Search

Search Results

• Worlds of reinterpretation – or the literary empire configurations of self-understanding

  5-12

  András A. Gergely

  Views:

  59

  Wolfgang Iser (2004): Az értelmezés világa. Translated: Krisztina Lajosi. Gondolat, Budapest, p. 207

• About the Understanding of Discursive Social Sciences and its Possible Aspects

  93-107

  László Péter Lipcsei

  Views:

  30

  This article observes a paradigm shift occurred in several disciplines of social science which
  also differs in theoretical and methodological aspects from science pursuing objectivity. The
  interpretative social sciences primarily focus on the study of meaning and sets texts and talks
  into the centre of understanding. Social facts are taking place in an intersubjective sphere,
  namely among each other. In this paper they are consequently called ‘socially meaningful facts’.
  Therefore, understanding and meaning of these socially meaningful facts can be study without
  snapping social reality by means of different survey techniques, which would also necessarily
  reduce the richness of social meanings.
  In this paper the vote is given for the transition of discourse approach into a paradigm.
  A couple of aspects are introduced in order to make an attempt to prove its scientific significance. On the other hand misunderstandings are also falsified. According to these misconceptions, a
  text-based approach and an actual postmodern scientific scheme is nothing else than a literary
  project, which also denies the pure existence of reality and only considers all previous knowledge
  as relative. Instead of that, this paper states that every single fact of society has meaning which
  is mediated through narratives by the language itself.

• Utopia and Social Science – Interpretation of the book Fahrenheit 451

  98-108

  Benedek Dudik

  Views:

  46

  Utopian and dystopian works have traditions hundreds of years, but their golden era did not begin until the 20th century. The genre is very often depicted as a literary genre, but in reality it is much more than simple fiction. These novels are as much social science and social theory writings as they are works of phantasmagoria. In my writing, I strive to explain this line of thought based on Ray Bradbury’s 1953 novel Fahrenheit 451. In the course of my work, following the fictional story of Guy Montag, I intend to present the peculiarities of the genre, its social science relations and its relationship with our contemporary society, in parallel with other dystopian works of the 20th century.

• Methodological approach to Intersectionality

  108-126

  Zsuzsa Sebestyén

  Views:

  73

   Intersectionality as an inequality conception or a particular perspective was already introduced to the readers of the Metszetek in 2014. In this study I undertake to review some methodological approaches to intersectionality. Moreover, I strive to make an effort to emphasize the adaptibility of intersectionality. Based on the new tendency which has been noticable recently in the inequality dimensions. I delineate, this tendency has completely transformed the focus away from an overemphasis on gender equality towards those suffering multiple, complex forms of discrimination. Many of the feminist scholars deal and dealt with the connection to inequality dimensions (principally race, class and gender). Necessary to pinpoint that indeed intersectionality does not command an unitary definition. A vast number of the international feminist scholars created their own intersectionalty definition, from which I am going to underline some. From among the methodological approaches I focus on Choo and Ferree’s intersectional statement; “Inclusion-centered interpretations, Process-centered models, Systemic intersectionality: Institutional interpenetration”. In this paper I announce two sociological studies that were undertaken using intersectionality method. Finally a summary is presented that undelines why it is worth scholars exploiting intersectionality as a methodology?

• Reframing of Particular Trust

  1-23

  Zoltán Grünhut

  Views:

  13

  The paper strives to reconsider the theory of particular trust, i.e. one’s trusting feelings towards her/his most intimate relatives, friends, and personal relations. By doing this, at first, the paper sheds light on two distinct interpretations of particular trust in the literature. One of these approaches addresses particular trust as a kind of core disposition of the self, and it describes how one’s trust towards her/his bonding relations establishes the given subject’s generalized trust towards others, in a broad sense, to people as such. The other interpretation argues that particular trust is important for group-level social dynamics. It claims that if members of close-knit and exclusive groups, dominated by particular trust, are interacting only with each other, and avoiding out-group relations, then broader social cooperation and collaboration are constrained, social integration and cohesion are limited, and on macro level there is an unfolding distrust. As it seems, the above-described readings of particular trust are contradictory. The current paper stresses that just one of these interpretations is coherent and consistent – the first one.