Résumés
Abstract
This article recovers a principle central to Simmel’s sociology yet largely overlooked: the quantitative, or numerical, determination of social forms. Read as the basis for a genuine sociogenesis, this principle first lets us unsettle the dichotomous typologies on which classical sociology was founded, replacing fixed historical types with a continuous, threshold-sensitive scale that governs both the differentiation of individuals and the normative order that binds them. Pursued to its own logical end, however, this same principle requires a further descent, from three to two to one, that challenges an influential recent reading of Simmel – Gilbert’s claim that the dyad forms sociology’s minimal unit – and locates the group’s least common denominator in the individual as such, apart from the legacies of individualization and individualism.
Keywords:
- Sociogenesis,
- Quantitative determination,
- Mediation,
- Individualization and Individualism
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- Burrell J., and M. Fourcade (2021). “The Society of Algorithms”, in: Annual Review of Sociology, 47, pp. 213-237.10.1146/annurev-soc-090820-020800 Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Couldry N., Fotopoulou A., and L. Dickens (2016). “Real social analytics: A contribution towards a phenomenology of a digital world”, in: The British Journal of Sociology, 67(1), pp. 118-137.10.1111/1468-4446.12183 Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Durkheim É. [1893] (1960). The Division of Labor in Society. Illinois: The free Press of Glencoe.Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Durkheim É. [1895] (1982). The Rules of Sociological Method. New York: Free Press.10.1007/978-1-349-16939-9 Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Elias N. [1987] (2010). The Society of Individuals. Dublin: University College Dublin Press.Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Elias N. [1991] (1993). Mozart: Portrait of a Genius. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Fitzi G. (2019). The Challenge of Modernity. Simmel’s Sociological Theory. London & New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315270937 Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Gilbert M. (2009). “Walking Together: A Paradigmatic Social Phenomenon”, in: Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 15(1), pp. 1-14.10.1111/j.1475-4975.1990.tb00202.x Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Ginzburg C. [1976] (1980). The Cheese and the Worms. The Cosmos of a Sixteenth-Century Miller. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Kaufmann L. (2025a). “‘The Strength of the Bond’: From Grammar to Phenomenology and Back Again”, in Vandenberghe F. and C. Papilloud (Ed.) New Directions in Relational Sociology, Volume 1. Relations All the Way Up. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 201-231.10.1007/978-3-031-93941-9_10 Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Kaufmann L. (2025b). “Discovering Society, Inventing Sociology: Sieyès and the Revolutionary Origins of the Sciences of Society”, in Sociological Theory, 43(2), pp. 157-183.10.1177/07352751251332274 Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Kneubühler M. (2023). “The Loss of Singular Existence and Personal Experience. The Problem of Interchangeability in the Social Sciences”, in: Wardle H., Rapport N and A. Piette (Ed.) The Routledge International Handbook of Existential Human Science. London & New York: Routledge, pp. 244-254.10.4324/9781003156697-28 Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Kneubühler M. and A. Piette (2019). “Following and Analyzing a Human Being: On the Continuity and Singularity of an Individual”, in: F. Cooren and F. Malbois (Ed.) Methodological and ontological principles of observation and analysis. New York: Routledge, pp. 13-43.10.4324/9781315201610-2 Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Müller H.-P. (2018). “How Is Individuality Possible? Georg Simmel’s Philosophy and Sociology of Individualism”, in: Simmel Studies, 22(1), pp. 15-43.
10.7202/1051006ar
Google Scholar
Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Simmel G. (1890). Über sociale Differenzierung: Soziologische und psychologische Untersuchungen. Leipzig: Duncker und Humblot.10.3790/978-3-428-57712-5 Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Simmel G. [1894-1908] (2009). Sociology. Inquiries into the Construction of Social Forms. Leiden & Boston: Brill.10.1163/ej.9789004173217.i-698 Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Tönnies F. [1887] (1957). Community and Society. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar
- Vandenberghe F. [1997] (2009). A Philosophical History of German Sociology. London & New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203888490 Google Scholar Rechercher cette référence bibliographique sur Google Scholar