“Analytical construct. The Culture as construct and the constitution of the social – fallowing Max Weber”. The key of this paper is the chalange to determinate theplace of the cultural sociology in the context of the general sociology and of the other cultural sciences, like cultural anthropology and ethnology. For doing that it is necessary to analize Max Weber’s concept: Gedankenbild.

'What is the sufficient reason for the inalienable dignity of man?' If man has an inalienable dignity, there has to be an ontologically sufficient reason for the inalienable dignity of man. We find this ontologically sufficient reason for the inalienable dignity of man in the ontological being and essence of man, according to our thesis. We argue that the human being is a 'person in a body.' To be a person is an objective inestimable value, it is the objective value par excellence. We are persons from the beginning (conception), because it is not possible to become 'someone.' We argue that the intrinsic preciousness of being a person is the ontologically sufficient reason for the inalienable dignity of man. We do not want to separate values from beings; the inalienable dignity of the human person is the heart of his being and essence. Therefore we should speak more often of man, insofar as he is inestimably precious.

This paper brings in discussion some key moments in semiotic field in the process of modern reconstruction of logic and of philosophy of language. We arefollowing the construction of logical semiotic (from Frege to Carnap and 'semantic of the possible worlds') and the central position of the concept 'possible worlds' in the interpretation process, which creates a meta-semantic. This concept is essential to understand 'the worlds from the poetic space'.

Expulsion of senses. Acustic spaces: call and listening in interpretive sociology. Following the 'mental constructs' that are illustrative for Max Weber's Idealtypologie, the 'acustic spaces' in the cultural concept of education are developed. The study is an analysis of the organization of command and obedience in Weber's sociology of domination. His interpretive sociology is taken from Martin Heidegger. Another subject of the paper is an excursion into the sociology of music of Weber and Adorno. In the acoustic sounds of music, especially in the organ and piano works, we find the process of rationalization of the Western culture.

The paper tries first to show that P. Strawson’s and J. Searle’s proposal of explicating the illocutionary meaning of speech-acts (or corresponding explicit sentences) in terms of the conditions of fulfilment or satisfaction (with regard to the underlying intentional states of mind) is unsatisfactory. It provides no full understanding of the meaning of speech-acts, at least not of non-constative acts, as e.g. orders, requests, demands, confessions, promisses, etc.; for, through its quasi-verificationist horizon, it provides no unterstanding of the illocutionary force in terms of the conditions of accepting the validity-claims that are connected with the performance of the act. Thus far the paper complies with Habermas’ approach. There remains however an ambiguity with regard to the good reasons for accepting a speech-act, since on the level of life-world communication and interaction not only validity-claims and pertinent arguments but also threats and offers are functioning as socially binding illocutionary forces (thus e.g. not only in coercions like "hands up" but in all kinds of negotiations and bargainings). How is it possible to show by a cogent argument that openly strategical acts as offers and threats cannot fulfill the role of providing good reasons for accepting speech-acts in the sense of unrestricted Verständigung (i.e. communicative understanding and coming to agreement) but are parasitic upon non-strategical ways of consensual communication by understanding and accepting validity-claims?The paper argues that this suggestive contention cannot be proved, i.e. grounded by a descriptive analysis of the normal function of communicative actions in the life-world but only - indeed - by transcendental pragmatic reflection on the normative conditions of argumentative discourse which cannot be denied without committing a performative self-contradiction.

This paper takes up again Grice’s Basic Model (GBM) for analysing communicative acts. We draw attention to a ’new’ fault in GBM, i.e. a fault not yet noticed in the literature: Grice’s deflniens for CA (= communicative attempt) is not only too weak (as it is not satisfying the reflexivity-condition according to which any CA implies the speaker’s intention of CA’s being understood by the hearer); it is also too strong - and just for the same reason.

The domain of pragmatics is to arrange in the architectonic of competences. Competences are to discriminate on the base of distinction between rule-following behaviour and action-rules. This can be understood as a critic of L. Wittgensteins conception of following a rule. The Frankfurter version of speechacttheory has argued - following partial K Bühler - that three fundamental properties (functions) of language can be identified: the representation of state of affaires, the generation of interpersonal relationship and the expression of intentional make happen someone (Erlebnisse). Further dimensions and explications for concerning this properties shall be elaborated. Steps to constructive pragmatics can be gone.

How operates communication with pictures? S. Kjörup has elaborated - follow up the analysis of pictorial symbolization in N. Goodman’s "languages of art" - a speechacttheory of picturing The problem of this approach is that Kjörup has no answer of pictorial fiction.

The relationship between reflection and language has become of main interest, not only in the area of philosophy. How is reflection by means of language on language possible?Firstly I want to discuss the possibility of linguistic reflexivity within the late philosophy of L. Wittgenstein.The next step will be a critical analysis of G. Frey's "linguistic theory of reflection". This will be followed by an outline of the importance of reflection in context of the speechacttheory (J.L. Austin, J.R. Searle).Finally I will analyse the problems around linguistic reflexivity within a discourse theoretical framework (J. Habermas, K-O. Apel).It will be questioned if the "discourse" would have to be understood as the linguistic equivalent to "reflection" . Then I will be looking at the relationship between discourse and metacommunication. The analysis will end in the attempt of a typology of discoursive-reflexive predicats.

