This book comprises a systematic analysis of Karl Marx’s reasoning on ownership. Marx as the author of an original theory of ownership is yet to be discovered. The creator of a theory which was to interpret social reality is quite a different thinker from the creator of a doctrine which was to alter the world. In designing communist society, Marx ignored the threats which social property bears, despite having skillfully identified them in investigations of diverse pre-capitalistic forms of common ownership. The author seeks to break through one-sided interpretations which discern in Marx a decisive critique of private property and an apologia of common ownership. It becomes apparent that Marx treated both the processes of socialization and privatization of ownership with equal consideration.

This book seeks to analyse the categorial structure of sociological theory. The analysis is based on three assumptions: first, sociological theory is in a state of structural crisis; second, one of the symptoms of the crisis is the existence of many theoretical dichotomies which hinder the unification of sociological knowledge; and third, sociology of knowledge may analyse the causes of sociological theory’s structural crisis. Drawing on Foucault’s work, the author defines the source of theoretical crisis as an anthropological paradox: the involvement of man in a dialectic of being created and defined by what is objective while, at the same time, transcending this condition into the subjective. This study argues that insights found in works by Luhmann, Latour, Collins, Shapin, and others provide a chance for a formulation of a theoretical language for sociology that escapes the anthropological paradox.

The aim of the book is to outline and discuss a way of thinking about the limits of juristic power. In terms of research methodology, the authors’ approach entails relating the topography of such limits to selected theoretical frameworks developed within the Polish sociological tradition. The argument draws, above all, on the works of Leon Petrażycki, Jerzy Lande, Bronisław Wróblewski, Adam Podgórecki, Florian Znaniecki, Jacek Szmatka, and Piotr Sztompka. Striving to have each aspect shed light on the other, the authors seek out theoretical arguments which support their account of these limits. They present their model of the limits of juristic power, which includes the following constitutive factors: 1) politico-legal culture, 2) legal texts, 3) juristic culture, and 4) subjective factors (i.e. an individual, axiological sense rooted in ethical and aesthetic judgments)

Social and human sciences are currently in a special position. On the one hand, they are subject to frequent doubts and mistrust while on the other hand, there is a view that the 21st century will be a century of social and human sciences, addressing their importance in solving key cultural and social issues of humanity. In general, however, we can observe a decreasing interest in human and social sciences. The authors of the book believe that the rejection of the importance of human sciences is based on a fundamental misconception of facts. Society's education and culture is a prerequisite for the economic level of each country. Innovation is not only a matter of technical importance; it is equally important to understand human cultural behaviour in the broadest possible context. This book presents studies in selected topics from social, human and historical sciences that demonstrate the relevance of the research in the area under consideration. The contributors to this book are researchers in the departments of Archaeology, Ethnology and Folklore, History, Culture and Tourism Management of Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra.

This book comprises a systematic analysis of Karl Marx’s reasoning on ownership. Marx as the author of an original theory of ownership is yet to be discovered. The creator of a theory which was to interpret social reality is quite a different thinker from the creator of a doctrine which was to alter the world. In designing communist society, Marx ignored the threats which social property bears, despite having skillfully identified them in investigations of diverse pre-capitalistic forms of common ownership. The author seeks to break through one-sided interpretations which discern in Marx a decisive critique of private property and an apologia of common ownership. It becomes apparent that Marx treated both the processes of socialization and privatization of ownership with equal consideration.

This book seeks to analyse the categorial structure of sociological theory. The analysis is based on three assumptions: first, sociological theory is in a state of structural crisis; second, one of the symptoms of the crisis is the existence of many theoretical dichotomies which hinder the unification of sociological knowledge; and third, sociology of knowledge may analyse the causes of sociological theory’s structural crisis. Drawing on Foucault’s work, the author defines the source of theoretical crisis as an anthropological paradox: the involvement of man in a dialectic of being created and defined by what is objective while, at the same time, transcending this condition into the subjective. This study argues that insights found in works by Luhmann, Latour, Collins, Shapin, and others provide a chance for a formulation of a theoretical language for sociology that escapes the anthropological paradox.

The aim of the book is to outline and discuss a way of thinking about the limits of juristic power. In terms of research methodology, the authors’ approach entails relating the topography of such limits to selected theoretical frameworks developed within the Polish sociological tradition. The argument draws, above all, on the works of Leon Petrażycki, Jerzy Lande, Bronisław Wróblewski, Adam Podgórecki, Florian Znaniecki, Jacek Szmatka, and Piotr Sztompka. Striving to have each aspect shed light on the other, the authors seek out theoretical arguments which support their account of these limits. They present their model of the limits of juristic power, which includes the following constitutive factors: 1) politico-legal culture, 2) legal texts, 3) juristic culture, and 4) subjective factors (i.e. an individual, axiological sense rooted in ethical and aesthetic judgments)

Social and human sciences are currently in a special position. On the one hand, they are subject to frequent doubts and mistrust while on the other hand, there is a view that the 21st century will be a century of social and human sciences, addressing their importance in solving key cultural and social issues of humanity. In general, however, we can observe a decreasing interest in human and social sciences. The authors of the book believe that the rejection of the importance of human sciences is based on a fundamental misconception of facts. Society's education and culture is a prerequisite for the economic level of each country. Innovation is not only a matter of technical importance; it is equally important to understand human cultural behaviour in the broadest possible context. This book presents studies in selected topics from social, human and historical sciences that demonstrate the relevance of the research in the area under consideration. The contributors to this book are researchers in the departments of Archaeology, Ethnology and Folklore, History, Culture and Tourism Management of Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra.