainted in 1923, to Leipzig in 1925. 1925-33 in Leipzig.
    [Show full text]
  • Biografie Helmut Schelsky 14.10
    http://agso.uni-graz.at/lexikon Biografie Helmut Schelsky i.e. Helmut Wilhelm Friedrich Schelsky *Chemnitz, Sachsen 14. Oktober 1912 †Münster, Nordrhein-Westfalen 24. Februar 1984 deutscher Soziologe Vater: Franz Schelsky, Zollsekretär Mutter: Ida Schelsky, geborene Sasse Geschwister: Ehe: 1944 Hildegard Brettle Kinder: Wilhelm Schelsky; Detlev Schelsky Religion: 14.10.1912 Geboren in Chemnitz, Sachsen. ?-1931 Studium der Philosophie, Germanistik, Geschichte und Kunstgeschichte an der Universität Königsberg [Kaliningrad, Russland]. 1931-1935 Studium der Philosophie an der Universität Leipzig, vor allem bei Arnold Gehlen (1904- 1976) und Hans Freyer (1887-1969); 1935 Ablegung der Lehramtsprüfung (Philosophie). 1935 Dr. phil.; Dissertation: Die Theorie der Gemeinschaft nach Fichtes „Naturrecht“ von 1796. Seit 1932 Mitglied der „Sturmabteilung <Link: http://www.dhm.de/lemo/html/weimar/innenpolitik/sa/index.html>“ (SA), seit 1933 Mitarbeit am „Nationalsozialistischen Deutschen Studentenbund“. 1937 Mitglied der „Nationalsozialistischen Deutschen Arbeiterpartei <Link: http://www.dhm.de/lemo/html/weimar/innenpolitik/nsdap/index.html>“ (NSDAP). Außerdem Lektor für das „Amt Rosenberg“. Versuchte sich auch an der Entwicklung von Lehrplänen für die „Hohe Schule“ der NSDAP zu beteiligen. 1938-1940 Lebte in Königsberg [Kaliningrad]. 1938-1940 Assistent von Arnold Gehlen an der Universität Königsberg. 1939 Habilitiert; Habilitationsschrift: Thomas Hobbes, eine politische Lehre. Seither Universitätsdozent. 1940-1941 Assistent von Hans Freyer an der
    [Show full text]
  • Helmut Schelskys “Skeptische Generation” Von 1957 35
    Helmut Schelskys “Skeptische Generation” von 1957 35 Franz-Werner Kersting Helmut Schelskys “Skeptische Generation” von 1957 Zur Publikations- und Wirkungsgeschichte eines 1 Standardwerkes I. "Es ist wirklich sehr schön, dass Sie mir die Zusage des Abschlusses Ihrer Arbeit zum Monatsende geben können. [...] Hinsichtlich der Erfolgsmöglichkeiten des Buches teile ich durchaus Ihren Optimismus. Wir werden die Tatsache, dass es sich um das erste grundlegende und wirklich zuverlässige Werk über die heutige Jugend handelt, werbe- mäßig nachdrücklich herausstellen. Ich habe unseren Reisevertretern besonders einge- schärft, bei den Buchhändlern auf den großen Interessentenkreis für das Buch zu ver- weisen. Wie ich Ihnen bereits schrieb, erhöht sich von Tag zu Tag die Zahl der Vor- bestellungen.”2 Diese Zeilen entstammen einem Brief, den der Sohn und Nachfolger des legendären Jenenser “Kultur-Verlegers und -Organisators”3 Eugen Diederichs, Peter Diederichs, am 10. September 1957 - nur wenige Tage vor demgroßen Wahlsieg Konrad Adenauers im Zeichen des Slogans “Keine Experimente” - an den Soziologen Helmut Schelsky schrieb. Der 1912 geborene sächsische Zollbeamtensohn Schelsky war zu dieser Zeit Ordinarius für Soziologie an der Universität Hamburg. Zuvor war er von 1949 bis 1953 als Soziolo- gieprofessor in der Hansestadt Direktor der dortigen Akademie für Gemeinwirtschaft gewesen. Eigentlich hatte der im “Dritten Reich” als jugendbewegter, NS-begeisterter Leipziger sowie Königsberger Schüler von Arnold Gehlen und Hans Freyer in seiner Kar- riere sehr geförderte und erfolgreiche Soziologe nach dem Krieg sofort Lehrstuhlinhaber werden wollen. Er war aber damals im ersten Anlauf noch an Bedenken und Widerstän- den innerhalb der Hamburger Philosophischen Fakultät gescheitert. Immerhin hatte es Schelsky 1943 - im Alter von gerade 31 Jahren - zu einem Ruf auf eine außerordentli- che Professur für Soziologie und Staatsphilosophie an der “braunen”, so genannten “Reichsuniversität” Straßburg gebracht, allerdings diesen Posten dann, kriegs- dienstbedingt, nicht mehr angetreten.