Semantic implicatures are features for understanding the use of sentences. The status of this implementations of meaning is a quasi-logical relation as a "weak implication". They are determinated through types of lexical units and expressions in grammatical positions. But both are only necessary conditions for semantic implicatures. Further assumption for meaningful use of sentences are presupposed e.g. existence presuppositions, evidences, customs etc. So, the delimination to pragmatic (presuppositions) is indicated.

In their book 'Foundation of illocutionary logic' the authors attempt to formalize the theory of speech acts. In set theoretical terms they describe their basic notions of illocutionary forces and points, define new ’illocutionary' symbols and operations and formulate some axioms and postulates, which should explicitly describe their theory, but their creativity of introducing new functional symbols and connectives conjoint with an unsystematic representation opposes this purpose.

In the contemporary research on cooperation we find mathematical, game-, moral-theoretical, experimental and ethological investigations. These approaches are individualistic in principle. Raimo Tuomela introduces a correction of the conceptualization of the standard game theory because this proposal lacks an account of collective commitments and acting for a reason, we need for explaining many cases. The essay sketches Tuomela’s proposal with regard to his new turn of analyzing cooperation. A substantial problem in social theory emerges from this framework understanding the social. The questtion is whether there is something like a basic consensus in social systems or a normative notion of collective commitments. This leads us to a re-interpretation of the function of social norms, I will sketch.

At first place the article should serve as clarification of the term "lifeworld" ("Lebenswelt) by means of selected lifeworld-conceptions of 20th. century philosophy.I would like to explikate the attempts of reflexive reference to lifeworld which exist in the concept of Husserl, Heidegger, Wittgenstein and Searle. According to the explanations of Husserl and Heidegger my main interest lies in the problematic of validity. The relation between lifeworld and reflection shall be dealt with in the light of the philosophy of language (Wittgenstein, Searle).At least I would like to discuss the relation between tifeword and science.

The world of daily life - taken as a product of cultural beings living in a certain state of knowledge -is in the philosophical reflexion not primary of interest as a field of scientific research. Life-world - constituted in itself by knowledge - provides an occasion to discuss the pretensions of social and philosophical sciences. This paper tries to outline some possibilities to see the relations between knowledge of different levels as a means to advance the understanding of the role of daily life and scientific knowledge.

This paper argues that Niklas Luhmann's theory of modem society's differentiation into autopoietically operating subsystems is widely accepted on false grounds. Modem society's empirical differentiation into relatively autonomous subsystems is falsely taken as the empirical point of reference for Luhmann's theory. Luhmann, his advocates and his critics; however; conflate analytical differentiation with empirical differentiation which occurs on a basis completely opposite to autopoiesis. Empirical differentiation consists of the permanent production and reproduction of codes and programs for economic, political, legal or other types of action by societal struggles which include elements of cultural legitimation, legal regulation, political enforcement and economic calculation. Such codes and programs are not evolutionary universals but historically particular institutions. Secondary conservative and critical interests support Luhmann's theory because they take it as a reflection of what they want either to preserve or to change, as the case many be.

The paper presents an outline of the systemtheory of Niklas Luhmann. The foci here are the basic conceptual decisions of his approach, the relationship between systems-, media- and theory of social evolution on the one hand and the status of systemrationality and the rationalization of lifeworld on the other. One aspect of Luhmann's theorizing will be discussed critically, namly the status of relationship between structure and process of the social integration in terms of norms which regulate the interaction process.

Public Opinion in the United States of America can rightfully be described as an important part of everyday life. It is shaped by different structural constraints as well as through social interaction. In order to relate public Opinion and political Culture it is therefore necesary to begin with methodological presuppositions. In this article a qualitative macro-sociological approach is put foreward instead of methodological individualism. It is argued that it is possible to delineate elements of the political culture within the realm of public opinion from a cultural standpoint.American political culture is used here to illuminate some traits of public opinion: Republicanism, the Liberal Tradition, Populism, Civil Religion and a specific brand of american Can-do-Philosophy.Vied form this perspective political culture as well as public opinion in the United States provide a system of complex world views which might best be interpreted through the schema approach known form cognition psychology. Criticism form communitarians as well as from multiculturalists against a supposedly closed system of every-day has to therefore be rejected.

The individual disciplines of the social sciences appear to be divided as if they were concerned with different objects but they are united through many of the questions which they are asked to answer. Although the individual disciplines were about to be institutionally separated at the time of the historical school major proponents of the historical method like Schmoller were still able to combine the different approaches in a unified framework The psychology of individuals establishes a link between social behaviour and economic interests. The intuuitive method allows to understand analogies between different manifestations of the lifestyle in a nation. There have to be coherent ethical norms for individual behaviour; social integration and economic cooperation. The article describes how Schmoller came to treat ethics as a unifying principle of sociological and economic research, starting from observations on the unifying power of culture in Germany in the classical period. Lessons are drawn for modern interdisciplinary research by examining examples of topical research projects.