Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

SOCİAL COGNİTİVE CRİSİS İN THE BELATED MODERNİTY: A CONCEP-TUAL STUDY OF THE DEVELOPMENTAL GRAMMAR OF MODERN REALİTY

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 1, 2 - 26, 29.06.2023

Öz

With the prominence of cognitive sociology in recent years, more and more researchers are working on the cultural roots of human cognition and the cognitive mechanisms by which culture motivates action. As a result of this orientation, the literature on interpretive cultural analysis approaches associated with social cognitive reality has developed rapidly. The cultural tradition of cognitive sociology is related to how human consciousness varies according to cultural groups and historical flow. According to this theory, when an actor enters the inter-subject world, he also socializes cognitively and gives objects common meaning with others. While experiencing cultural cognition on the one hand, the individual, on the other hand, sees "other" people, whom she understands as deliberate agents, through the optics of social reality. The actor, who constructs her personal and social self in this way, tests her/his social and cultural identity by taking communicative action with the thought communities in the world in the next stage. In this study, we will not engage in the empirical examination of the cultural mec-hanisms that affect the action. We will try to address the biography of reality, which reveals the conceptual use of cognitive social reality in everyday life. We will also examine in detail the social position of reality, which causes more messages to reach cognitive capacity, transforming reproduction into reflexive mechanisms. For this purpose, we will briefly address the main points of the social cognitive process that provides data to modern cognitive sociology rather than the historical expression of cultural sociology. The cultural roots of human cognition explain cognitive differences to some extent. It is obvious that there is another experiential awareness behind the Western consciousness that shapes today's functional reality. In belated modernity, the mechanisms of phenomena that make up social reality refer to different contextual situations in daily life, so the reflexive outcome of agency causes deviations in the standard time of cognition. In this article, in which we focus on the character of cognitive experience, we will argue that a different critical reality explanation has become an indi-vidual and social necessity, especially in belated modern societies, based on the asymmetrical positioning of cognitive reality

