The essence of caring for those in need of help consists in a certain relationality, in giving and receiving a certain relationship. The relationship as such is the protagonist of the care. Material help is always necessary, at least for the time it has to be dedicated. However, the material aspect takes on meaning from the relationship between the one who helps (caregiver) and the one who receives the help (care receiver). It is a lifeworld relationship. What is lacking in (...) today’s society is not so much material and technological resources, but rather the relational skills of welcoming, supporting and socially integrating people in difficulty. The care of the Other is increasingly entrusted to new technologies and impersonal welfare mechanisms, while interpersonal social relationships become increasingly weak, liquid and unavailable. The consequences are evident in the loss of social solidarity and in the degradation of the human condition. Situations of need due to fragility, hardship, marginalization are spreading. We need a social change, first of all cultural, which brings out, rather than concealing, the relational character of human needs and, correlatively, of the necessary response. (shrink)

In my view, we need a sociological analysis to show how the crisis stemmed from a certain set-up of the so-called global society. Such a set-up is the product of a long historical development, which goes beyond the financial crisis? outbreak in 2008. The question I ask is the following: from a sociological standpoint, why did this crisis break out? And what remedies can be put in place? The measures adopted these days cannot solve the crisis, but, for a number (...) of reasons, they can at most provide temporary stoppers and remedies. (shrink)

Toda investigación empírica muestra que el capital social es un factor esencial para producir y preservar los bienes públicos, pero las teorías difieren en cuanto al papel desempeñado por las relaciones sociales. Algunos piensan que los bienes públicos no necesitan redes sociales, mientras que otros argumentan que, sin redes sociales, el capital social no se crea y, por lo tanto, los bienes públicos no se valoran. El presente trabajo mantiene que la comparación entre estas teorías opuestas, o al menos divergentes, (...) solo se puede resolver demostrando si, o no, y bajo qué condiciones, las redes de relaciones sociales producen el valor social añadido (VSA) que se traduce en el capital social necesario para apoyar bienes públicos. Adoptando la perspectiva de la sociología relacional podemos ver y medir el valor social añadido de las relaciones sociales en redes primarias y secundarias, conduciendo a la emergencia de los bienes públicos.Although empirical research reveals that social capital is an essential factor to produce and preserve public assets, theories differ as to the role that social relations play. Some believe that public assets do not require social networks, while others argue that social capital without social networks cannot be created and, therefore, public assets are not valued. This paper mantains that a comparison between these opposing, or at least diverging, theories can only be made by demonstrating whether, and under what conditions, social relation networks produce social added value (SAV) or not, which becomes the social capital needed to support public assets. From the relational sociology perspective, we can see and measure the SAV of social relations in primary and secondary networks that lead to public assets emerging. (shrink)

The emergence of processes of globalization has gone hand in hand with a theoretical ?crisis? in sociology. According to an increasing number of scholars, ?global society? has transformed the ?social? to such an extent that classical sociological theory and that of the nineteenth century no longer seem adequate for conceptualizing not only the ?new society,? but (human) society as such. The very distinction between human and non-human society has gone lost. In this context, is it still possible to formulate a (...) ?theory of society? and what form should such a theory take? (shrink)

The paper deals with the theory of gesture from the point of view of relational sociology. On the one hand, the thesis of the ‘complete gesture’ developed by Giovanni Maddalena is appreciated as a significant step forward from classical pragmatism. On the other hand, since theories based essentially on phenomenology and semiotics are at risk of nominalism and constructivism, if we want to understand the gesture from a critical realistic perspective, we need to complement the theory of gesture with a (...) relational social ontology. This means that the theory of the gesture as action (unit act) must be placed within an ontological and epistemological framework, in which Peirce’s triangle is related to the latent value of the real as indicated by the sign. A relational alternative to Peirce's semiotic triangle is presented here with the aim of connecting the sign of the gesture to the underlying reality. (shrink)

This volume explores the potential of employing a relational paradigm for the purposes of interdisciplinary exchange. Bringing together scholars from the social sciences, philosophy and theology, it seeks to bridge the gap between subject areas by focusing on real phenomena.Although these phenomena are studied by different disciplines, the editors demonstrate that it is also possible to study them from a common relational perspective that connects the different languages, theories and perspectives which characterize each discipline, by going beyond their differences to (...) the core of reality itself. As an experimental collection that highlights the potential that exists for cross-disciplinary work, this volume will appeal to scholars across a range of field concerned with critical realist approaches to research, collaborative work across subjects and the manner in which disciplines can offer one another new insights. (shrink)

The advent of the digital era brings with it the dream of ‘transcending the human’ through the most sophisticated AI / robot technologies. The Author argues that the concept and practices of ‘transcendence’ are deeply ambiguous, since on the one hand they simply aim to overcome the weaknesses, limits and fragility of the human, while on the other hand they modify the human by selecting its specific qualities and its causal properties in a way to generate beings ‘other than human.’ (...) As a matter of fact, post / trans-humanist ideologies, instead of strengthening the human, lead to its dehumanization because they imply the denial of the characteristics that are uniquely human and / or those that constitute human nature. To understand when new digital technologies enhance the human or distort it, it is necessary to analyze and evaluate social processes on the basis of a relational vision that shows us which human relationships emerge from the use of technologies. (shrink)