L'auteur montre comment N. Elias critique à la fois la sociologie classique, qui emprunte aux sciences naturelles la théorie évolutionniste, et la sociologie moderne, qui rejette la notion d'évolution. Il analyse comment N. Elias propose une sociologie évolutionnaire à travers le concept de processus configurationnel qui abolit l'opposition classique individu-société. Dans ce cadre, la notion d'évolution appartient elle aussi au processus évolutionnaire.The author shows how N. Elias criticizes, at one and the same time, the classical sociology using (...) the evolutionistic theoiy coming from the natural sciences, and the modern sociology rejecting the notion of evolution. He analyses how N. Elias propounds an . evolutionary sociology through the concept of configurationalprocess which eliminates the classical individual-society opposition. In this framework the notion of evolution itself has to be seen as belonging to the evolutionaiy process. (shrink)

Elias wrote in both English and German, and in all his work runs to 14 books and around 90 other essays, along with poems and numerous interviews. The 18 volumes of the collected works contain many writings not previously published in English, and a small number never published before. All of the texts have thoroughly checked and revised, by editors who have a deep knowledge of Elia's thinking; they have inserted many clarifications, cross-references and explanatory notes.

What is Sociology? presents in concise and provocative form the major ideas of a seminal thinker whose work--spanning more than four decades--is only now gaining the recognition here it has long had in Germany and France. Unlike other post-war sociologists, Norbert Elias has always held the concept of historical development among his central concerns; his dynamic theories of the evolution of modern man have remedied the historical and epistemological shortcomings of structualism and ethno-methodology. What is Sociology? refines the (...) arguments that were first found in Elias' massive work on the civilizing process, in which he formulated his major assertions about the interdependence of the making of modern man and modern society. It is Elias' contention that changes in personality structure--embodied in phenomena ranging from table manners and hygiene habits to rites of punishment and courtly love--inevitably reflect and mould patterns of control generated by new political and social instututions. Elias' rejection of a dichotomy between individual and society, and his use of psychoanalysis, political theory, and social history, help restore a fullness of resource to sociology. (shrink)

Inevitably, digitization and the increasing use of intelligent programs and machines have fundamentally changed the world of work. Moreover, it is to be expected that trends will continue in the near future and that other far-reaching changes will occur. Work is such an essential part in the lives of most members of society. It is not only the primary source of income but also crucial for one’s self-fulfillment, identification, and the achievement of social recognition. Therefore, from a societal, legal, and (...) political perspective, there is a need to understand the imminent changes, to critically reflect on them, and to draft alternative proposals to shape the future in order to provide normative guidance. (shrink)

Originally published in 1985, this is a short meditation by a great old man on people relating to other people who are dying, and the need for all of us to open ...

In the last decade of his life, Elias gave many interviews in which he discussed aspects of his work, rebutting many common misunderstandings of his thinking and further developing ideas sketched out in his writings. This volume can serve as an excellent introduction to Elias's thinking overall. Volume 17 in The Collected Works of Norbert Elias.

Elias wrote in both English and German, and in all his work runs to 14 books and around 90 other essays, along with poems and numerous interviews. The 18 volumes of the collected works contain many writings not previously published in English, and a small number never published before. All of the texts have thoroughly checked and revised, by editors who have a deep knowledge of Elia's thinking; they have inserted many clarifications, cross-references and explanatory notes.

The themes of this volume represent major extensions of and reflections upon the ideas first advanced in Elias' The Civilizing Process.

V.1. On the sociology of knowledge and the sciences -- v. 2. On civilising processes, state formation and national identity -- v. 3. On sociology and the humanities.

Elias wrote in both English and German, and in all his work runs to 14 books and around 90 other essays, along with poems and numerous interviews. The 18 volumes of the collected works contain many writings not previously published in English, and a small number never published before. All of the texts have thoroughly checked and revised, by editors who have a deep knowledge of Elia's thinking; they have inserted many clarifications, cross-references and explanatory notes.

