DC Field | Value | Language |
dc.contributor.author | Кукарцев, Олег | |
dc.contributor.author | Kukartsev, Oleh | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-09-05T08:03:44Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2018-09-05T08:03:44Z | - |
dc.date.created | 2017-10-25 | |
dc.date.issued | 2017-10-25 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Кукарцев О. Порівняльна історична соціологія імперій Айзенштадта / Олег Кукарцев // Humanitarian Vision. — Lviv : Lviv Politechnic Publishing House, 2017. — Vol 3. — No 2. — P. 19–24. | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://ena.lpnu.ua/handle/ntb/42596 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Досліджено внесок Айзенштадта у розвиток порівняльної історичної соціології імперій. У центрі уваги є
праця ізраїльського вченого “Політичні системи імперій: піднесення та падіння історичних бюрократичних
суспільств”. Розкрито особливості його типології політичних систем. Визначено вплив структурного
функціоналізму на теорію та методологію дослідження імперій Айзенштадта. | |
dc.description.abstract | The contribution of Eisenstadt to the development of comparative historical sociology of empires is researched. The
work of Israeli scientist ‘The Political Systems of Empires: The Rise and Fall of the Historical Bureaucratic Societies’ is on
the focus. The main goal of the research is to disclose the content of theoretical positions and the specifics of the
methodology of this work.
It is clarified that Eisenstadt gave social science a valuable conceptual and methodological arsenal for understanding
meaningful features, the history of the formation, development and dissolution of empires. The scholar focused on the
systemic nature of the imperial regimes, the different social structures and institutions that characterized them, as well as
the social processes that their rulers supported to preserve the systemic boundaries of their states. It was showed that to
achieve his goal, Eisenstadt used a specific methodology – a comparative analysis of the substantial qualities of social
structures, institutions and patterned social actions that develop within the social system and determine it. Following this
methodology, the researcher proposed an original typology of historical political systems. Among the types he has selected,
the main subject of the analysis in the book is ‘centralized historical bureaucratic empires’, a characteristic feature of which
is the institutionalization of autonomous political power, as well as the deliberate development of ‘free-floating resources’,
which encourages social differentiation on a large scale. The Eisenstadt’s work significantly influenced the historical
macrosociological studies of the empires of contemporary authors. Analyzing his scientific achievements, we obtain essential
information about the theoretical and methodological means of studying empires and they can open up new perspectives for
the comparative history of empires. | |
dc.format.extent | 19-24 | |
dc.language.iso | uk | |
dc.publisher | Lviv Politechnic Publishing House | |
dc.relation.ispartof | Humanitarian Vision, 2 (3), 2017 | |
dc.subject | Айзенштадт | |
dc.subject | імперія | |
dc.subject | політична система | |
dc.subject | централізація | |
dc.subject | соціальна диференціація | |
dc.subject | ресурси влади | |
dc.subject | структурний функціоналізм | |
dc.subject | порівняльна історична соціологія | |
dc.subject | Eisenstadt | |
dc.subject | empire | |
dc.subject | political system | |
dc.subject | centralization | |
dc.subject | social differentiation | |
dc.subject | resources of power | |
dc.subject | structural functionalism | |
dc.subject | comparative historical sociology | |
dc.title | Порівняльна історична соціологія імперій Айзенштадта | |
dc.title.alternative | Eisenstadt’s comparative and historical sociology of empires | |
dc.type | Article | |
dc.rights.holder | © Національний університет "Львівська політехніка", 2017 | |
dc.rights.holder | © Кукарцев О., 2017 | |
dc.contributor.affiliation | Національний університет “Львівська політехніка” | |
dc.format.pages | 6 | |
dc.identifier.citationen | Kukartsev O. Eisenstadt’s comparative and historical sociology of empires / Oleh Kukartsev // Humanitarian Vision. — Lviv : Lviv Politechnic Publishing House, 2017. — Vol 3. — No 2. — P. 19–24. | |
dc.relation.references | Баталов, А. (2004). “Исторические бюрократические | |
dc.relation.references | империи” в теории Ш. Эйзенштадта и их трансформация в | |
dc.relation.references | “модернизированное общество”. Вісник Харківського | |
dc.relation.references | національного університету імені В. Н. Каразіна, сер. | |
dc.relation.references | Філософія. Філософські перипетії, 638, 49–56. | |
dc.relation.references | Кутуєв, П. (2007). Порівняльно-історична соціологія | |
dc.relation.references | модернізації: теоретизування Ш. Ейзенштадта. Соціальна | |
dc.relation.references | психологія: Український науково-практичний журнал, 4,17–26. | |