    [Show full text]
  • The German Concept of “Bildung” Then and Now*)
    1 Jürgen Oelkers *) The German Concept of “Bildung” then and now 1. Seclusion and freedom “What about Humboldt?” was a question raised two years ago during a student protest at German universities that was to be seen on many posters during the weeks of protest. There were other posters referring to Humboldt. “What about Humboldt” pointed to the apparent threat to higher education originating from the Bologna process. The word “Bologna” sounded no better to German professors, as it stands for a process of educational efficiency deeply alien to the spirit of liberal humanism. • So: “What about Humboldt?” means “What happened to Bildung?” • The equation seems to be self-evident: no one in Germany needs to explain what Humboldt has to do with “Bildung”. • Being a German, what will my lecture be all about? The German term “Bildung” is not only hard explain, but also nearly untranslatable. “Bildung” has a more extensive range of meanings than “education”, implying the cultivation of a profound intellectual culture, and is often rendered in English as “self-cultivation”. The term originated from the European philosophy of Neo-Platonism in 17th century and referred to what is called the “inward from” of the soul. Humboldt’s concept echoes this tradition even though Humboldt was not a Platonist. But “Bildung” was the key concept of German humanism and was backed by famous philosophers like Herder and Hegel as well as classical writers like Goethe or Schiller. The German “Bildungsroman” - novel of Bildung - shows how “Bildung” should work, i.e. experiencing the world in a free and personal way without formal schooling.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons Learned from German Sociology, 1933–45: Contexts and Content Wiebke Keim
    Lessons learned from German sociology, 1933–45: contexts and content Wiebke Keim To cite this version: Wiebke Keim. Lessons learned from German sociology, 1933–45: contexts and content. Social Science in Context. Historical, Sociological, and Global Perspectives, Nordic Academic Press, pp.95 - 114, 2013, 978-91-87351-04-4. halshs-01077333 HAL Id: halshs-01077333 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01077333 Submitted on 24 Oct 2014 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Keim, Wiebke (2013): Lessons learned from German sociology 1933-45: Contexts and content. In: Danell, Rickard; Larsson, Anna; Wisselgren, Per (Hg.): Social Science in Context. Historical, Sociological, and Global Perspectives, Lund: Nordic Academic Press: 95-114. – Manuscript – Lessons learned from German sociology, 1933–45: contexts and content Wiebke Keim This essay deals with a specific historical context for sociology: the period 1933–45 in Germany. It raises questions about the definition and self-definition of the discipline.i How far did the given historical,
    [Show full text]
  • 1 from Historical Structures to Temporal Layers: Hans Freyer and Conceptual History Timo Pankakoski Centre for European Studies
    From Historical Structures to Temporal Layers: Hans Freyer and Conceptual History Timo Pankakoski Centre for European Studies, University of Helsinki, Finland [Pre-print version – forthcoming in History and Theory 59:1, 2020] Abstract The article assesses, for the first time, the significance of the sociologist, philosopher, and conservative political theorist Hans Freyer for German conceptual history. Freyer theorized historical structures as products of political activity, emphasized the presence of several historical layers in each moment, and underscored the need to read concepts with regard to accumulated structures. He thus gave significant impulses not only to German structural history but also to conceptual history emerging out of it in the work of Otto Brunner, Werner Conze, and, most notably, Reinhart Koselleck, whose theories of temporal layers in history and concepts reworked the Freyerian starting points. Underscoring the openness and plurality of history, criticizing its false “plannability,” and reading world history as European history writ large, Freyer shaped the politically oriented theory of history behind Koselleckian Begriffsgeschichte. Further, Freyer theorized the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century transition to the industrial society as a historical rupture or “epochal threshold”, which bears close, and by no means coincidental, similarity to Koselleck’s saddle time thesis. Freyer’s theory of history sheds light on the interrelations of many Koselleckian key ideas, including temporal layers, the contemporaneousness of the non-contemporaneous, the plannability of history, and the saddle time. Keywords Hans Freyer, Reinhart Koselleck, conceptual history, social history, philosophy of history, conservatism, Otto Brunner, Werner Conze I. Introduction Rather than being a mere set of practices, German conceptual history carries an embedded theory of history and modernity.
