socofpowerСоциология властиSociology of Power2074-04922413-144XThe Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public AdministrationGTUXTLsocofpower-281Research ArticleСТАТЬИ. ТЕОРИЯ И ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯARTICLES. THEORY & INVESTIGATIONSПорядок и изменение в блумерианской социологии: возможности и ограниченияOrder and Change in Blumerian Sociology: Opportunities and Constraintshttps://orcid.org/0009-0003-0418-7984БарановА. И.BaranovA. I.

Баранов Антон Игоревич — аспирант кафедры общей социологии НИУ ВШЭ.

Москва

Anton I. Baranov — postgraduate student of Department of General Sociology, National Research University Higher School of Economics.

Moscow

tohax100@gmail.comНациональный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики»РоссияNational Research University Higher School of EconomicsRussian Federation20252707202537285107Copyright © Баранов А.И., 20252025Баранов А.И.Baranov A.I.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://socofpower.ranepa.ru/jour/article/view/281

Внимание символических интеракционистов к спонтанным аспектам социальности нередко рассматривалось критиками как неспособность осмыслить структуру. Статья рассматривает данный вопрос сквозь призму проблемы социальных изменений, то есть проблемы соотношения между порядком и процессом его трансформации. Работа преследует две цели: различить интерпретации изменения в рамках блумерианской социологии; определить, предусматривают ли трактовки изменения существование механизмов их сдерживания. Для обнаружения интерпретаций изменения рассматриваются теоретические основания символического интеракционизма (самовзаимодействие и не/ символическое взаимодействие), блумерианская версия области коллективного поведения (элементарные коллективные группировки толпы, массы и публики), интеракционистская макросоциология (идея макроорганизации как сети совместных действий, теория моды и концепция индустриализации как агента социальных изменений), эпистемология (процесс создания понятия) и онтология (реальность как диалектика постоянства и изменения). Утверждается, что блумерианская социология демонстрирует симметричный взгляд на соотношение между порядком и изменением. Вопреки когнитивистскому прочтению символического интеракционизма, важную роль в блумерианской социологии играет взаимодополняемость символа и аффекта как механизмов поддержания порядка и инициации изменений. Символы и аффекты способны взаимно подкреплять или блокировать действия друг друга. Во всех случаях они могут выступать как источники изменения, так и порядка. Поздняя разработка диалектической онтологии постоянства и изменений фиксирует желание Блумера представить наиболее общий и фундаментальный взгляд на соотношение между порядком и изменением. Идея сопротивления упрямой реальности становится способом процессуальной реинтерпретации социальной структуры. Противостояние сил порядка и изменения принимает форму непрекращающихся взаимных приспособлений.

The symbolic interactionists’ focus on the spontaneous aspects of sociality has often been seen by critics as a failure of the perspective to comprehend structure. The article examines this issue through the prism of the problem of social change, that is, the problem of the relationship between order and the process of its transformation. The paper pursues two goals: to distinguish the interpretations of change within the framework of Blumerian sociology; to determine whether interpretations of change provide for the existence of mechanisms to contain them. In order to identify interpretations of change, the theoretical foundations of the symbolic interactionist perspective (self-interaction and non-/symbolic interaction), the Blumerian version of the collective behavior domain (elementary collective groupings of crowd, mass, and public), interactionist macrosociology (the idea of macroorganization as a network of joint actions, fashion theory, and the concept of industrialization as an agent of social change), epistemology (process of concept creation), and ontology (reality as a dialectic of persistence and change) are considered. It is argued that Blumerian sociology exhibits a symmetrical view of the relationship between order and change. Contrary to the cognitivist reading of SI, an important role in Blumerian sociology is played by the complementarity of symbol and affect as mechanisms for maintaining order and initiating change. Symbols and affects can mutually reinforce or block each other’s activity. In all cases, they can act as sources of change and order. The later development of a dialectical ontology of persistence and change captures Blumer’s desire to present the most general and fundamental view of the relationship between order and change. The confrontation of the forces of order and change takes the form of incessant mutual adjustments.