ABSTRACT: Rousseau develops a genealogical reflection on political domination. The intelligibility of the genealogy does not rest on the psychological category of craving for power. That is why Rousseau differentiates between tyranny and despotism. Rousseau stresses this difference in two works: Discours sur l’origine de l’inégalité parmi les hommes and Rousseau juge de Jean-Jacques. Tyranny and despotism differ in that the latter produces an ideological speech. Political domination depends upon a double process. In the first process, ruling implies creating inequality (...) in the political order, thus excluding people from political decisions. In order to mask this political inequality, the ideological speech produces two fictions: the fiction of the guaranty and the fiction of the community. In the second process, ruling implies generating public opinion which, in turn, adheres to this political order. (shrink)

La loi, dans la pensée politique de Rousseau, engage nécessairement une détermination du citoyen et de la démocratie. Cette caractéristique ne repose pas seulement sur l'affirmation de la souveraineté du peuple, mais bien plutôt sur une double définition paradoxale de la citoyenneté. En effet, Rousseau fonde la loi sur la nécessité de citoyens silencieux. Sous cet aspect, l'État rousseauiste se présente sous le trait d'une communauté de promeneurs solitaires, où la vie et l'opinion publiques semblent être absentes. Mais Rousseau dégage, (...) notamment dans les Lettres écrites de la montagne , une autre caractéristique du citoyen fondée sur la nécessité d'une communication des citoyens, devant former, comme l'affirme Rousseau « la voix du public ». A partir de cette détermination d'un citoyen à la fois silencieux et loquace, notre problème est : pourquoi Rousseau sollicite-t-il ces deux déterminations de la citoyenneté pour caractériser la loi ?The law, in Rousseau's political thought necessarily involves a definition of the citizen and of democracy. This isn't only founded on the assertion of the sovereignty of the people, but also on the double paradoxical definition of citizenship. Indeed, Rousseau founds the law on the necessity of silent citizens. In this regard, Rousseau's State takes the shape of a community of solitary walkers who seem to be devoid of any public life and opinion. But Rousseau draws, notably in the Lettres écrites de la montagne another characteristic of the citizen, founded on the necessity for citizen to communicate. And this communication is for Rousseau “the voice of the public”. From this definition of the citizen as both silent and loquacious, our problem is now why Rousseau solicits these two determinations of citizenship to found the law? (shrink)

On désespère de trouver une théorie du pouvoir étatique chez Marx, mais il n’y a pas à désespérer de son absence. En effet son absence n’est pas le signe d’une insuffisance ou de son incapacité à comprendre le politique, mais elle est bien plutôt le résultat d’un déplacement dans la façon d’appréhender le pouvoir. Pour Marx le pouvoir est moins un problème d’origine que d’effet. La puissance d’un pouvoir se mesure à ses effets d’individuation. Marx est justement un grand (...) penseur du pouvoir car il court-circuite une théorie de l’État. Le pouvoir ne se montre pas dans la loi et le droit, mais sur les corps productifs que l’on discipline dans la grande industrie. L’analyse du capitalisme chez Marx repose sur une double définition du pouvoir : Comment créer des sujets conformes aux impératifs de la production capitalisme? C’est l’analyse de l’exploitation dans la production. Comment reproduire ce système? Comment faire accepter aux dominés la légitimité de leur domination. C’est tout le travail que Marx mène avec le fétichisme que l’on peut appeler la religion quotidienne du capitalisme. (shrink)

Introduction Le temps, abordé au point de vue social, a fait l’objet de travaux – chez Norbert Elias notamment – qui permettent de dégager une compréhension de ce dernier comme régulateur social, voire comme outil de gouvernement. Le temps est en effet conçu comme un instrument souple, à l’usage du pouvoir, pour permettre l’intériorisation de normes facilitant la coordination des activités à l’intérieur d’une société, sans user de contraintes apparentes ou physiques comme la violence. En ce s...

Norbert Elias's The Civilizing Process, which was published in German in 1939 and first translated into English in two volumes in 1978 and 1982, is now widely regarded as one of the great works of twentieth-century sociology. This work attempted to explain how Europeans came to think of themselves as more “civilized” than their forebears and neighboring societies. By analyzing books about manners that had been published between the thirteenth and eighteenth centuries, Elias observed changing conceptions of (...) shame and embarrassment with respect to, among other things, bodily propriety and violence. To explain those developments, Elias examined the interplay among the rise of state monopolies of power, increasing levels of economic interconnectedness among people, and pressures to become attuned to others over greater distances that led to advances in identifying with others in the same society irrespective of social origins. Elias's analysis of the civilizing process was not confined, however, to explaining changing social bonds within separate societies. The investigation also focused on the division of Europe into sovereign states that were embroiled in struggles for power and security.This article provides an overview and analysis of Elias's principal claims in the light of growing interest in this seminal work in sociology. The analysis shows how Elias defended higher levels of synthesis in the social sciences to explain relations between “domestic” and “international” developments, and changes in social structure and in the emotional lives of modern people. Elias's investigation, which explained long-term processes of development over several centuries, pointed to the limitations of inquiries that concentrate on short-term intervals. Only by placing short-term trends in long-term perspective could sociologists understand contemporary developments. This article maintains that Elias's analysis of the civilizing process remains an exemplary study of long-term developments in Western societies over the last five centuries. (shrink)