    [Show full text]
  • Band 166 Findbuch
    Beiträge aus der Forschung Band 166 Jens Adamski Findbuch zum Bestand der „Sozialforschungsstelle an der Universität Münster, Sitz zu Dortmund“ im Archiv der Sozialforschungsstelle Dortmund (sfs) Dortmund, im November 2008 Im Auftrag der Gesellschaft zur Förderung des Strukturwandels in der Arbeitsgesellschaft e.V. (GFS) Impressum: Beiträge aus der Forschung, Band 166 ISSN: 0937-7379/0937-7360 Layout: Jens Adamski Sozialforschungsstelle Dortmund (sfs) Zentrale wissenschaftliche Einrichtung der Technischen Universität Dortmund Evinger Platz 17 D-44339 Dortmund Tel.: +49 (0)2 31 – 85 96-2 41 Fax: +49 (0)2 31 – 85 96-1 00 e-mail: [email protected] http://www.sfs-dortmund.de Findbuch zum Bestand der „Sozialforschungsstelle an der Universität Münster, Sitz zu Dortmund“ im Archiv der Sozialforschungsstelle Dortmund (sfs) erstellt von Jens Adamski im Auftrag der Gesellschaft zur Förderung des Strukturwandels in der Arbeitsgesellschaft e.V. (GFS) Dortmund 2008 2 3 Inhaltsverzeichnis A. Vorbemerkungen 5 I. Zur Geschichte der „Sozialforschungsstelle an der Universität Münster, Sitz zu Dortmund“ (1946-1969) 5 II. Literaturhinweise 8 III. Der Bestand und seine Ordnung 9 IV. Hinweise für die Benutzung des Findbuchs 10 B. Bestandsverzeichnis 11 I. Gründungsjahre und Geschichte der Sozialforschungsstelle 11 II. Instituts- und Gesellschaftsunterlagen 15 1. Trägergesellschaft „Sozialforschungsstelle an der Universität Münster e.V., Sitz zu Dortmund“ 15 2. Präsidium 18 3. Kuratorium 18 4. Wissenschaftsrat 19 III. Verwaltung, Organisation und Wissenschaftsbetrieb 21 1. Schriftwechsel 21 1.1 Allgemeine Schriftwechsel 21 1.2 Geschäftsführung und wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiter 22 1.3 Verlage 28 2. Abteilungsleitersitzungen 30 3. Arbeitsgemeinschaft deutscher wirtschaftswissenschaftlicher Forschungsinstitute 32 4. Gesellschaftsmitglieder 35 5. Neubau und Erweiterungsbau der Sozialforschungsstelle 38 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Hans Freyer, Anne Marie Schimmel, Muhammed Hamidullah, Muhammed Tayyip Okiç)
    International Journal of Arts and Commerce Vol. 10 No. 2 February 2021 BIBLIOGRAPHY OF FOREIGN ACADEMICIANS WHO WORKED IN THE FACULTIES OF THEOLOGY IN THE REPUBLICAN PERIOD IN TURKEY (HANS FREYER, ANNE MARIE SCHIMMEL, MUHAMMED HAMİDULLAH, MUHAMMED TAYYIP OKİÇ) Emine ÖZTÜRK1 and Sadagat ABBASOVA2 1Prof.Dr, Kafkas University Faculty of Theology, Philosophy and Religious Studies Email: [email protected] 2Associated. Prof. Dr., Kafkas University Faculty of Science and Philology, Philology and Literature of English, Email: [email protected] Published: 28 February 2021 Copyright © ÖZTÜRK et al. Cite this article: ÖZTÜRK, E. & ABBASOVA, S. (2021). BIBLIOGRAPHY OF FOREIGN ACADEMICIANS WHO WORKED IN THE FACULTIES OF THEOLOGY IN THE REPUBLICAN PERIOD IN TURKEY (HANS FREYER, ANNE MARIE SCHIMMEL, MUHAMMED HAMİDULLAH, MUHAMMED TAYYIP OKİÇ). International Journal of Arts and Commerce, 10(2), 1-15. 1 International Journal of Arts and Commerce ISSN 1929-7106 www.ijac.org.uk ABSTRACT During the pandemic process, I was teaching my lessons mostly from home, but one day, while I was teach my lesson to my students, my dear friend Sadagat Abbasova, an academic in the field of English Language and Literature, listened to my lesson. And in the lecture, I talked about Hans Freyer and mentioned that he taught at the Ankara Theology Faculty. Mrs. Abbasova at the end of this course, has offered to make a bibliographic study on some academics, who have foreign nationals and have served in theology faculties in Turkey during the Republican era and this is how this research came about. I hope it will be a fun reading bibliography. There are four academics whose lives we will mention in this bibliography.
    [Show full text]