@ARTICLE{27043461_121718799_2014, 
	author = {Andrey Nekhaev}, 
	keywords = {, theory and history of ideas, social studies, casual explanations, epiphenomenalism, reductionism, intellectualsrationality},
	title = {What Is the “Orthodox Theory and History of Ideas”?: A Disciplinary Story in a Critical and Ironic Vein},
	journal = {The Russian Sociological Review},
	year = {2014},
	month = {Апрель},
	volume = {13},
	number = {1},
	pages = {176-233},
	url = {https://sociologica.hse.ru/en/2014-13-1/121718799.html},
	publisher = {},
	abstract = {The article contains a critique of the current condition of the theory and history of ideas discipline. Orthodox research in the theory and history of ideas are contrasted to the modern social studies of relations between rationality and sociality. The article suggests the necessity of changes in the research practices of the discipline. The changes have to help prevent two typical conceptual traps — epiphenomenalism and reductionism. Special attention is paid to the sources and agents of orthodox influence on research practices in the modern theory and history of ideas. In particular, the article focuses on research practices of German classical philology (Klassische Philologie) in the 19th century, which have been widely recognized due to academic activities of such influential schools as Gottfried Hermann’s philology of words (Wortphilologie), and August Böckh’s philology of things (Sachphilologie). These research practices became a tool for 19th century philology expansion into the territory of related disciplines, particularly history. Both the active borrowing of these practices and the creation of philology-dependent research associations in cross-border disciplinary areas influenced the formation of the orthodox research canon in the theory and history of ideas. This influence was so strong and extensive that its traces can be found in research practices of many modern disciplinary programs in the theory and history of ideas. In conclusion, the article provides a brief overview of some promising directions for the development of an unorthodox and more socially-oriented approach to the theory and history of ideas.},
	annote = {The article contains a critique of the current condition of the theory and history of ideas discipline. Orthodox research in the theory and history of ideas are contrasted to the modern social studies of relations between rationality and sociality. The article suggests the necessity of changes in the research practices of the discipline. The changes have to help prevent two typical conceptual traps — epiphenomenalism and reductionism. Special attention is paid to the sources and agents of orthodox influence on research practices in the modern theory and history of ideas. In particular, the article focuses on research practices of German classical philology (Klassische Philologie) in the 19th century, which have been widely recognized due to academic activities of such influential schools as Gottfried Hermann’s philology of words (Wortphilologie), and August Böckh’s philology of things (Sachphilologie). These research practices became a tool for 19th century philology expansion into the territory of related disciplines, particularly history. Both the active borrowing of these practices and the creation of philology-dependent research associations in cross-border disciplinary areas influenced the formation of the orthodox research canon in the theory and history of ideas. This influence was so strong and extensive that its traces can be found in research practices of many modern disciplinary programs in the theory and history of ideas. In conclusion, the article provides a brief overview of some promising directions for the development of an unorthodox and more socially-oriented approach to the theory and history of ideas.}
}