Kaynakça

  • Arthur, R. T. (2018). Monads, Composition, and Force Ariadnean Threads through Leibniz’s Labyrinth. Great Clarendon Street, Oxford,, UK: Oxford University Press.
  • Benton, T. (2016). Sosyolojinin Felsefi Kökenleri (2 Baskı b.). (Ü. Tatlıcan, Çev.) İstanbul: Küre.
  • Brandom, R. B. (2008). Between Saying and Doing: Towards an Analytic Pragmatism. Oxford New York : Oxford University Press .
  • Brandom, R. B. (2009). Reason in Philosophy. Massachusetts - London, England: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press Cambridge.
  • Brassier, R. (2007). Nihil Unbound Enlightenment and Extinction. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Buroker, J. V. (2006). Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge , UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Cassirer, E. (2000). The Individual and the Cosmos in Renaissance Philosophy . (M. Domandi, Çev.) New York: Dover edition.
  • Cassirer, E., Kristeller, P. O., & Randall, J. H. (Dü). (1948). The Renaissance Philosophy of Man. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Christensen, C. B. (2008). Self and World − From Analytic Philosophy to Phenomenology. Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter.
  • Davidson, D. (2004). Problems of Rationality. Great Clarendon Street, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • DiMaggio, P. (1997, 08 15). Culture and Cognition. Annual Review of Sociology, s. 263-287. 12 25, 2020 tarihinde : http://www.jstor.org/stable/2952552 adresinden alındı
  • DiMaggio, P. (2002). Why Cognitive (and Cultural) Sociology Needs Cognitive Psychology. K. A.Cerulo (Dü.) içinde, Culture in Mind (s. 274-283). New York: Routledge.
  • Dummett, M. (2014). Origins of Analytical Philosophy. London- New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.
  • Elder-Vass, D. (2010). The Reality of Social Construction. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Ferraris, M. (2014). Manifesto of New Realism. (S. D. Sanctis, Çev.) New York: Published by State University of New York Press.
  • Foucault, M. (2000). Entellektüelin Siyasi İşlevi. (I. Ergüden, O. Akınhay, & F. Keskin, Çev.) İstanbul: Ayrıntı.
  • Gallagher, S., & Zahavi, D. (2012). The Phenomenological Mind (2 b.). Oxon, USA ve Kanada: Routledge.
  • Gilbert, M. (2007). Collective Intentions, Commitment, and Collective Action Problems. F. Peter, & H. B. Schmid içinde, Rationality and Commitment (s. 284). Oxford - New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Goodman, N., & Quine, W. V. ( 1947, Aralık). Steps Toward a Constructive Nominalism. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, Vol. 12, (No. 4), 105-122.
  • Harman, G. (2011). Quentin Meillassoux: Philosophy in the Making. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Harman, G. (2018). Speculative Realism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Heidegger, M. (1998). Bilim Üzerine İki Ders. (H. Hünler, Çev.) İstanbul: Paradigma Yayınları.
  • Heidegger, M. (2002). Identity and Difference (Second printing edition b.). (J. G. Gray, Dü.) New York: University of Chicago Press.
  • Ignatow, G. (2007, 6). Theories of Embodied Knowledge: New Directions for Cultural and Cognitive Sociology? Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, s. 115-132. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5914.2007.00328.x
  • Kennedy, W. J. (2003). The Site of Petrarchism, Early Modern National Sentiment in Italy, France, and England. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Khamara, E. J. (2006). Space, Time, and Theology in the Leibniz-Newton Controversy . Heusenstamm, Germany: ontos verlag.
  • Kneller, J. (2007). Kant and The Power Of İmagination. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press .
  • Lilla, M. (1994). New French Thought. Princeton, New Jersey : Princeton University Press.
  • May, T. (1995). The Moral Theory of Poststructuralism. Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
  • May, T. (2005). Gilles Deleuze An Introduction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • McDowell, J. (2000). Mind And World (Fifth printing b.). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
  • Meillassoux, Q. (2008). After Finititude: An Essay on the Necessity of Contingency. (R. Brassier, Çev.) London: Continuum.
  • Meillassoux, Q. (2014). Time Without Becoming. (A. Longo, Dü.) Mimesis International.
  • Nozick, R. (1993). The Nature of Rationality. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  • Oleksy, M. W. (2015). Realism and Individualism, Charles S. Peirce and the Threat of Modern Nominalism,. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
  • Paternoster, A., Marraffa, M., & Francesco, M. D. (2016). The Self and its Defenses: From Psychodynamics to Cognitive Science. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Peters, M. (2003). Derrida, Pedagogy, and the Calculation of the Subject. P. P. Trifonas (Dü.) içinde, Pedagogies of Difference: Rethinking education for social change (s. 63). New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
  • Renaut, A. (1997). The Era of the Individual. (M. B. Philip, Çev.) New Jersey : Princeton University Press.
  • Robinson, K. (2009). Introduction: Deleuze, Whitehead, Bergson — Rhizomatic Connections. K. Robinson (Dü.) içinde, Deleuze, Whitehead, Bergson (s. 1-27). New York: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
  • Rockmore, T. (1997). Penelope's Web: Reconstruction of Philosophy and the Relevance of Reason. (T. Rockmore, Dü.) The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, 7, 114-136.
  • Rockmore, T. (2011). Kant and Phenomenology. Chicagoand London: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Russell, B. (2010). The Philosophy of Logical Atomism. London - New York: Routledge Classics.
  • Sallis, J. (1986). Delimitation: Phenomenology and the end of metaphysics (Second, Expanded Edition b.). Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
  • Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.
  • Shaviro, S. (2014). The universe Of Things: on speculative realism. Minneapolis-London: University of Minnesota Press.
  • Sparrow, T. (2014). The End of Phenomenology: Metaphysics and the New Realism. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Strickland, L. (2014). Leibniz’s Monadology, A New Translation and Guide. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Ltd.
  • Watkin, C. (2009). Phenomenology or Deconstruction? Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Yamagishi, T., & Yamagishi, M. (1994). Trust and Commitment in the United States and Japan. Motivation and Emotion. doi:10.1007/BF02249397
  • Zahavi, D. (2012). The Oxford Handbook of Contemporary Phenomenology. (D. Zahavi, Dü.) Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  • Zerubavel, E. (1999). Social Mindscapes : An Invitation to Cognitive Sociology. Massachusetts- Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  • Zerubavel, E. (1999). Social Mindscapes: An Invitation to Cognitive Sociology. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

