IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rnp/wpaper/061806.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Analysis of Actual Discussions in the Theory of Action and Practices: Skeptical vs Anti-Skeptic Trends in Conceptualization
[Анализ Актуальных Дискуссий В Теории Действия И Практик: Скептицистские Vs Антискептицистские Направления Концептуализации]

Author

Listed:
  • Vakhshtayn, Victor (Вахштайн, Виктор)

    (Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA))

  • Klowait, Nils (Кловайт, Нильс)

    (Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA))

Abstract

In this paper we analyze the problem of the social action and its Wittgenstein re-definition. These questions are of fundamental importance to the social theory because they allow us to redefine the basic concept underlying a significant part of the sociological conceptualizations: that is the concept of social action. In the framework of this paper, we propose to consider the skeptical paradox originally formulated by S. Kripke, as applied to modern theories of action. We propose its solutions, based on the ethnomethodological reading of the paradox, which allows us to redefine the subjective subject matter underlying most theoretical approaches to action.

Suggested Citation

  • Vakhshtayn, Victor (Вахштайн, Виктор) & Klowait, Nils (Кловайт, Нильс), 2018. "Analysis of Actual Discussions in the Theory of Action and Practices: Skeptical vs Anti-Skeptic Trends in Conceptualization [Анализ Актуальных Дискуссий В Теории Действия И Практик: Скептицистские ," Working Papers 061806, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.
    • Handle: RePEc:rnp:wpaper:061806
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec.ranepa.ru/rnp/wpaper/061806.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rnp:wpaper:061806. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: RANEPA maintainer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aneeeru.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.