dc.relation.references | Abrams, P. (1982). Historical Sociology. Ithaca, New | |
dc.relation.references | York: Cornell University Press. | |
dc.relation.references | Eisenstadt, S. (1963). The Political Systems of Empires: | |
dc.relation.references | The Rise and Fall of the Historical Bureaucratic Societies. New | |
dc.relation.references | York: Free Press of Glencoe. | |
dc.relation.references | Giesen, B., −uber D. (2005). Eisenstadt, Shmuel N. In | |
dc.relation.references | G. Ritzer (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Social Theory, Vol. 1, 233–234. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. | |
dc.relation.references | Hamilton G. (1984). Configurations in History: The | |
dc.relation.references | Historical Sociology of S. N. Eisenstadt. In T. Skocpol (Ed.), | |
dc.relation.references | Vision and Method in Historical Sociology, 85–128. New York | |
dc.relation.references | and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. | |
dc.relation.references | Marangudakis M. (2012). Multiple Modernities and the | |
dc.relation.references | Theory of Indeterminacy: On the development and theoretical | |
dc.relation.references | foundations of the historical sociology of Shmuel N. Eisenstadt. | |
dc.relation.references | ProtoSociology, Vol. 29: China’s Modernization II, 7–28. | |
dc.relation.references | Tucker A. (2004). Our Knowledge of the Past: A | |
dc.relation.references | Philosophy of Historiography. New York: Cambridge | |
dc.relation.references | University Press | |
dc.relation.references | Weerdt H. D. (2016). Shmuel N. Eisenstadt and the | |
dc.relation.references | Comparative Political History of Pre-Eighteenth-Century | |
dc.relation.references | Empires. Asian Review of World Histories, 4, 1, 133–162. | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Abrams P. (1982). Historical Sociology. Ithaca, New | |
dc.relation.referencesen | York: Cornell University Press. | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Batalov A. A. (2004). “The Historical Bureaucrat | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Imperia” in the Sh. Eisenstadt’s Theory and their | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Transformation into “Modern Society”. [In Russian]. Herald of | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Kharkiv National University named after V.N. Karazin, Seria: | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Philosophy. Philosophical Debates, 638, 49–56. | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Eisenstadt S. N. (1963). The Political Systems of | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Empires: The Rise and Fall of the Historical Bureaucratic | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Societies. New York: Free Press of Glencoe Kutuiev, P. (2007). Comparative and Historical | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Sociology of Modernization: Eisenstadt’s Theorization.[In | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Ukrainian]. Social Psychology: Ukrainian Scientific and | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Practical Journal, 4, 17–26. | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Giesen, B., −uber, D. (2005). Eisenstadt, Shmuel N. | |
dc.relation.referencesen | In G. Ritzer (Ed.) Encyclopedia of Social Theory, 1, 233–234. | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Hamilton G. (1984). Configurations in History: The | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Historical Sociology of S. N. Eisenstadt. In T. Skocpol (Ed.), | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Vision and Method in Historical Sociology, 85–128. New York | |
dc.relation.referencesen | and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Marangudakis M. (2012). Multiple Modernities | |
dc.relation.referencesen | and the Theory of Indeterminacy: On the development and | |
dc.relation.referencesen | theoretical foundations of the historical sociology of | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Shmuel N. Eisenstadt. ProtoSociology, Vol. 29: China’s | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Modernization II, 7–28. | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Tucker A. (2004). Our Knowledge of the Past: A | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Philosophy of Historiography. New York: Cambridge | |
dc.relation.referencesen | University Press. | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Weerdt H. D. (2016). Shmuel N. Eisenstadt and the | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Comparative Political History of Pre-Eighteenth-Century | |
dc.relation.referencesen | Empires. Asian Review of World Histories, 4, 1, 133–162. | |
dc.citation.volume | 3 | |
dc.citation.issue | 2 | |
dc.citation.spage | 19 | |
dc.citation.epage | 24 | |
dc.coverage.placename | Lviv | |
dc.subject.udc | 32.001 | |
dc.subject.udc | 321 | |
dc.subject.udc | 327.2 | |
Appears in Collections: | Humanitarian Vision. – 2017. – Vol. 3, No. 2
|