نویسنده

کارشناس ارشد دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی

چکیده

روح ﺟﻤﻌﻲ ﻳﺎ ﻫﻤﺎن اﺟﺘﻤﺎع ﻣﻄﺮح ﺷﺪه در ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺎت ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ و ﻧﻴﺰ ﮔﻔﺘﮕﻮ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻨﺪ دو ﻣﻔﻬﻮم ﻛﻠﻴﺪی ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ اﻣﺎ دﻳﺮزﻣﺎﻧﻲ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ  در درون ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎن ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎت ، ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ و ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ اﻧﺘﻘﺎدی ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻲ ﻣﻮرد اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻗﺮار ﻣﻲ ﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ؛ وﻟﻲ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻨﺔ اﻧﺴﺎن ﮔﺮاﻳﺎﻧﻪ و ﺗﺎ ﺣﺪی اﻧﺘﺰاﻋﻲ آﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﻧﺸﺪه ﺗﺎ ﻣﺼﺎدﻳﻖ ﻣﻠﻤﻮس و ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ آﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺤﺚ و ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﻗﺮار ﻧﮕﻴﺮﻧﺪ، ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻄﺮح ﻛﺮدن ﺑﺤﺚ ﻓﻀﺎ و ﻗﺪرت و ﻫﺎﺑﺮﻣﺎس ﻧﻴﺰ از ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻣﻔﻬﻮم ﻛﻨﺶ ارﺗﺒﺎﻃﻲ ﺗﻼش ﻛﺮدﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ را ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻠﻲ ﻋﻴﻨﻲ ﺗﺮ در ﻋﻠﻮم اﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻲ ﻃﺮح ﻛﻨﻨﺪ .در اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ اﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﻧﺸﺎن دادن اﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻮع ﻛﻪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻲ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﻲ ﺑﺮای ﺑﺤﺜﻬﺎی روﺷﻨﻔﻜﺮاﻧﺔ ﻧﺨﺒﮕﺎن ﻧﻤﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ، ﺟﻬﺖ ﮔﻴﺮی اﺻﻠﻲ ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ اﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺑﻮده اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎ ﭼﻪ ﺣﺪ اﺟﺘﻤﺎع ﻫﻤﺒﺴﺘﻪ و ﺻﻤﻴﻤﻲ ﺷﻜﻞ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﭘﺎﺗﻮﻗﻬﺎ و ﻧﻴﺰ ﮔﻔﺘﮕﻮ در زﻧﺪﮔﻲ روزﻣﺮه ﺟﻮاﻧﺎن ﺗﻬﺮاﻧﻲ ﺣﻀﻮر دارد و ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﺎ ﭼﻪ ﺣﺪ ﺑﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ آﮔﺎﻫﻲ دارﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻋﻼﻗﻪ دارﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ آﻧﻬﺎ را ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ .ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮاﻳﻦ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻓﻮق، ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮان ﺑﻪ اﻳﻦ ﺳﺆال ﭘﺎﺳﺦ داد ﻛﻪ آﻳﺎ در ﻣﺘﻦ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﺣﻀﻮر در اﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﺎت ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮن و ﻧﻴﺰ در ﻛﻨﺎر آن ﻋﻼﻗﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﮔﻔﺘﮕﻮی واﻗﻌﻲ ﺑﺎ ،زﻧﺪﮔﻲ ﻫﺮ روزه دوﺳﺘﺎﻧﺸﺎن، ﻫﻮﻳﺘﻲ آزادﺗﺮ و ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺗﺮ را ﺑﺮای آﻧﺎن ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺧﻴﺮ؟

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Dialogues made in Recourse: Opportunities for Experience and Resistance

نویسنده [English]

  • Mani KAllani

M. A Allamehtabatabaei university

چکیده [English]

Community” and “dialogue” are two basic concepts of Sociology and Critical Theory outlined by classical sociological theories. However, these terms have not historically been used within the discourses of Cultural Studies. Attention has been paid to their humanistic and abstract roots but their tangible and experimental dimensions have not yet been dealt with. Within Anthropological thought also the objective truths of the concepts “community” and “dialogue” have not been addressed although Foucault’s focuses on issues of “power” and “space” and Habermas’ concept of“communicative action” have tried to materialise these issues within social sciences. In this article we show that such issues are not merely subjects of intellectual elite discussions. We adopt an experimental orientation in our methodology to see how much “community” and “dialogue” play an impotant role in the everyday life of Tehrani youth. We ask how much the youth are aware and interested in experiencing these terms within their daily lives. Based on our evaluation we can now conclude wether or not participation in youth gatherings and discussions has resulted in the acquisition of a more free and autonomous identity.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • everyday life
  • Dialogue
  • everyday opportunities
  • daily
  • shock(Gr. Erlebnis)
  • Normalization
  • indifference
  • Alienation
  • resistance
  • the other
  • speech
  • Individual Identity
  • life-style
  • everyday experience