Modernization of the structure of sociological knowledge and the place and role of the sociological reflection of transport in this context

  • I. G. Shapoval National Aviation University
  • Y. I. Yakovenko Kyiv National Taras Shevchenko University
Keywords: transport, sociology of transport, reflection, branch sociology, development, institutionalization, mimicry, modernization

Abstract

The modern world, with its furious pace of life, in all its spheres of development, is impossible without communications and connections. It is impossible to describe all the consequences of social, spiritual, psychological, modern means of information. But along with the intensive development of computer local and global grids such as the Internet, telecommunications, etc., the undercover transport sector remains. In sociology there is a tradition to divide the structure of sociological knowledge into theoretical sociology, the theory of the middle level, the empirical basis of science, which must be generalized, thanks to the theoretical foundations of sociology, in the theories of the middle level. The article will discuss the «sociology of transport». The following circumstances justify this topic. The epoch of globalization is determined by the exceptional role of transport and communication. Therefore, according to the model of the proclamation of the of the Earth-science, the industrial revolution, the science of transport and communication as a super-complex science of the era of the communication revolution comes to the fore. The sociology of transport looks like an integral part of it along with transport economics, transport medicine, legal principles of transport, and so on. Transport is a complex consisting of separate types: railway, sea, river, automobile, pipeline and air. They have their own peculiarities, advantages, disadvantages and scope. They interact with each other and form a transport system that develops under the influence of the economy as a whole and its individual branches. The main content of the article is to reveal the definition of the directions of modernization of the structure of sociological knowledge in Ukraine and ways of overcoming it through a discussion of contradictions in this matter. An attempt to explain why choices should be made in sociology, regarding ways to modernize the structure of special and branch sociologies. Attempts to explain the expediency of describing the sociology of transport as a branch of the structure of the sociological system of knowledge and pointed to the main prospects for further development of this branch of sociology, because recently sociologists have lost the prestige of their work and are trying to give their articles the status of useful science, in order to receive funding for conducting further studies, some sociologists resort to mimicry. Mimicry in sociology manifests itself in various ways, in particular, by offering pseudo-new areas of research (which is stated, for example, in such improper editions as «military sociology» or «martial sociology» or «sociology of professionalism» and continue to insist on some kind of innovation. In our opinion, such a variety of innovations for a sociological center in Ukraine serves as a threat to the loss of its scientific identity and integrity, and subsequently it may lead to further profanation of sociology in Ukraine. It has been established that the sociology of transport in its formation and development should go in the institutional direction, integrating the main results obtained by world sociology in its reflections on: economics, education, management, organizations, labor, migration, disasters, tourism, professional groups.

