Subjectivity and objectification the dilemmas of modernity according to Simmel and Weber
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5433/2176-6665.2004v9n2p147Keywords:
Modernity, Subjectivity, Social theoryAbstract
The article explains the central position of the matter of social objectification in the works of Max Weber and Georg Simmel. It argues that the theoretical knowledge of these authors manifest, above all, the dilemma between the atrophy of the modern agent and the hypertrophy of an objective culture, characterized by a rationality that opposes the postulates in the individual freedom that influenced great part of the social and political theory.Metrics
Metrics Loading ...
References
ALEXANDER, J. The Dialectic of Individuation and Domination: Weber's Rationalization Theory and Beyond. In: WEBER, Max. Rationality and Modernity. London: Allen & Unwin, 1987.
FRISBY, David. The Aesthetics of Modern Life: Simmel's Interpretation. Theory, Culture and Society, New York, v. 8, n. 3, 1991.
MARX, Karl. O Capital: Crítica da Economia Política. Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira, 1998. v. 1 p. 53-17.
SIMMEL, G. Subjective culture. Individuality and social forms. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971.
SIMMEL, G. O Estrangeiro. In: SIMMEL, Georg. Sociologia (Grandes Cientistas Sociais). São Paulo: Ática, 1983.
SIMMEL, G. The Metropolis and mental life, 1971.
SCHLUCHTER, W. Weber's Sociology of Rationalism and Typology of Religious Rejections of the World. In: WEBER, Max. Rationality and Modernity. London: Allen & Unwin, 1987. p. 92.
WEBER, M. A Ética Protestante e o Espírito do Capitalismo. São Paulo: Pioneira, 1996.
WEBER, M. The Religion of China: Confucionism and Taoísm. New York: The Free Press, 1951.
WEBER, M. A Ciência como Vocação. Ciência e Política: Duas Vocações'. São Paulo: Cultrix. 1993.
WEBER, M. Economia e Sociedade. Brasília: Editora UnB, 1994. v. 1. p. 142-7.
WHIMSTER, Sam. The Secular Ethic and the Culture of Modemism. In: WEBER, Max. Rationality and Modernity. London: Allen & Unwin, 1987. p. 260.
FRISBY, David. The Aesthetics of Modern Life: Simmel's Interpretation. Theory, Culture and Society, New York, v. 8, n. 3, 1991.
MARX, Karl. O Capital: Crítica da Economia Política. Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira, 1998. v. 1 p. 53-17.
SIMMEL, G. Subjective culture. Individuality and social forms. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971.
SIMMEL, G. O Estrangeiro. In: SIMMEL, Georg. Sociologia (Grandes Cientistas Sociais). São Paulo: Ática, 1983.
SIMMEL, G. The Metropolis and mental life, 1971.
SCHLUCHTER, W. Weber's Sociology of Rationalism and Typology of Religious Rejections of the World. In: WEBER, Max. Rationality and Modernity. London: Allen & Unwin, 1987. p. 92.
WEBER, M. A Ética Protestante e o Espírito do Capitalismo. São Paulo: Pioneira, 1996.
WEBER, M. The Religion of China: Confucionism and Taoísm. New York: The Free Press, 1951.
WEBER, M. A Ciência como Vocação. Ciência e Política: Duas Vocações'. São Paulo: Cultrix. 1993.
WEBER, M. Economia e Sociedade. Brasília: Editora UnB, 1994. v. 1. p. 142-7.
WHIMSTER, Sam. The Secular Ethic and the Culture of Modemism. In: WEBER, Max. Rationality and Modernity. London: Allen & Unwin, 1987. p. 260.
Downloads
Published
2004-12-15
How to Cite
CARVALHO, B. S. de. Subjectivity and objectification the dilemmas of modernity according to Simmel and Weber. Mediações - Revista de Ciências Sociais, Londrina, v. 9, n. 2, p. 147–164, 2004. DOI: 10.5433/2176-6665.2004v9n2p147. Disponível em: https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/mediacoes/article/view/9030. Acesso em: 12 may. 2024.
Issue
Section
Articles
License
Copyright on articles published in Mediações belongs to the author(s): in the case of partial or entire republication of the original publication, we ask author(s) to indicate the original publication in the periodical.
Mediações uses the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license, which allows Open Access, enabling any user to read, download, copy and disseminate its content so long as adequately referenced.
The opinions expressed by the author(s) are their sole responsibility.
