Search

Durkheim's proposed methodology for sociology is based on an empiricist origin built on a realistic ground. But, Durkheim's 'theory-dependent stance' and some of his conceptualizations (such as collective consciousness, primitive society) have led to his being accused of idealism. The desire of proposed the method to 'holistic explanation' the society has created such a dual interpretation. This 'holistic explanation' desire, which brings Durkheim closer to neo-Kantism, is also the main focus of this study, which he also opened to the Hegelian influence. However, Durkheim never gives up relying on empirical data. Thanks to this tension, while Durkheim explains the society through concepts such as collective consciousness and primitive society, on the other hand he proposed to treat 'social phenomena as things'. Thus, Durkheim determined the methodological framework of sociology in order to distinguish the practice of sociological research from speculation. In this study the claim will be investigated that the Hegelian dialectical method lies behind Durkheim's this attempt. In the article, in other words, the evolution of Durkheim's methodology from a positivist attitude to dialectical thinking has been discussed. This evolution was discussed using the hermeneutical method of Ricoeur. In the analytical thinking part, the influence of Hegelian dialectical method on Durkheim's methodology are presented through with 'fact' and 'concrete' conceptualizations. In the dialectical thinking part, it will be shown that Durkheim's methodology shifted to Hegelian dialectical method with these two conceptualizations. As a result, it is stated that although Durkheim avoids dialectical method, his studies are designed dialectically. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Macro and micro theories have determined methodological discussions within cultural studies and sociology of culture. In the classical definition of the definition of culture, the emphasis on the material and spiritual content of society is also the emergence of culturally action and ideology. Studies on the sociology of culture have been made on different methodology debates over these distinctions. The question of how a cultural pillar emerges as action or ideology has identified two directions of discussion. The first use of the concept of culture was perceived as a planting, mowing activity by referring to the changes made by man in nature. This planting is an operational one. But planting is not a spontaneous phenomenon, and there is a deep past behind this action. When we look at the cultures of the societies, not only the individuals who live today, but every individual from the first ancestors affects the creation of the culture of that community. The creation of an intellectual accumulation is the result of this unity. The sociology of culture is not only about concrete events in everyday life practices but also about the results of valuable actions of individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]