GECİKMİŞ MODERNİTEDE SOSYAL BİLİŞSEL KRİZ: MODERN GERÇEKLİĞİN GELİŞİMSEL GRAMERİ ÜZERİNE KAVRAMSAL BİR ÇALIŞMA

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 1, 2 - 26, 29.06.2023

Öz

Son yıllarda bilişsel sosyolojinin öne çıkmasıyla birlikte, gittikçe daha fazla araştırmacı, insan bilişinin kültürel kökleri ve kültürün eylemi motive ettiği bilişsel mekanizmalar üzerinde çalışmaktadır. Bu yönelimin bir neticesi olarak sosyal bilişsel gerçeklikle ilişkilendirilen, yorumlayıcı kültürel analiz yaklaşımlarına dair literatür hızla gelişti. Bilişsel sosyolojinin kültürel geleneği, insan bilincinin kültürel gruplara ve tarihsel akışa göre nasıl değiştiği ile ilgilidir. Bu teoriye göre, bir aktör, özneler arası dünyaya girerken, aynı zamanda bilişsel olarak da sosyalleşir ve nesnelere başkalarıyla ortak anlam verir. Birey, bir yandan kültürel bilişselliği deneyimlerken, diğer yandan, kasıtlı failler olarak anladığı "öteki" insanları, sosyal gerçekliğin optiğinden görür. Kişisel ve toplumsal benliğini bu şekilde inşa eden aktör, ileriki aşamada, dünyadaki düşünce toplulukları ile iletişimsel eyleme geçerek, sosyal ve kültürel kimliğini test eder. Bu çalışmada, eylemi etkileyen kültürel mekanizmaların ampirik incelemesine girmeyeceğiz. Bilişsel sosyal gerçekliğin gündelik yaşamda konsept kullanımını ortaya çıkartan gerçeklik biyografisini ele almaya çalışacağız. Ayrıca, yeniden üretimi, düşünümsel mekanizmaya dönüştürecek şekilde, daha fazla iletinin bilişsel kapasiteye ulaşmasına neden olan gerçekliğin sosyal pozisyonunu etraflıca inceleyeceğiz. Bunun için de kültür sosyolojisinin tarihsel anlatımından çok, modern bilişsel sosyolojiye veri sağlayan sosyal bilişsel sürecin ana noktalarına özet olarak değineceğiz. İnsan bilişinin kültürel kökleri bilişsel farklılıkları bir ölçüde açıklar. Günümüzün işlevsel gerçekliğini biçimleyen Batı bilincinin arkasında başka bir deneyimsel farkındalık olduğu aşikardır. Gecikmiş modernitede, sosyal gerçekliği oluşturan fenomenlerin mekanizmaları, gündelik yaşamda farklı bağlamsal durumlara atıfta bulunduğu için, eylemliliğin düşünümsel neticesi, bilişselliğin standart zamanında sapmalara neden olur. Bilişsel deneyimin karakterine odaklandığımız bu makalede, bilişsel gerçekliğin asimetrik konumlanışını esas alarak, özellikle gecikmiş modern toplumlarda, farklı bir eleştirel gerçeklik açıklamasının bireysel ve toplumsal zorunluluk haline geldiğini savunacağız.