References

1. Akulshyna, N. (2011). Ponyattya «vijs`kovogo» ta «voyennogo» dyskursiv – ob’yektyvna totozhnist` ta/chy` permanentna proty`lezhnist` [The notion of «military» and «martial» discourses as an objective identity and / or a permanent opposite]. Studia Linguistica 5, 458–462 [in Ukrainian].
2. Ariiskaia fizika [Aryan physics]. – Retrieved from: http://znaimo.com.ua/%D0%90%D1%80%D1%96%D0%B9%D1%81%D1%8C%D0%BA%D0%B0_%D1%84%D 1%96%D0%B7%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0.
3. Bila kny`ga – 2005: oboronna polity`ka Ukrayiny [White Paper-2005: Defense Policy of Ukraine]. (2005). Kyiv. [in Ukrainian]
4. Voyenno-naukove upravlinnya GSh ZSU [Military and scientific management of the GS of the Armed Forces]. Retrieved from: http:// www.mil.gov.ua/ministry/struktura-generalnogo-shtabu/voenno-naukove-upravlinnyagsh-zsu.html.
5. Giddens, Je. (2007). K sociologicheskomu soobshhestvu! [To the Sociological Community!]. Sociologicheskie issledovanija 9, 5–8 [in Russian].
6. Gorodyanenko, V. (2003). Sociologiya polity`ky`, «polity`chna sociologiya» abo «sociologiya polity`chnoyi sfery`»? [Sociology of Politics», «Political Sociology» or «Sociology of the Political Sphere? (Historiography of the problem)]. Sociologiya: teoriya, metody`, markety`ng 1, 167–185 [in Ukrainian]
7. Gry`nchuk, A. (2008). Bezpekoprodukuvannya v konteksti sociologichnogo dy`skursu. [Safe Production in the Context of Sociological Discourse]. Visny`k Akademiyi praci i social`ny`x vidnosy`n Federaciyi profspilok Ukrayiny, 3, 30–35 [in Ukrainian].
8. Gry`nchuk, A. (2009). Ry`zy`k i bezpeka yak social`ni yavy`shha ta pidstavy` modernizaciyi struktury` sociologichnogo znannya [Risk and Safety as Social Phenomena and Grounds for Modernization of the Structure of Sociological Knowledge]. Sociology in a situation of social uncertainty: Abstracts of the participants of the 1st Congress of the Sociological Association of Ukraine, (pp. 21–22). Kharkiv: KhNU imeni V. N. Karazina. [in Ukrainian].
9. Gry`shhenko, K. (2012). Transformacijni procesy` v Ukrayini i rol` sociologiyi ta inshy`x gumanitarny`x nauk u modernizaciyi ukrayins`kogo suspil`stva [Transformation Processes in Ukraine and the Role of Sociology and Other Humanities in the Modernization of Ukrainian Society]. Sociologiya: teoriya, metody`, markety`ng, 2, 186–204 [in Ukrainian].
10. Dudina, V. (2013). Jepistemicheskie matricy sociologicheskogo znanija [Epistemic matrices of sociological knowledge]. St. Petersburg [in Russian].
11. Karlova, E. (2014). Voennaja nauka kak social’nyj institute [Military Science as a Social Institute]. Sociology of Science and Technology, 5 (1), 67–79 [in Russian].
12. Kasavin, I. (2009). Problema kak forma znanija [The Problem as a Form of Knowledge]. Jepistemologija & Filosofija nauki, 4, 5–13 [in Russian].
13. Kirdina, S. (2000). Institucional’nye matricy i razvitie Rossii [Institutional Matrices and the Development of Russia]. Moscow: TEIS. [in Russian].
14. Lobanova, A. (2004). Fenomen social`noyi mimikriyi [The Phenomenon of Social Mimicry]. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
15. Lukashevy`ch, M. (2009). Sociologiya ekonomiky` [Sociology of Economics: Textbook]. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
16. Lukashevy`ch, M. (2004). Ekonomichna Sociologiya chy` sociologiya ekonomiky`?: dy`skurs shhodo struktury` sy`stemy` sociologichny`x znan`[Economic Sociology or Sociology of Economics ?: Discourse on the structure of the system of sociological knowledge]. Methodology, theory and practice of sociological analysis of modern societies: Sb. sciences works (pp. 115–119). Kharkiv: Publishing Center of Kharkiv National University named after V.N. Karazin [in Ukrainian].
17. Mezhdunarodnaja sociologicheskaja associacija [International Sociological Association]. – Retrieved from: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Международная_социологическая_ассоциация
18. Osipova, N. (2010). Evropejskaja sociologija : uchebnoe posobie [European Sociology: Textbook]. Moscow. [in Russian].
19. Osipova, N. (2013). Otraslevaja matrica sovremennoj sociologii: krizis divergencii [A Sectoral Matrix of Contemporary Sociology: the Crisis of Divergence]. Bulletin of Moscow University, 18(2), 29–51[in Russian].
20. Selen’ I. (2015). Trojnoj krizis amerikanskoj sociologii [Triple Crisis of American Sociology]. Global Dialogue: UIA Magazine in 15 languages, 5 (4), 4–7. – Retrieved from: http://isa-global-dialogue.net/wp-content/ uploads/2015/06/v5i2-russian.pdf.
21. Sobolevs`ka, M. (2010). Neofunkcionalists`ki ta poststrukturalists`ki teoriyi v suchasnij sociologiyi: navch. posibny`k [Neo-functionalist and post-structuralist theories in modern sociology: teach. manual]. Kyjiv. [in Ukrainian].
22. Sociologija v Irlandii [Elektronnij resurs], (2015). Global Dialogue: UIA Magazine in 15 languages 5 (4), 29–34. – Retrieved from: http://isa-global-dialogue.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/v5i2-russian.pdf.
23. Sociologija v Pakistane [Sociology in Ireland] Global’nyj dialog: Zhurnal MSA na 15 jazykah, 2015. 5 (4). 22–23. – Retrieved from: http://isa-global-dialogue.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/v5i2-russian.pdf.
24. Sociologichna ency`klopediya [Sociological Encyclopedia], (2008). Ed. V. G. Gorodyanenko. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
25. Sociologija v Rossii [Sociology in Russia], (1998). Moscow [in Russian].
26. Sociologiya v sy`tuaciyi social`ny`x nevy`znachenostej [Sociology in the Situation of Social Uncertainty: Abstracts of the Participants of the 1st Congress of the Sociological Association of Ukraine], (2009). Kharkiv: KhNU imeni V. N. Karazina. [in Ukrainian].
27. Filippov, A. F. (2013) Sociologija kak policejskaja nauka [Sociology as Police Science]. New literary review, 5 (123). – Retrieved from: http://www.nlobooks.ru/node/3973.
28. Cyurupa, M. (2013). Osnovy` zagal`noyi ta voyennoyi politologiyi [Fundamentals of General and Military Political Science]. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
29. Yakovenko, Yu. (2009). Sociologiya profesionalizmu – fal`start, abo Nebezpechny`j precedent progoloshennya niby`to novoyi sociologichnoyi galuzi [Sociology of Professionalism - False Start, or Dangerous Precedent of Proclaiming Supposedly new Sociological Branch]. Sociologiya: teoriya metody`, markety`ng: naukovo-teorety`chny`j chasopy`s, 4, 157–171[in Ukrainian].
30. Yakovenko, Yu. (2012). Sociologiya v Ukrayini: chy` ye rux vpered? [Sociology in Ukraine: is there any movement in the future?]. Mizhnarodny`j naukovy`j forum, 1(8), 5–32 [in Ukrainian].
Published
2018-04-08
How to Cite
Shapoval, I. G., & Yakovenko, Y. I. (2018). Modernization of the structure of sociological knowledge and the place and role of the sociological reflection of transport in this context. Grani, 21(2), 16-24. https://doi.org/10.15421/171811
Section
Article