Social philosophy and sociology: the problem of disciplinary boundaries

Authors

  • Hassan S. Gafarov Belarusian State University, Nezavisimosti avenue, 4, 220030, Minsk, Republic of Belarus
  • Julia J. Gafarova Belarusian State University, Nezavisimosti avenue, 4, 220030, Minsk, Republic of Belarus

Keywords:

social philosophy, sociology, social, self-determination, disciplinary self-determination, empirical, theoretical, descriptive, normative, «good life»

Abstract

The article is devoted to the problem of disciplinary self-determination in social philosophy. The main stages of the process of self-determination are shown discretely. The authors demonstrate as the problematic of the social becomes actual again in the end of the XIX century in the polemics of neo-Kantianism, Marxism and neo-Hegelianism. They describe as in 1920–1930s the social becomes at last an independent field of research. The authors conclude that, underlining the axiological problematic of «good life», social philosophy comes in the opposition with sociology on the field of the dichotomies like empirical and metatheoretical, is and ought, descriptive and normative.

Author Biographies

  • Hassan S. Gafarov, Belarusian State University, Nezavisimosti avenue, 4, 220030, Minsk, Republic of Belarus

    doctor of science (philosophy), docent; professor at the department of design, faculty of social and cultural communication

  • Julia J. Gafarova, Belarusian State University, Nezavisimosti avenue, 4, 220030, Minsk, Republic of Belarus

    PhD (philosophy), docent; associate professor at the department of social communication, faculty of philosophy and social science

References

  1. Horster D. Sozialphilosophie. Philos. Disziplinen. Leipzig, 1998. S. 368–391 (in Ger.).
  2. Röttgers K. Philosophische Begriffsgeschichte und der Begriff der Sozialphilosophie. Kurseinheit 2 : Geschichte des Begriffs «Sozialphilosophie». Hagen, 1995 (in Ger.).
  3. Röttgers K. Sozialphilosophie. Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie. Basel, 1995. B. 9. S. 1217–1227 (in Ger.).
  4. Habermas J. Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne. Frankfurt am Main, 1985 (in Ger.).
  5. Hess M. Die europäische Triarchie. Leipzig, 1841 (in Ger.).
  6. Hess M. Philosophie der Tat. Zürich, 1843 (in Ger.).
  7. Simmel G. Parerga zur Socialphilosophie. Jahrbuch für Gesetzgebung, Verwaltung und Volkswirtschaft im Deutschen Reich 18. Leipzig, 1894. S. 257–265 (in Ger.).
  8. Wichmann O. Sozialphilosophie. Munich, 1923 (in Ger.).
  9. Horkheimer M. Traditionelle und kritische Theorie : fünf Aufsätze. Frankfurt am Main, 1992 (in Ger.).
  10. Habermas J. Die klassischen Lehren von der Politik in ihrem Verhältnis zur Sozialphilosophie. In: J. Habermas. Theorie und Praxis. Frankfurt am Main, 1971. S. 48–88 (in Ger.).
  11. Furs V. N. Filosofija nezavershennogo moderna Jurgena Habermasa. Minsk, 2000 (in Russ.).

Published

2019-01-15

How to Cite

[1]
Gafarov, H.S. and Gafarova, J.J. 2019. Social philosophy and sociology: the problem of disciplinary boundaries. Journal of the Belarusian State University. Philosophy and Psychology. 2 (Jan. 2019), 29–36.