Stages of formation of the newest methodological paradigm: from narratology and memetics to narrative economics and storytelling sociology

  • Vyacheslav K. Shcherbin Center for System Analysis and Strategic Research, National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, 1 Akademichnaja Street, Minsk 220072, Belarus

Abstract

The stages of the formation of the newest, narrative-discursive-rhetorical, methodological paradigm in the field of socio-humanitarian sciences are considered. The first stage involves the study of economic histories, social discourses, large and small narratives by analogy with other areas of narratology (historical, literary, psychological, sociological, economic narratology, etc.). The second stage involves the study of economic and social memes, mental viruses, thought viruses in comparison with other areas of memetics (historical, psychological, sociological, economic memetics, etc.). The third stage implies the formation of modern narrative economics and narrative sociology, in the process of development of which the main types of narrative analysis were formed (academic analysis of narratives, life stories as a method of data collection, qualitative analysis of narratives, cognitive narrative analysis, quantitative analysis of narratives, constructivist approach to the analysis of narratives, the method of narrative interviews, the method of creating metanarratives, narrative analysis, psychoanalytic analysis of narratives, structural analysis of narratives, plot analysis, etc.). The article analyses the relationships between narrative economics and storytelling sociology. It identifies the contributions of various disciplines to the development of narrative economics and storytelling sociology. The following conclusions are substantiated: narrative economics and storytelling sociology, as the latest branch theories, were formed due to the joint use of methodological approaches developed within the framework of such different disciplines as the history of economic doctrines, history of macro- and microsociology, narratology, memetics, socio-economic rhetoric, macroeconomic forecasting and social design in narrative research; the latest methodological, narrative-discursive-rhetorical, paradigm serves as the theoretical basis for narrative economics and storytelling sociology, within the framework of which, on the one hand, methodological approaches developed within the framework of the scientific disciplines listed above are distinguished, and on the other hand, quantitative and qualitative analys of economic and social narratives.

Author Biography

Vyacheslav K. Shcherbin, Center for System Analysis and Strategic Research, National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, 1 Akademichnaja Street, Minsk 220072, Belarus

