Abstract
On the basis of his conception of anthropology, Kondylis, in comparison with Gehlen’s model, expands and completes the meaning and function of institutions for society in several important areas. According to the Kondylis’ conception, the individual transfers his or her quest for power into the service of the social organism. Thereby institutions, which are considered objective, are responsible for the necessary social discipline. They work as long as the economy and the mode of production, in other words, the living conditions of organised society, remain the same. However, if there are changes in this respect, institutions also change, or their interpretation changes. Unlike Gehlen’s conception, Kondylis’ theory of institutions has more explicative potential. The former cannot explain the reasons why institutions undergo change or even cease to exist altogether. The article uses a very interesting source, namely Kondylis’ surviving system of note cards, which constitute the still unpublished part of his scientific heritage.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