This article argues that the life-works of Norbert Elias and Franz Borkenau can best be understood together, as they were developed in close interaction during the 1930s. Deriving inspiration from Freud, they took up the project formulated by Weber at the end of his `Anticritical Last Word'. However, in two significant respects they went beyond the Weberian problematics. First, overcoming the centrality attributed to economic concerns, they rooted the Western civilizing process in the long-term attempt to harness the (...) violence that was escalated by the emergence and then collapse of the Roman Empire. Second, they emphasized the crucial importance of periods of transition that follow an overall dissolution of order and mark the possible future course of events. (shrink)

Understanding Elias -- Origins of Elias's synthesis -- Norbert Elias and Karl Mannheim -- The civilizing process : the structure of a classic -- Involved detachment : knowledge and self-knowledge in Elias -- The symbol theory : secular humanism as a research programme -- Concluding remarks : the fourth blow to man's narcissism.

Norbert Elias has been recognized as one of the key social scientists of the 20th century at least in sociology, political science and history. This book will address Norbert Elias's approach to empirical research, the use of his work in empirical research, and compare him with other theorists.

Comment est né l'Etat moderne que d'aucuns disent en crise? Quel rôle a-t-il joué dans la relative pacification des sociétés occidentales au cours des cinq derniers siècles? Une théorie de la civilisation peut-elle comprendre et expliquer Auschwitz? L'œuvre de Norbert Elias s'est confrontée sans faux-semblants aux principaux défis légués par le XXe siècle aux sciences humaines. Atypique et longtemps méconnue, cette sociologie historique assume la tentative de penser ensemble, et dans la longue durée, l'évolution des structures psychiques des (...) individus et celle des structures sociales des entités qu'ils forment. Aujourd'hui, les conséquences de la mondialisation et les questions soulevées par l'intégration européenne lui offrent une actualité nouvelle. Les transformations affectant l'organisation politique des hommes n'ont certes aucune raison de s'arrêter aux frontières des Etats-nations, peut-être appelés à disparaître sous l'effet d'interdépendances devenues planétaires. Mais quand l'appartenance à l'humanité peine à créer du sens, peut-on éviter que la communauté ne se fonde sur un sentiment, par définition toujours exclusif d'un " autre "? La tâche du sociologue se voit alors redéfinie : mettre les problèmes en histoire afin de les mettre à distance. De même que sa mission : rapprocher les individus en leur faisant connaître et reconnaître les liens qui les unissent. C'est à la lumière de cette double ambition que se laisse décrypter la réflexion d'Elias. Une réflexion sur le devenir de la civilisation et de l'Etat aussi originale que contestée, et dont les enjeux politiques et épistémologiques ne sauraient être dissociés. (shrink)

While the opposing paradigms of globalization and fragmentation compete in often bloody and destructive ways in the world today, this book convincingly reminds us of the importance of finding out more about the complex and changing ways in which we are connected. The authors demonstrate that the more we understand our connectedness and deal with its consequences, the less dependent and helpless we become. The critical, multidisciplinary perspectives they offer cover a wide range of subjects, from the world wide web (...) to medieval poetry, nations and gender, cancer narratives and money, emotion management and the financial markets, and the American civilizing process and the repression of shame. The contributions bear witness to Elias's innovative achievements while the authors continue his stunning explorations, extending them into other areas of the humanities and the sciences, and presenting their own wide-ranging and penetrating insights into our mutual dependence. Contributors are Jorge Arditi, Godfried Van Benthem Van Den Bergh, Reinhard Blomert, Stephen Guy-Bray, Thomas M. Kemple, Hermann Korte, Helmut Kuzmics, Stephen Mennell, Thomas Salumets, Thomas J. Scheff, Ulrich C. Teucher, Annette Treibel, and Cas Wouters. (shrink)

This article discusses the background to Walter Benjamin's famous 'letter to an unknown correspondent', which was part of a series of letters between Benjamin and Norbert Elias. Elias had just finished writing the first volume of The Civilizing Process, and he wrote to Ben jamin asking him to review it, but Benjamin declined. The reasons for his reluctance are discussed. The letters themselves are reproduced at the end of the article.