PhD (philology); leading researcher

References

  1. Prokhorova ID. [New anthropology of culture. Introduction as a manifesto]. Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. 2009;100:9–16. Russian.
  2. Fetisov M. Theory and narrative in soviet studies: the relevance of Natalya Kozlova’s thought for the political theory of modernity. Russian Sociological Review. 2017;16(1):227–246. Russian. DOI: 10.17323/1728-192X-2017-1-227-246.
  3. Lekhtsier VL. Narrative turn and the actuality of the narrative mind. International Journal of Cultural Research. 2013;1:5–8. Russian.
  4. Trubina EG. Rasskazannoe Ya: otpechatki golosa [Narrated self: voice prints]. Ekaterinburg: Izdatel’stvo Ural’skogo universiteta; 2002. 278 p. Russian.
  5. Danilov AN, Bezniuk DK, Bogdevich IM, Vodopiyanov PA, Volotovsky ID, Zelenkov AI, et al. Modern society: new challenges and risks. Journal of the Belarusian State University. Sociology. 2022;4:24–25. Russian. DOI: 10.33581/2521-6821-2022-4-12-33.
  6. Kravchenko SA. Development of the subject of sociology: from monodisciplinarity to inter- and post-disciplinarity. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya. 2020;3:16–26. Russian. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250008794-6.
  7. Savchuk VV. The phenomenon of turn in 20th century culture. International Journal of Cultural Research. 2013;1:93–108. Russian.
  8. Yanitsky ON. Organic modernization vs informational archaization. Social Sciences and Contemporary World. 2017;4:153–164. Russian.
  9. Schiller R. Narrativnaya ekonomika. Novaya nauka o vliyanii virusnykh istorii na ekonomicheskie sobytiya [Narrative economics. A new science about the influence of viral stories on economic events]. Kalugin E, translator. Moscow: Eksmo; 2023. 416 p. Russian.
  10. Berger RJ, Quinney R. Storytelling sociology: narrative as social inquiry. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers; 2005. 307 p.
  11. Raskov D. Rhetoric of the new institutional economics. Voprosy ekonomiki. 2010;(5):81–95. Russian. DOI: 10.32609/0042-8736-2010-5-81-95.
  12. Franzoci R. Narrative analysis – or why (and how) sociologists should be interested in narrative. Annual Review of Sociology. 1998;24:517–554.
  13. Maines DR. Narrative’s moment and sociology’s phenomena: toward a narrative sociology. Sociological Quarterly. 1993;34(1):17–38.
  14. Toshchenko ZhT. From phenomenon to noumenon: а methodological and methodic search. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya. 2019;4:3–14. Russian. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250004582-3.
  15. Zenkin S. [Critique of narrative reason]. Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. 2003;59:524–534. Russian.
  16. Scott J, editor. Sociology: the key concepts. London: Routledge; 2006. 232 p.
  17. McCloskey D. Ritorika ekonomicheskoi nauki [Rhetoric of economic science]. Yakimenko O, translator. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Instituta Gaidara; 2015. 328 p. Russian.
  18. Tyupa VI. Ocherk sovremennoi narratologii [Essay on modern narratology]. Kritika i semiotika. 2002;5:5–31. Russian.
  19. Evstigneeva NV, Oberemko OA. Modeli analiza narrative [Models of narrative analysis]. Chelovek. Soobshchestvo. Upravlenie. 2007;4:95–107. Russian.
  20. Brodie R. Virus of the mind. The new science of the meme. London: Hay House; 2009. 249 p.
  21. Dawkins R. Egoistichnyi gen [The selfish]. Fomina N, translator. Moscow: AST; 2016. 512 p. Russian.
  22. Nesterenko A. [What William Baumol did not say: the contribution of the 20th century to the philosophy of economic activity]. Voprosy ekonomiki. 2001;7:4–17. Russian.
  23. Baranovskii VA. [Internet memes in the context of cultural modernisation of society]. In: Danilov AN, editor. Sotsiologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie: sovremennye vyzovy i riski. Materialy Mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii, posvyashchennoi pamyati professora G. P. Davidyuka; 10 noyabrya 2021 g.; Minsk, Belarus’ [Sociological science and education: modern challenges and risks. Materials of the International scientific and practical conference dedicated to the memory of full professor G. P. Davidyuk; 2021 November 10; Minsk, Belarus]. Minsk: Belarusian State University; 2021. p. 185–188. Russian.
  24. Terborn J. Mir: rukovodstvo dlya nachinayushchikh [The world: a beginner’s guide]. Gorbunova EM, Titarenko LG, translators. Moscow: Higher School of Economics Publishing House; 2015. 336 p. Russian.
  25. Collins R. [Sociology: science or anti-science?] Thesis. 1994;4:71–96. Russian.
  26. Shavel’ SA. Obshchestvennaya missiya sotsiologii [Public mission of sociology]. Minsk: Belaruskaja navuka; 2010. 730 p. Russian.
  27. Starzhinskii VP, Tsepkalo VV. Na puti k obshchestvu innovatsii [On the way to an innovation society]. Minsk: National Institute for Higher Education; 2017. 454 p. Russian.
  28. Vol’chik VV, Tsygankov SS, Maskaev AI. [Formal institutions of the Russian innovation system in light of narrative economics]. ECO. 2022;10:110–128. Russian.
  29. Hayes B. Bit lit: with digitized text from five million books, one is never at a loss for words. American Scientist. 2011;99(3):190–194.
  30. Efimov VM. [Discourse analysis in economics: a revision of the methodology and history of economic science]. Journal of Economic Regulation. 2011;12(3):15–53. Russian.
  31. Kozlova NN. Methodology of human document analysis. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya. 2004;1:14–26. Russian.
  32. Belaya GV, Simonov KI. Gnoseoontologic interpretation of a «narrative/text» dichotomy. Izvestiya of the Samara Science Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Social, Humanitarian, Medicobiological Sciences. 2009;11(4):1250–1258. Russian.
  33. Trotsuk IV. Ankersmit F. Narrative logic. Semantic analysis of the language of historians [Review]. Sociological Journal. 2005;4:168–178. Review of: Ankersmit F. Narrative logic. Semantic analysis of the language of historians. Moscow: Ideja-press; 2003. 360 p. Russian.
  34. Bulyubash BV. [Narrative: between science and education]. Naukovedenie. 2003;3:177–184. Russian.
  35. Brockmeyer J, Harre R. [Narrative: problems and promises of an alternative paradigm]. Voprosy filosofii. 2000;3:29–42. Russian.
  36. Trotsuk IW. When methodology beats techniques, or Why we prefer discourse and narrative analysis to interpret textual data. Russian Sociological Review. 2015;14(3):48–63. Russian.
Published
2024-12-19
Keywords: large and small narratives, social discourse, economic history, mental virus, economic meme, history of economic doctrines, history of macro- and microsociology, narratology, memetics, rhetoric, macroeconomic forecasting, social design, narrative economics, storytelling sociology
How to Cite
Shcherbin, V. K. (2024). Stages of formation of the newest methodological paradigm: from narratology and memetics to narrative economics and storytelling sociology. Journal of the Belarusian State University. Sociology, 4, 31-42. Retrieved from https://journals.bsu.by/index.php/sociology/article/view/6722
Issue
No 4 (2024): Journal of the Belarusian State University. Sociology
Section
Articles and Reports

Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of the Belarusian State University. Sociology

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

The authors who are published in this journal agree to the following:

  1. The authors retain copyright on the work and provide the journal with the right of first publication of the work on condition of license Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial. 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0).
  2. The authors retain the right to enter into certain contractual agreements relating to the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work (e.g. post it on the institutional repository, publication in the book), with the reference to its original publication in this journal.
  3. The authors have the right to post their work on the Internet (e.g. on the institutional store or personal website) prior to and during the review process, conducted by the journal, as this may lead to a productive discussion and a large number of references to this work. (See The Effect of Open Access.)