1,721,191 research outputs found
The relationship in the System: a comparison of Donati and Luhmann
No full textThe goal of the essay is to reconstruct differences and similarities between two paradigms: the relational paradigm, founded by Pierpaolo Donati, and system/environment paradigm, founded by Niklas Luhmann. The relational paradigm, introduced by the Italian sociologist, has many points of contact with Luhmann’s.
Donati’s concept of relationship is beyond both the concept of agency (methodological individualism) and the concept of structure (methodological collectivism).
Relational theory is a way of thinking that assumes that society’s problems are generated by social relations and seeks to understand not based on purely individual factors (voluntarism), nor in terms of collective factors (structuralism), but through new social relations and new relations of relations (relazionamenti di relazioni in Donati, 2009).
Donati argues that the social is a: “relational property of the relationship between the observer (or agent) and is being observed or acted upon”. (Donati, 2009): from this perspective, the relational theory accepts the assumption of a constructivist paradigm which is also present in the thinking of Niklas Luhmann (von Foerster in Alferj and Pilati, 1990).
According to the Italian sociologist: “The meaning of a meaning is a relationship.” (Donati, 2009) and relationships have the characteristic of deferring to other relationship.
The relationships, therefore, cannot exist without collective representations. From this second observation point Donati accepts the concept of recursiveness of social phenomena, finding other points of contact with the systemic paradigm.
Finally, the principle of relatedness exists not only socially, but also in the interconnections between other levels of reality: biological, psychological, ethical, political, economic. From this point of view Donati’s theory includes the concepts of differentiation and emergency developed from the General Systems Theory because each system is constituted by relations between parties capable of generating something different from the sum of the individual parts, and each system may interact with other systems in turn composed of sub-systems and so on recursively, generating additional complexity that needs to be controlled and reduced. The author of this draft paper wants to explain in detail the possible convergence between two schools of thought that, despite different assumptions, have a similar way of formulating abstractions
General Purpose of research. Understanding tourism industry dinamics on the web
No full textThis reasearch aims to describe and analyse in
detail the objectives, activities and results ob-
tained by the experimental research programme
TUR.N. 2.0 (an acronym for Tourism and Network-
ing). This programme was carried out by a busi-
ness cluster adhering to the Innovation Pole for
Advanced Services, in collaboration with two
universities in Abruzzo. Social networks are revolu-
tionizing the normal processes of interaction with
individuals and organizations, offering the oppor-
tunity to interact and engage, bringing people
with shared interests and activities together in vir-
tual spaces that determine concrete choices in real
places, transforming the tourism market’s supply
and demand chain.
In some cases, online networking has replaced tra-
ditional intermediation. In other cases, it serves as a
marketing tool, enabling new tourism offers previ-
ously excluded by tour operators because they were
underestimated or not appreciated. In the new sup-
ply and demand chain, tourists, intervening first in
the decision-making process and later in their eval-
uation of the service, reveal themselves to be pre-
cious strategic advisers, new promoters of the offer
or support consultants. From these considerations,
the strategic research project TUR.N. 2.0 (Tourism
and Networking) has a specific purpose: to build a
model for mapping and promoting the offer of the
tourism product, through the creation of a software
prototype able to ask relevant questions to Web
users, creating an incentive for them to establish a
strong relationship in order to offer better guidance
in the search for information within the Web areas in
which the prototype is applied
Anticipating the future by inventing otherwise possible realities through the theory of system
No full textL'identità della Differenza. Ripensare la relazione nei sistemi sociali
No full textLa relazione esiste in un contesto, ma non è un contesto; esiste tra i fatti, ma non è propriamente un fatto; si manifesta nelle interazioni interpersonali, ma non si riduce ad azione intenzionale; è una realtà distinta attraverso la quale edificare la nostra identità. Ciò non significa che essa avvenga prima della nostra identità personale (ciò che "io sono per me"), ma sicuramente contribuisce a strutturarla definendo anche l'identità sociale (ciò che "io sono per gli altri"). In questo libro si assiste a un "ri-pensamento" filosofico e sociologico che pone la questione "dell'identità della differenza" come radice problematica degli elementi costitutivi della "relazione". Nel tentativo di rintracciare "l'essere della relazione", D'Alessandro si domanda: È possibile ri-partire dall’essere della relazione per ri-pensare l'identità della persona? In che modo la relazione declina i concetti di identità e differenza? Con quale linguaggio si ri-costruisce l’identità dell’essere della relazione? Partendo da tali interrogativi, l'autore di questo testo ricco di sentieri di ricerca inesplorati, vuole rintracciare l’Heidegger “filosofo dell’essere e sociologo dell’identità”, stabilendo una comparazione con la sistemica luhmanniana e con la mia sociologia relazionale, a partire dalle idee chiave di: identità, differenza, relazione, registro del tempo, riflessività. Dalle conclusioni di questo sentiero di ricerca si potrebbe evincere che l'Essere (come ego), il Divenire (come tempo) e la differenza (come alter), “relazionandosi” diano vita all’identità mutevole della persona in grado di meta-riflettere adeguatamente su se stessa, prima ancora che sul mondo: perché riflettere adeguatamente sulla propria capacità relazionale, aiuta a "diventare ciò che si è"!
Dalla prefazione di Pierpaolo Donat
From the Pseudo-environment to the Meta-verse. Recontextualising Lippmann’s thought.
Full text linkThe Social Sciences have been investigating the processes of Public Opinion formation since the second half of the 19th century. From Tocqueville to Le Bon, from Toennies to Allport, from Lazarsfeld to Habermas, from Niklas Luhmann to Pierre Bourdieu, from Noelle-Neumann to Landowski. Among these authors, Lippmann stands out for his theoretical-practical orientation that anticipated themes and scenarios. Exactly one hundred years ago, in his best-known work Public Opinion (Lippmann 1922) he had opened the way to the inevitability of the construction of a world “beyond the
real”, through the concept of “pseudo-environment”. The need for representation determines “pseudo-environments”, interstitial realities made up of stereotyped images and contents that the public interprets to construct shared imaginaries that do not
adhere to reality: «The world outside and the picture in your head» (Lippmann 1992: 3).
Pseudo-environments enable decision-making and action, reducing complexity (Luhmann e De Giorgi 1992). This phenomenon anticipates the concept of simulacrum, in the sense of Braudillard (1985), but also that of Second Life and the Meta-verse in the sense of Stephenson (1992). Starting from Lippmann’s vision, this proposed paper intends to recontextualise his thought
- …