Kaynakça

  • Arthur, R. T. (2018). Monads, Composition, and Force Ariadnean Threads through Leibniz’s Labyrinth. Great Clarendon Street, Oxford,, UK: Oxford University Press.
  • Benton, T. (2016). Sosyolojinin Felsefi Kökenleri (2 Baskı b.). (Ü. Tatlıcan, Çev.) İstanbul: Küre.
  • Brandom, R. B. (2008). Between Saying and Doing: Towards an Analytic Pragmatism. Oxford New York : Oxford University Press .
  • Brandom, R. B. (2009). Reason in Philosophy. Massachusetts - London, England: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press Cambridge.
  • Brassier, R. (2007). Nihil Unbound Enlightenment and Extinction. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Buroker, J. V. (2006). Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge , UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Cassirer, E. (2000). The Individual and the Cosmos in Renaissance Philosophy . (M. Domandi, Çev.) New York: Dover edition.
  • Cassirer, E., Kristeller, P. O., & Randall, J. H. (Dü). (1948). The Renaissance Philosophy of Man. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Christensen, C. B. (2008). Self and World − From Analytic Philosophy to Phenomenology. Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter.
  • Davidson, D. (2004). Problems of Rationality. Great Clarendon Street, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • DiMaggio, P. (1997, 08 15). Culture and Cognition. Annual Review of Sociology, s. 263-287. 12 25, 2020 tarihinde : http://www.jstor.org/stable/2952552 adresinden alındı
  • DiMaggio, P. (2002). Why Cognitive (and Cultural) Sociology Needs Cognitive Psychology. K. A.Cerulo (Dü.) içinde, Culture in Mind (s. 274-283). New York: Routledge.
  • Dummett, M. (2014). Origins of Analytical Philosophy. London- New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.
  • Elder-Vass, D. (2010). The Reality of Social Construction. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Ferraris, M. (2014). Manifesto of New Realism. (S. D. Sanctis, Çev.) New York: Published by State University of New York Press.
  • Foucault, M. (2000). Entellektüelin Siyasi İşlevi. (I. Ergüden, O. Akınhay, & F. Keskin, Çev.) İstanbul: Ayrıntı.
  • Gallagher, S., & Zahavi, D. (2012). The Phenomenological Mind (2 b.). Oxon, USA ve Kanada: Routledge.
  • Gilbert, M. (2007). Collective Intentions, Commitment, and Collective Action Problems. F. Peter, & H. B. Schmid içinde, Rationality and Commitment (s. 284). Oxford - New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Goodman, N., & Quine, W. V. ( 1947, Aralık). Steps Toward a Constructive Nominalism. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, Vol. 12, (No. 4), 105-122.
  • Harman, G. (2011). Quentin Meillassoux: Philosophy in the Making. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Harman, G. (2018). Speculative Realism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Heidegger, M. (1998). Bilim Üzerine İki Ders. (H. Hünler, Çev.) İstanbul: Paradigma Yayınları.
  • Heidegger, M. (2002). Identity and Difference (Second printing edition b.). (J. G. Gray, Dü.) New York: University of Chicago Press.
  • Ignatow, G. (2007, 6). Theories of Embodied Knowledge: New Directions for Cultural and Cognitive Sociology? Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, s. 115-132. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5914.2007.00328.x
  • Kennedy, W. J. (2003). The Site of Petrarchism, Early Modern National Sentiment in Italy, France, and England. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Khamara, E. J. (2006). Space, Time, and Theology in the Leibniz-Newton Controversy . Heusenstamm, Germany: ontos verlag.
  • Kneller, J. (2007). Kant and The Power Of İmagination. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press .
  • Lilla, M. (1994). New French Thought. Princeton, New Jersey : Princeton University Press.
  • May, T. (1995). The Moral Theory of Poststructuralism. Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
  • May, T. (2005). Gilles Deleuze An Introduction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • McDowell, J. (2000). Mind And World (Fifth printing b.). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
  • Meillassoux, Q. (2008). After Finititude: An Essay on the Necessity of Contingency. (R. Brassier, Çev.) London: Continuum.
  • Meillassoux, Q. (2014). Time Without Becoming. (A. Longo, Dü.) Mimesis International.
  • Nozick, R. (1993). The Nature of Rationality. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  • Oleksy, M. W. (2015). Realism and Individualism, Charles S. Peirce and the Threat of Modern Nominalism,. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
  • Paternoster, A., Marraffa, M., & Francesco, M. D. (2016). The Self and its Defenses: From Psychodynamics to Cognitive Science. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Peters, M. (2003). Derrida, Pedagogy, and the Calculation of the Subject. P. P. Trifonas (Dü.) içinde, Pedagogies of Difference: Rethinking education for social change (s. 63). New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
  • Renaut, A. (1997). The Era of the Individual. (M. B. Philip, Çev.) New Jersey : Princeton University Press.
  • Robinson, K. (2009). Introduction: Deleuze, Whitehead, Bergson — Rhizomatic Connections. K. Robinson (Dü.) içinde, Deleuze, Whitehead, Bergson (s. 1-27). New York: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
  • Rockmore, T. (1997). Penelope's Web: Reconstruction of Philosophy and the Relevance of Reason. (T. Rockmore, Dü.) The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, 7, 114-136.
  • Rockmore, T. (2011). Kant and Phenomenology. Chicagoand London: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Russell, B. (2010). The Philosophy of Logical Atomism. London - New York: Routledge Classics.
  • Sallis, J. (1986). Delimitation: Phenomenology and the end of metaphysics (Second, Expanded Edition b.). Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
  • Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.
  • Shaviro, S. (2014). The universe Of Things: on speculative realism. Minneapolis-London: University of Minnesota Press.
  • Sparrow, T. (2014). The End of Phenomenology: Metaphysics and the New Realism. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Strickland, L. (2014). Leibniz’s Monadology, A New Translation and Guide. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Ltd.
  • Watkin, C. (2009). Phenomenology or Deconstruction? Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Yamagishi, T., & Yamagishi, M. (1994). Trust and Commitment in the United States and Japan. Motivation and Emotion. doi:10.1007/BF02249397
  • Zahavi, D. (2012). The Oxford Handbook of Contemporary Phenomenology. (D. Zahavi, Dü.) Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  • Zerubavel, E. (1999). Social Mindscapes : An Invitation to Cognitive Sociology. Massachusetts- Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  • Zerubavel, E. (1999). Social Mindscapes: An Invitation to Cognitive Sociology. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Toplam 51 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Sosyoloji
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Ethem Yıldız 0000-0002-8891-563X

