|
Translations
|
3–12
|
This is one of the most famous works of Robert Park - Chicago School theorist and one of the founders of the urban sociology which is for the first time published in Russian. The city is convenient for the Park "locus of research", since it is here that any feature of human behavior concentrated on a relatively small (foreseeable) space, the natural growth of the institutions is the fastest. In the published article, despite the fact that it may seem a review, recorded a number of basic methodological positions - both in terms of the city, the dynamics of its social development and differentiation, and relative to the social sciences have reached a point where it became possible to organize and carry out laboratory experiment. |
|
13–18
|
This article by R.Park is notorious for his famous ability - to transcend from setting the fundamental theoretical questions to their manifestations in real social problems naturally and by the shortestpass. The political system is based on the assumption that the local community is a local political entity. If the local community is organized, aware of their local interests, and has its own opinion, then we have the most thriving democracy. There is evidence that fifty percent of voters in the country do not enjoy their right to vote. If this is any indication of indifference to the interests of the local community, while at the same time, it can be considered a measure of the effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) of the local community. In this case we are talking about the problems of immigrant communities. Park finds out what community is and what is its organization. He tries to assess the competence and efficiency of the community is different from the competence and efficiency of its constituent individuals. In a sense, these communities, where immigrants live their lives, can be seen as a model for society as a whole. |
|
19–26
|
The article of the French philosopher of the New Urbanism – Henri Lefebvre – represents philosophical grounds of this concept and introduces its basic principles. The problem of the new urbanism in the philosophical statement is purposeful creation and management of social life equal to or higher than the life generated by history. We can assume that this problem will be resolved by successive approximations, fumbles, bug fixes that did not exclude shocks resulting from ingenious initiatives, inventions or discoveries. These methodological reflections have to question, inter alia, the primacy of the technical approach. |
|
27–29
|
An excerpt from the book by Henri Lefebvre introduces the basic principle of his theory and what is followed by explanations and implications. The main point -- space (social) is the product (social) -- is considered in the problematic vein. The author wonders about what hides this truth of (social) space, which consists in that it is the product (social). His response is -- a double illusion, each side of which suggests another, reinforce each, it is justified: first, the illusion of transparency, and second -- of density ("realistic" illusion). What follows is a detailed analysis of these illusions. |
Summaries
Book reviews
Reflections on a book
Papers and essays
|
68–77
|
The concept of “modernization” is complicated and controversial. The understanding of modernization first switched from the identification of modernization with “westernization” or “americanization” which directly contrasted it with traditional institutions in 1950s towards recognition of multiple developments based on the complexity and diversity of traditions. Then the time of disappointment in theorization in the modernization categories came and it was a trend to focus on the “post modern” age. As a result, people thought “modernity” to be a development model for the counties of the third world and for post communist countries. In this paper we will consider the contemporary development of concept of “modernization” and we will analyze some of its problems. |
Retrospection
|