| Summary: | As one attempts to approach the multiple dimensions of modernity and its nexus with
contemporary theoretical debates, one should not omit the different contributions made
by the so-called post-modern critique. This article discusses these contributions on the
basis of those theoretical elements that are presented as heirs of a neglected sociological
tradition in the academia because of the occasional hegemony of analytical perspectives
that are more rooted in structural determinism. When the post-modern critique
reformulates issues of sociability and political and cultural behavior and resorts to an
analytical framework in which concepts such as plurality, multiplicity, fragmentation
and relativism gain importance, it is doing nothing else than reintroducing a theoretical
legacy and a sociological adventure that arise, for instance, from the sociological
impressionism of Simmel, the pragmatism of William James and psychosocial studies of
Georg H. Mead. The article claims that the post-modern critique is in a way defined as a
kind of reuse of theoretical approaches to social interaction ranging from philosophical
pragmatism and eclecticism to etnomethodology and the so-called cultural studies
|
|---|