символический интеракционизмсоциальные измененияструктурапостоянствоинтерпретацияаффектсопротивлениемодаиндустриализацияsymbolic interactionismsocial changestructurepersistenceinterpretationaffectdefinition of situationfashionindustrializationReferencesБлумер Г. (2008a) Социологические импликации мышления Джорджа Герберта Мида. Социальные и гуманитарные науки. Отечественная и зарубежная литература. Сер. 11: Социология, (1), с. 118–137. EDN: IBXPDTBlumer H. (2008a) Sociological implications of the thought of George Herbert Mead. Social Sciences and Humanities. Domestic and Foreign Literature. Series 11: Sociology, (1), pp. 118–137. (in Russ.)Блумер Г. (2008b) Социальные установки и несимволическое взаимодействие. Социальные и гуманитарные науки. Отечественная и зарубежная литература. Сер. 11: Социология, (1), с. 138–145. EDN: IBXPEDBlumerH. (2008b) Social attitudes and non-symbolic interaction. SocialSciences and Humanities. Domestic and Foreign Literature. Series 11:Sociology,(1), pp. 138–145. (in Russ.)Блумер Г. (2008c) Мода: От классовой дифференциации к коллективному отбору. Социальные и гуманитарные науки. Отечественная и зарубежная литература. Сер. 11: Социология, (2), с. 132–154. EDN: IIZDGTBlumer H. (2008c) Fashion: from class differentiation to collective selection. Social Sciences and Humanities. Domestic and Foreign Literature. Series 11: Sociology, (2), pp. 132–154. (in Russ.)Блумер Г. (2017a) Методологическая позиция символического интеракционизма. В: Г. Блумер, Символический интеракционизм (с. 37–117). М.: Элементарные формы.Blumer H. (2017a) Methodological position of symbolic interactionism. Symbolic Interactionism. M.: Elementary Forms, pp. 37–117. (in Russ.)Блумер Г. (2017b) Общество как символическое взаимодействие. В: Г. Блумер, Символический интеракционизм (с. 141–157). М.: Элементарные формы.Blumer H. (2017b) Society as Symbolic Interaction. Symbolic Interactionism. M.: Elementary Forms, pp. 141–157. (in Russ.)Блумер Г. (2017c) Наука без понятий. В: Г. Блумер, Символический интеракционизм (с. 241–259). М.: Элементарные формы.Blumer H. (2017c) Science without concepts. Symbolic Interactionism, M.: Elementary Forms, pp. 241–259. (in Russ.)Дьюи Д. (2003) Реконструкция в философии. Проблемы человека. М.: Республика. EDN: QWFIPNDewey D. (2003) Reconstruction in philosophy. Problems of Man. M.: Respublika. (in Russ.)Козер Л. (2000) Функции социального конфликта. М.: Идея-Пресс.Coser L. A. (2000). The Functions of Social Conflict. Ideja-Press. (in Russ.)Кули Ч. Х. (2017) Процесс социального изменения. Социальные и гуманитарные науки. Отечественная и зарубежная литература. Сер. 11: Социология, (3), с. 117–134. EDN: ZOGBMVCooley C. H. (2017) The process of social change. Social and Humanitarian Sciences. Domestic and Foreign Literature. Series 11: Sociology, (3), pp. 123–141. (in Russ.)Мертон Р. К. (1994) Явные и латентные функции. В: Е. И. Кравченко (Сост.), В. И. Добреньков (Ред.), Американская социологическая мысль: Тексты (с. 379–448). М.: Изд-во МГУ.Merton R. K. (1994) Manifest and latent functions. American sociological thought: texts. М.: Izd-vo MGU, pp. 379–448. (in Russ.)Мид Дж. Г. (2014) Философия настоящего. М.: Изд. дом ВШЭ. EDN: ZFPHGRMead G. H. (2014) Philosophy of the Present. M.: Izd. dom VShJe. (in Russ.)Миллс Ч. Р. (2013) Профессиональная идеология социопатологов. Социологический журнал, (1), с. 10–35. EDN: QASHWL. https://doi.org/10.19181/socjour.2013.1.361Mills C. W. (2013) The Professional Ideology of Social Pathologists. Sociological Journal, (1), pp. 10–35. (in Russ.) https://doi.org/10.19181/socjour.2013.1.361Николаев В. Г. (2008) Символический интеракционизм Герберта Блумера (II): Теоретическая перспектива. Социальные и гуманитарные науки. Отечественная и зарубежная литература. Сер. 11: Социология, (3), с. 133–154. EDN: JJSHHTNikolaev V. G. (2008) Herbert Blumer’s Symbolic Interactionism (II): A Theoretical Perspective. Social Sciences and Humanities. Domestic and Foreign Literature. Series 11: Sociology, (3), pp. 133–154. (in Russ.)Парк Р. Э. (2011) Человеческая природа и коллективное поведение. В: Р. Э. Парк, Избранные очерки: Сборник переводов (с. 57–65). М.: ИНИОН РАН. EDN: OHJVKXPark R. E. (2011) Human nature and collective behavior. Selected Essays: A collection of translations, M.: INION RAS, pp. 57–65. (in Russ.)