IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/mpifgd/067.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Einladung zum Schattenboxen: Die Soziologie und die moderne Biologie

Author

Listed:
  • Mayntz, Renate

Abstract

Die moderne Biologie, speziell Genetik und Neurobiologie, scheinen die handlungstheoretische Basis der Soziologie in Frage zu stellen. Widerlegen ihre neuesten Ergebnisse tatsächlich Axiome, deren Fortfall das soziologische Theoriegebäude einstürzen ließe? Diese Axiome beziehen sich auf unser Menschenbild. Diesem Menschenbild zufolge hat der im Prozess primärer und sekundärer Sozialisation geprägte Akteur soziokulturell geformte Präferenzen, die sein Handeln leiten. Er ist offen für seine Umwelt und reproduziert in seinem Handeln kulturell vorgegebene Muster. Die moderne Genetik scheint das Verhältnis zwischen Natur und Umwelt, nature and nurture in der Bestimmung des menschlichen Handelns zugunsten der Natur zu verschieben. Bei genauerer Betrachtung bestätigt sich jedoch, dass der handelnde Mensch der Soziologie ganz überwiegend ein Produkt der Sozialisation in eine historisch geformte Gesellschaft hinein ist. Die Genetik definiert lediglich die äußerste Grenze soziokultureller Formbarkeit. Die Hirnforschung stellt den autonomen Akteur in Frage und macht Bewusstsein zum Epiphänomen organisch-neurologischer Prozesse. Für die Soziologie ist der freie Wille jedoch niemals notwendiges handlungstheoretisches Axiom gewesen. Nicht ob Menschen bewusst handeln, sondern nach welchen - bewussten oder unbewussten - Regeln sie es tun, ist soziologisch relevant. Dabei hat die Hirnforschung selbst festgestellt, dass die ins erwachsene Gehirn einprogrammierten Reaktionstendenzen nicht genetisch determiniert sind, sondern in Interaktion mit der Umwelt "gelernt" oder zumindest verstärkt oder gehemmt werden. Die nachgewiesene Plastizität des Gehirns bannt die Gefahr des neurologischen Determinismus. Auch inhaltlich stellen die neu entdeckten, neurophysiologisch verankerten Reaktionstendenzen die von Soziologen benutzte Handlungstheorie nicht in Frage. Die Soziologie braucht und benutzt lediglich ein stilisiertes Modell des Menschen: Der homo sociologicus ist ein höchst selektives Konstrukt. Das intellektuelle Schattenboxen mit der modernen Biologie fördert keinen Widerspruch zu fundamentalen soziologischen Axiomen zutage.

Suggested Citation

  • Mayntz, Renate, 2006. "Einladung zum Schattenboxen: Die Soziologie und die moderne Biologie," MPIfG Discussion Paper 06/7, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgd:067
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/19935/1/dp06-7.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:ags:afjare:141665 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Fehr, Ernst & Fischbacher, Urs & Kosfeld, Michael, 2005. "Neuroeconomic Foundations of Trust and Social Preferences," IZA Discussion Papers 1641, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Robert H. Bates & Avner Greif & Margaret Levi & Jean-Laurent, 1998. "Analytic Narratives," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 6355.
    4. Norman Frohlich & Joe Oppenheimer, 2006. "Skating on Thin Ice," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 18(3), pages 235-266, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Georgy Egorov & Konstantin Sonin, 2011. "Dictators And Their Viziers: Endogenizing The Loyalty–Competence Trade‐Off," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(5), pages 903-930, October.
    2. Sonin, Konstantin & Egorov, Georgy, 2005. "The Killing Game: Reputation and Knowledge in Non-Democratic Succession," CEPR Discussion Papers 5092, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Zachary Liscow, 2012. "Why fight secession? Evidence of economic motivations from the American Civil War," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 37-54, October.
    4. Cullis, John & Jones, Philip & Soliman, Amal, 2012. "‘Spite effects’ in tax evasion experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 418-423.
    5. Broadberry, Stephen & Ghosal, Sayantan & Proto, Eugenio, 2011. "Is Anonymity the Missing Link Between Commercial and Industrial Revolution?," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 974, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    6. Pablo Bandeira, 2009. "Instituciones y desarrollo económico. Un marco conceptual," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 11(20), pages 355-373, January-J.
    7. Ashima Goyal, 2005. "Incentives from exchange rate regimes in an institutional context," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2005-002, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
    8. Claus Dierksmeier, 2020. "From Jensen to Jensen: Mechanistic Management Education or Humanistic Management Learning?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 73-87, September.
    9. Mongin, Philippe, 2007. "Une étude d'histoire militaire instruite par la Théorie des jeux et quelques amplifications Méthodologiques," HEC Research Papers Series 866, HEC Paris.
    10. Uwe Jirjahn & Vanessa Lange, 2015. "Reciprocity and Workers’ Tastes for Representation," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 188-209, June.
    11. Woll, Cornelia, 2005. "Learning to Act on World Trade: Preference Formation of Large Firms in the United States and the European Union," MPIfG Discussion Paper 05/1, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    12. Antoci, Angelo & Bonelli, Laura & Paglieri, Fabio & Reggiani, Tommaso & Sabatini, Fabio, 2019. "Civility and trust in social media," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 83-99.
    13. Philippe Bertheau & Gilles Garel, 2015. "Déterminer la valeur de l’innovation en train de se faire, c’est aussi et déjà innover," Post-Print hal-01187115, HAL.
    14. Egorov, Georgy & Sonin, Konstantin, 2015. "The killing game: A theory of non-democratic succession," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 398-411.
    15. repec:cte:werepe:we041905 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. James A. Robinson, 2006. "Equity, Institutions and the Development Process," Nordic Journal of Political Economy, Nordic Journal of Political Economy, vol. 32, pages 17-50.
    17. Sebastian Edwards, 2014. "Is Tanzania a Success Story? A Long-Term Analysis," NBER Chapters, in: African Successes, Volume I: Government and Institutions, pages 357-432, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Jean Cartier-Bresson, 2013. "Le pouvoir du positivisme et ses limites : microéconométrie et macroéconométrie actuelles du développement," Working Papers hal-00847005, HAL.
    19. Paolo Crosetto & Alexia Gaudeul & Gerhard Riener, 2012. "Partnerships, Imperfect Monitoring and Outside Options: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Jena Economics Research Papers 2012-052, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    20. Stergios Skaperdas, 2006. "Bargaining Versus Fighting," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(6), pages 657-676.
    21. Fudenberg, Drew & Pathak, Parag A., 2010. "Unobserved punishment supports cooperation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(1-2), pages 78-86, February.

    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:zbw:mpifgd:067. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mpigfde.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.