Chris Wickham: A review of Alex Callinicos, Making History: Agency, Structure, and Change in Social Theory. This is an important book [Leiden: Brill, ]. Making History: Agency, Structure, and Change in Social Theory. By Alex Callinicos. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, p. $ – Volume 84 Issue. Making History is about the question – central to social theory – of and a wide range of historical writing, Alex Callinicos seeks to avoid two.
|Published (Last):||5 August 2018|
|PDF File Size:||4.2 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||5.68 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Chapter 5 analyses the rationality of revolution.
Chapter 3 Reasons and Interests 3. Parisa Nasrabadi rated it liked it Feb 25, Even setting out the arguments of the book is going to be a fairly abstract task. This republication gives a new generation of readers access to an important intervention in Marxism and makiing theory.
Nevertheless there are passages of theoretical brilliance here, including a takedown of methodological individualism that I’m sure I will return to. The only way to solve this sort of problem is by establishing complex models that contain dynamic but also open-ended elements, and this is what Callinicos allows us to do. Thanks for telling us aex the problem. Callinicos is hostile to that tradition, and has written against it elsewhere, but it would need more attention than he gives it here and did already in This is the other chapter I particularly liked, and, as noted earlier, anyone could start here.
Receive exclusive offers and updates from Oxford Academic. DFT rated it really liked it Apr makint, Brill, ], though cllinicos an easy one. Refresh and try again.
Open Preview See a Problem? Terms and Conditions Privacy Statement. Callinicos is here trying, perhaps above all, to defend the proposition that one can understand the objective interests of human agents including collectivities of agentsand counterpose those to their empirically demonstrable wants.
While some of these thinkers may be unknown to the reader, others, like Foucault are oft-quoted and rarely understood. Other books in the series.
Sign In or Create an Account. Paul rated it it was amazing Jul 22, Jeff Vass rated it really liked it Jul 15, Seleno rated it it was amazing Jan 01, Books by Alex Callinicos.
But it would take more space than I have to go further on these points. Mehdi rated it really liked it Apr 30, The basic concepts of historical materialism 2.
Making History – Agency, Structure, and Change in Social Theory
Charity, truth and community 3. Librarian administrators click here. Close mobile search navigation Article navigation. Newer Post Older Post Home. Making History is about the question – central to social theory – of how human agents draw their powers from the social structures they are involved in.
Sometimes I felt that I was going though an unusually fast course in contemporary philosophy. Preview — Making History by Alex Callinicos. Falsehood and ideology, I 4.
Making History: Agency, Structure, and Change in Social Theory
Hardcoverpages. Finally, he wants to argue that human agency is not the sole element that is worth studying in social action—that structures cannot be reduced to a set of individual intentions. He is always interesting.
Charlie Burton rated it really liked it Sep 02, He establishes his points very effectively in both arguments: I liked callinicso result a lot. Benjamin and Sartre 5. Practical reason and social structures Chapter 2 Structure and Action 2.
You could not be signed in. How the mighty have fallen. Warren Evans rated it it was amazing Jul 11, Nation, state and military power 4.
Posted by Resolute Reader at The rationality of revolution 5. Want to Read saving…. This is the start of an attack on one of the major targets of the book, the methodological individualism of Max Weber and, most recently, of rational-choice Marxists, who argue precisely this last point.
Chapter 3 is the most technical, while chapters 4 and 5 are probably the place to start if you want to get a sense of where Dallinicos is going, as they are less philosophical.