Прус Р. (2017) Предисловие к русскому изданию. В: Г. Блумер, Символический интеракционизм (с. 7–29). М.: Элементарные формы.Prus R. (2017) Preface to the Russian edition. (Symbolic Interactionism). M.: Elementary Forms, pp. 7–29. (in Russ.)Baldwin J. D. (1988) Habit, Emotion, and Self-Conscious Action. Sociological Perspectives, 31(1), pp. 35–57. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.2307/1388950Baldwin J. D. (1988) Habit, Emotion, and Self-Conscious Action. Sociological Perspectives, 31(1), pp. 35–57. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.2307/1388950Bales R. F. (1966) Comment on Herbert Blumer’s Paper. American Journal of Sociology, 71(5), pp. 545–547. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/224172Bales R. F. (1966) Comment on Herbert Blumer’s Paper. American Journal of Sociology, 71(5), pp. 545–547. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/224172Blumer H. (1931) Science Without Concepts. American Journal of Sociology, 36(4), pp. 515–533. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/215473Blumer H. (1931) Science Without Concepts. American Journal of Sociology, 36(4), pp. 515–533. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/215473Blumer H. (1936) Social Attitudes and Nonsymbolic Interaction. Journal of Educational Sociology, 9(9), pp. 515–523. https://doi.org/10.2307/2262360Blumer H. (1936) Social Attitudes and Nonsymbolic Interaction. Journal of Educational Sociology, 9(9), pp. 515–523. https://doi.org/10.2307/2262360Blumer H. (1946) Collective behavior. In A. M. Lee (Ed.), New Outline of the Principles of Sociology (2nd ed., pp. 165–222). Barnes & Noble.Blumer H. (1946) Collective behavior. In A. M. Lee (Ed.), New Outline of the Principles of Sociology (2nd ed., pp. 165–222). Barnes & Noble.Blumer H. (1964) Industrialization and the Traditional Order. Ekistics, 18(106), pp. 138–140.Blumer H. (1964) Industrialization and the Traditional Order. Ekistics, 18(106), pp. 138–140.Blumer H. (1966a) Reply. American Journal of Sociology, 71(5), pp. 547–548. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/224173Blumer H. (1966a) Reply. American Journal of Sociology, 71(5), pp. 547–548. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/224173Blumer H. (1966b) Sociological Implications of the Thought of George Herbert Mead. American Journal of Sociology, 71(5), pp. 535–544.Blumer H. (1966b) Sociological Implications of the Thought of George Herbert Mead. American Journal of Sociology, 71(5), pp. 535–544.Blumer H. (1969) Fashion: From Class Differentiation to Collective Selection. Sociological Quarterly, 10(3), pp. 275–291. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1969.tb01292.xBlumer H. (1969) Fashion: From Class Differentiation to Collective Selection. Sociological Quarterly, 10(3), pp. 275–291. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1969.tb01292.xBlumer H. (1980) Mead and Blumer: The Convergent Methodological Perspectives of Social Behaviorism and Symbolic Interactionism. American Sociological Review, 45(3), pp. 409–419. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095174Blumer H. (1980) Mead and Blumer: The Convergent Methodological Perspectives of Social Behaviorism and Symbolic Interactionism. American Sociological Review, 45(3), pp. 409–419. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095174Blumer H. (1986) Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. University of California Press.Blumer H. (1986) Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. University of California Press.Blumer H. (1990) Industrialization as an Agent of Social Change: A Critical Analysis. Routledge.Blumer H. (1990) Industrialization as an Agent of Social Change: A Critical Analysis. Routledge.Blumer H., & Miller D. L. (2004) On George Herbert Mead’s contribution to understanding human conduct. In T. J. Morrione (Ed.), George HerbertMead and human conduct (pp. 109–153). AltaMira Press.Blumer H., & Miller D. L. (2004) On George Herbert Mead’s contribution to understanding human conduct. In T. J. Morrione (Ed.), George HerbertMead and human conduct (pp. 109–153). AltaMira Press.Blumer H., Parsons T., & Turner J. H. (1975) Exchange on Turner, „Parsons as a Symbolic Interactionist”. Sociological Inquiry, 45(1), pp. 59–68. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1975.tb01214.xBlumer H., Parsons T., & Turner J. H. (1975) Exchange on Turner, „Parsons as a Symbolic Interactionist”. Sociological Inquiry, 45(1), pp. 59–68. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1975.tb01214.xCooley C. H. (1897) The Process of Social Change. Political Science Quarterly, 12(1), pp. 63–81. https://doi.org/10.2307/2140028Cooley C. H. (1897) The Process of Social Change. Political Science Quarterly, 12(1), pp. 63–81. https://doi.org/10.2307/2140028Coser L. A. (1956) The Functions of Social Conflict. Free Press.Coser L. A. (1956) The Functions of Social Conflict. Free Press.Dewey J. (1920) Reconstruction in Philosophy. Henry Holt and Company.Dewey J. (1920) Reconstruction in Philosophy. Henry Holt and Company.Fine G. A., & Kleinman S. (1983) Network and Meaning: An Interactionist Approach to Structure. Symbolic Interaction, 6(1), pp. 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.1983.6.1.97Fine G. A., & Kleinman S. (1983) Network and Meaning: An Interactionist Approach to Structure. Symbolic Interaction, 6(1), pp. 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.1983.6.1.97Fine G. A., & Tavory I. (2019) Interactionism in the Twenty-First Century: A Letter on Being-in-a-Meaningful-World. Symbolic Interaction, 42(3), pp. 457–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.430Fine G. A., & Tavory I. (2019) Interactionism in the Twenty-First Century: A Letter on Being-in-a-Meaningful-World. Symbolic Interaction, 42(3), pp. 457–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.430Hughes E. C. (1949) Social Change and Status Protest: An Essay on the Marginal Man. Phylon (1940–1956), 10(1), pp. 58–65. https://doi.org/10.2307/272218Hughes E. C. (1949) Social Change and Status Protest: An Essay on the Marginal Man. Phylon (1940–1956), 10(1), pp. 58–65. https://doi.org/10.2307/272218Low J., & Bowden G. (2020) An Embattled Yet Enduring Influence: Introduction to a Special Issue on Blumerian Symbolic Interactionism. Symbolic Interaction, 43(4), pp. 575–596. https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.519Low J., & Bowden G. (2020) An Embattled Yet Enduring Influence: Introduction to a Special Issue on Blumerian Symbolic Interactionism. Symbolic Interaction, 43(4), pp. 575–596. https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.519Maines D.R.(1977) Social Organization and Social Structure in Symbolic Interactionist Thought. Annual Review of Sociology, 3, pp. 235–259. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.03.080177.001315Maines D.R. (1977) Social Organization and Social Structure in Symbolic Interactionist Thought. Annual Review of Sociology, 3, pp. 235–259. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.03.080177.001315Maines D. R. (1988) Myth, Text, and Interaction Complicity in the Neglect Of Blumer’s Macrosociology. Symbolic Interaction, 11(1), pp. 43–57. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.1988.11.1.43Maines D. R. (1988) Myth, Text, and Interaction Complicity in the Neglect Of Blumer’s Macrosociology. Symbolic Interaction, 11(1), pp. 43–57. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.1988.11.1.43Mead G. H. (1932) The Philosophy of the Present (A. E. Murphy, Ed.). The Open Court Company.Mead G. H. (1932) The Philosophy of the Present (A. E. Murphy, Ed.). The Open Court Company.Mead G. H. (1962) Mind, Self & Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist (C. W. Morris, Ed.). University of Chicago Press.Mead G. H. (1962) Mind, Self & Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist (C. W. Morris, Ed.). University of Chicago Press.Merton R. K. (1968) Social Theory and Social Structure. Free Press.Merton R. K. (1968) Social Theory and Social Structure. Free Press.Mills C. W. (1943) The Professional Ideology of Social Pathologists. American Journal of Sociology, 49(2), pp. 165–180. https://doi.org/10.1086/219350Mills C. W. (1943) The