The cognition of something in front and something in the background. Is “taken-for-granted reality” experienced?

Authors

  • Krzysztof Konecki Uniwersytet Łódzki, Wydział Ekonomiczno-Socjologiczny

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/2300-1690.19.16

Keywords:

cognitive sociology, ignoring, sociology of attention, Eviatar Zerubavel, existencial sociology

Abstract

The paper is an analysis of the cognitive-sociological model of reconstructing taken-for-granted knowledge, as presented by Eviatar Zerubavel. The analysis shows Zerubavel’s structuralist and “sociologistic” approach to common-sense knowledge. The analysis also shows that his concepts of formal sociology could be used in phenomenological, existentialist, and contemplative approaches, where social and cultural knowledge is bracketed and reflected upon to clear the social mind for personal and experiential cognition.

Author Biography

Krzysztof Konecki, Uniwersytet Łódzki, Wydział Ekonomiczno-Socjologiczny

Krzysztof T. Konecki jest profesorem zwyczajnym i przewodniczącym komisji ds. stopni naukowych w dyscyplinie nauki socjologiczne UŁ. Pracuje na Wydziale Ekonomiczno-Socjologicznym Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, jest kierownikiem Katedry Socjologii Organizacji i Zarządzania. Jego zainteresowania obejmują socjologię jakościową, symboliczny interakcjonizm, teorię ugruntowaną, metodologię nauk społecznych, socjologię wizualną, komunikację i zarządzanie międzykulturowe, kulturę organizacyjną i zarządzanie oraz badania fenomenologiczne i kontemplatywne, interakcje ludzi i zwierząt. Jest redaktorem naczelnym „Przeglądu Socjologii Jakościowej” i pełni aktualnie funkcję przewodniczącego Polskiego Towarzystwa Socjologicznego.

References

Anderson, L. (2006). Analytic Autoethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 35(4), 373– 395. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241605280449
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241605280449

Bentz, Valerie M., Rehorick, D., Marlatt, J., Nishii, A., & Estrada, C. (2018). Transformative Phenomenology as an Antidote to Technological Deathworlds. Schutzian Research, 10, 189–220. https://doi.org/10.5840/schutz20181011
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/schutz20181011

Bentz, Valery M., & Giorgino, V. (2016). Contemplative Social Research: Caring for Self, Being, and Lifeworld. Santa Barbara: Fielding Institute Press.
View in Google Scholar

Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Berkeley: University of California Press.
View in Google Scholar

Brekhus, W. (1998). A Sociology of the Unmarked: Redirecting Our Focus. Sociological Theory, 16(1), 34–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/0735-2751.00041
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0735-2751.00041

Brekhus, W. (2007). The Rutgers school: A Zerubavelian culturalist cognitive sociology. European Journal of Social Theory, 10(3), 448–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431007080705
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431007080705

Brekhus, W. (2015). Culture and cognition : patterns in the social construction of reality. Cambridge: Polity Press
View in Google Scholar

Cary, M. S. (1978). Does civil inattention exist in pedestrian passing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(11), 1185–1193. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.36.11.1185
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.36.11.1185

Denzin, N. K. (2006). Analytic Autoethnography, or Déjà Vu all Over Again. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 35(4), 419–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241606286985
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241606286985

Denzin, N. K. (2009). On Understanding Emotion. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
View in Google Scholar

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2001). The American Tradition in Qualitative Research. London: Sage Publications
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446263570

Douglas, J. D., & Johnson, J. M. (1977). Existential Sociology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
View in Google Scholar

Durkheim, E. (2008). The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications.
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/owc/9780199540129.001.0001

Giorgino, V. (2014). Contemplative Methods Meet Social Sciences: Back to Human Experience as It Is. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 45(4), 461–483. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12078
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12078

Giorgino, V. (2016). Contemplative Knowledge and Social Sciences: Close Encounters of the Enactive Kind. In Valery M. Bentz & V. Giorgino (Eds.), Contemplative Social Research. Caring for Self, Being, and Lifeworld (pp. 163–192). Santa Barbara: Fielding University Press
View in Google Scholar