Yayımlanma Tarihi 29 Haziran 2023
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2023 Cilt: 7 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Yıldız, E. (2023). GECİKMİŞ MODERNİTEDE SOSYAL BİLİŞSEL KRİZ: MODERN GERÇEKLİĞİN GELİŞİMSEL GRAMERİ ÜZERİNE KAVRAMSAL BİR ÇALIŞMA. Sosyoloji Notları, 7(1), 2-26.
AMA Yıldız E. GECİKMİŞ MODERNİTEDE SOSYAL BİLİŞSEL KRİZ: MODERN GERÇEKLİĞİN GELİŞİMSEL GRAMERİ ÜZERİNE KAVRAMSAL BİR ÇALIŞMA. sosnot. Haziran 2023;7(1):2-26.
Chicago Yıldız, Ethem. “GECİKMİŞ MODERNİTEDE SOSYAL BİLİŞSEL KRİZ: MODERN GERÇEKLİĞİN GELİŞİMSEL GRAMERİ ÜZERİNE KAVRAMSAL BİR ÇALIŞMA”. Sosyoloji Notları 7, sy. 1 (Haziran 2023): 2-26.
EndNote Yıldız E (01 Haziran 2023) GECİKMİŞ MODERNİTEDE SOSYAL BİLİŞSEL KRİZ: MODERN GERÇEKLİĞİN GELİŞİMSEL GRAMERİ ÜZERİNE KAVRAMSAL BİR ÇALIŞMA. Sosyoloji Notları 7 1 2–26.
IEEE E. Yıldız, “GECİKMİŞ MODERNİTEDE SOSYAL BİLİŞSEL KRİZ: MODERN GERÇEKLİĞİN GELİŞİMSEL GRAMERİ ÜZERİNE KAVRAMSAL BİR ÇALIŞMA”, sosnot, c. 7, sy. 1, ss. 2–26, 2023.
ISNAD Yıldız, Ethem. “GECİKMİŞ MODERNİTEDE SOSYAL BİLİŞSEL KRİZ: MODERN GERÇEKLİĞİN GELİŞİMSEL GRAMERİ ÜZERİNE KAVRAMSAL BİR ÇALIŞMA”. Sosyoloji Notları 7/1 (Haziran 2023), 2-26.
JAMA Yıldız E. GECİKMİŞ MODERNİTEDE SOSYAL BİLİŞSEL KRİZ: MODERN GERÇEKLİĞİN GELİŞİMSEL GRAMERİ ÜZERİNE KAVRAMSAL BİR ÇALIŞMA. sosnot. 2023;7:2–26.
MLA Yıldız, Ethem. “GECİKMİŞ MODERNİTEDE SOSYAL BİLİŞSEL KRİZ: MODERN GERÇEKLİĞİN GELİŞİMSEL GRAMERİ ÜZERİNE KAVRAMSAL BİR ÇALIŞMA”. Sosyoloji Notları, c. 7, sy. 1, 2023, ss. 2-26.
Vancouver Yıldız E. GECİKMİŞ MODERNİTEDE SOSYAL BİLİŞSEL KRİZ: MODERN GERÇEKLİĞİN GELİŞİMSEL GRAMERİ ÜZERİNE KAVRAMSAL BİR ÇALIŞMA. sosnot. 2023;7(1):2-26.