Professional Ideology of Social Pathologists. American Journal of Sociology, 49(2), pp. 165–180. https://doi.org/10.1086/219350Morrione T. J. (1998) Persistence and change: Fundamental elements in Herbert Blumer’s metatheoretical perspective. In L. Tomasi (Ed.), The Tradition of the Chicago School of Sociology (pp. 191–216). Ashgate.Morrione T. J. (1998) Persistence and change: Fundamental elements in Herbert Blumer’s metatheoretical perspective. In L. Tomasi (Ed.), The Tradition of the Chicago School of Sociology (pp. 191–216). Ashgate.Morrione T. J. (2021) Herbert Blumer, symbolic interactionism, and 21st-century sociology. In D. V. Lehn, N. Ruiz-Junco, & W. J. Gibson (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of interactionism. Routledge.Morrione T. J. (2021) Herbert Blumer, symbolic interactionism, and 21st-century sociology. In D. V. Lehn, N. Ruiz-Junco, & W. J. Gibson (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of interactionism. Routledge.Musolf G. R. (Ed.) (2016) The Astructural Bias Charge: Myth or Reality? (Vol. 46). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0163-2396201646Musolf G. R. (Ed.) (2016) The Astructural Bias Charge: Myth or Reality? (Vol. 46). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0163-2396201646Park R.E. (1904) Masse und Publikum: Eine Methodologische und Soziologische Untersuchung. Lack & Grunau.Park R.E. (1904) Masse und Publikum: Eine Methodologische und Soziologische Untersuchung. Lack & Grunau.Park R. E. (1926) The Concept of Position in Sociology. Papers and Proceedings of the American Sociological Society, pp. 1–14.Park R. E. (1926) The Concept of Position in Sociology. Papers and Proceedings of the American Sociological Society, pp. 1–14.Park R. E. (1927) Human Nature and Collective Behavior. American Journal of Sociology, 32(5), pp. 733–741. https://doi.org/10.1086/214235Park R. E. (1927) Human Nature and Collective Behavior. American Journal of Sociology, 32(5), pp. 733–741. https://doi.org/10.1086/214235Park R. E. (1930) Collective behavior. In A. Johnson & E. R. A. Seligman (Eds.), Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (Vol. 3, pp. 631–633). MacMillan.Park R. E. (1930) Collective behavior. In A. Johnson & E. R. A. Seligman (Eds.), Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (Vol. 3, pp. 631–633). MacMillan.Park R. E. (1972) The Crowd and the Public and Other Essays (H. Elsner, JR., Ed.; C. Elsner, Trans.). University of Chicago Press.Park R. E. (1972) The Crowd and the Public and Other Essays (H. Elsner, JR., Ed.; C. Elsner, Trans.). University of Chicago Press.Reynolds J. M., & Reynolds L. T. (1973) Interactionism, complicity, and the astructural bias. Catalyst, 7 (Winter), pp. 76–85.Reynolds J. M., & Reynolds L. T. (1973) Interactionism, complicity, and the astructural bias. Catalyst, 7 (Winter), pp. 76–85.Thomson L., & Low J. (2021) Symbolic interactionism and the myth of astructural bias: A textual defense and illustrative advice. Canadian Journal of Soсiology, 46(2), pp. 97–120. https://doi.org/10.29173/cjs29734Thomson L., & Low J. (2021) Symbolic interactionism and the myth of astructural bias: A textual defense and illustrative advice. Canadian Journal of Soсiology, 46(2), pp. 97–120. https://doi.org/10.29173/cjs29734Turner J. H. (1974) Parsons as a Symbolic Interactionist: A Comparison of Action and Interaction Theory. Sociological Inquiry, 44(4), pp. 283–294. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1974.tb01162.xTurner J. H. (1974) Parsons as a Symbolic Interactionist: A Comparison of Action and Interaction Theory. Sociological Inquiry, 44(4), pp. 283–294. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1974.tb01162.xWood M., & Wardell M. L. (1983) G. H. Mead’s Social Behaviorism vs. The Astructural Bias of Symbolic Interactionism. Symbolic Interaction, 6(1), pp. 85–96. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.1983.6.1.85Wood M., & Wardell M. L. (1983) G. H. Mead’s Social Behaviorism vs. The Astructural Bias of Symbolic Interactionism. Symbolic Interaction, 6(1), pp. 85–96. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.1983.6.1.85

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.