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory. New York: Aldine de Grutyer.
View in Google Scholar

Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Anchor
View in Google Scholar

Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
View in Google Scholar

Johnson, J. M., & Melnikov, A. (2008). Existentialism and the Emergence, Growth, and Development of Existential Sociology. In Methodology, Theory, and Practice of the Sociological Analysis of a Modern Society: Collection of Scientific Papers (pp. 33–40). Kharkiv: Kharkiv National University Press
View in Google Scholar

Kacperczyk, A. (2014). Autoetnografia – technika, metoda, nowy paradygmat? O metodologicznym statusie autoetnografii; Autoethnography – Technique, Method, or New Paradigm? On Methodological Status of Autoethnography. Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej, X(3), 32–75.
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8069.10.3.03

Konecki, K. T. (2018). Advances in contemplative social research. Lodz, Krakow: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego/Jagiellonian University Press.
View in Google Scholar

Kotarba, J., & Fontana, A. (1987). The Existential Self in Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
View in Google Scholar

Kotarba, J., & Johnson, J. M. (2002). Postmodern Existential Sociology. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.
View in Google Scholar

Manning, P. K. (1973). Existential Sociology. The Sociological Quarterly, 14(2), 200–225. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1973.tb00854.x
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1973.tb00854.x

Melnikov, A. (2013). Research possibilities of valuenormative transformations of Ukrainian society from the perspective of existential sociology. Соціологія: Теорія, Методи, Маркетинг, (2), 52–70
View in Google Scholar

Prus, R. (1996). Symbolic interaction and ethnographic research: Intersubjectivity and the study of human lived experience. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press
View in Google Scholar

Rehorick, D. A., & Bentz, V. M. (2008). Transformative phenomenology : changing ourselves, lifeworlds, and professional practice. New York: Lexington Books
View in Google Scholar

Scheff, T. (1990). Microsociology: Discourse, Emotion, and Social Structure. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press.
View in Google Scholar

Scheff, T. (2014). Goffman on Emotions: The PrideShame System. Symbolic Interaction, 37(1), 108–121. https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.86
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.86

Schütz, A. (1945). On Multiple Realities. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 5(4), 533–576.
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2102818

Schütz, A. (1962). The problem of social reality. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
View in Google Scholar

van der Laan, E., & Velthuis, O. (2016). Inconspicuous dressing: A critique of the construction-throughconsumption paradigm in the sociology of clothing. Journal of Consumer Culture, 16(1), 22–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540513505609
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540513505609

Van Manen, M. (2007). Phenomenology of practice. Phenomenology & Practice, 1(1), 11–30. Retrieved from https://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/pandpr/article/view/19803
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.29173/pandpr19803

Zerubavel, E. (1980). If Simmel Were A Fieldworker: On Formal Sociological Theory And Analytical Field Research. Symbolic Interaction, 3(2), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.1980.3.2.25
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/si.1980.3.2.25

Zerubavel, E. (1995). The Rigid, the Fuzzy, and the Flexible: Notes on the Mental Sculpting of Academic Identity. Social Research, 62(4), 1093– 1106. https://doi.org/10.2307/40971135
View in Google Scholar

Zerubavel, E. (2015b). The Elephant in the Room: Silence and Denial in Everyday Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press
View in Google Scholar

Zerubavel, E. (2018a). Taken for granted: the remark - able power of the unremarkable. Oxfordshire : Princenton University Press.
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.23943/9781400889464

Zerubavel, E. (2018b). Terra Cognita. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351306003
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351306003

Zuckerman, M., Miserandino, M., & Bernieri, F. (1983). Civil Inattention Exists—in Elevators. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9(4), 578–586. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167283094007
View in Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167283094007

Downloads

Published

2020-11-20

How to Cite

Konecki, K. (2020). The cognition of something in front and something in the background. Is “taken-for-granted reality” experienced?. Władza Sądzenia, (19), 310–323. https://doi.org/10.18778/2300-1690.19.16

Issue

No. 19 (2020)

Section

Articles

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.