Norbert Elias and the philosophical controversy surrounding the nature of time

Abstract

What is time? What is its nature? Is time something natural or cultural? Is it the property of knowing objects or the property of knowing subjects? How has time been conceived, defined, and characterized throughout history by philosophical and scientific thinking? What are the theoretical obstacles that have historically prevented a better understanding of time? Why does that concept still remain so mysterious and enigmatic these days? In the search for the answers to these and other questions, this article explores the concept of time of one of the greatest and most influential sociologists of the 20th century-the German Norbert Elias (1897-1990)-whose sociological theory has been of great value to the debate on the problems of contemporary society. In recent decades, his reflections on time that guided by a holistic and procedural perspective have caused a spreading impact, becoming compulsory reading for anyone wanting to study the topic. By questioning and critical analysis of the bases on which Elias' concepts of time are founded, this article aims to instigate and contribute to a debate founded on the nature of time. KeywordsNorbert Elias, philosophical controversy between objectivism and subjectivism, objective and subjective times, physical and social times Time & Society 0(0) 1-21 ! The Author(s) 2015 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

Mulheres De Vida Fácil? Tempo, Prazer E Sofrimento No Trabalho De Prostitutas

“…Prostitution has also been approached as "dirty work," that is, as something that carries stigma (Blithe & Wolfe, 2017) and forces its practitioners to make decisions every day at a frantic pace (Lainez, 2019) and abnegate their personal life at present to save it for the future. This, in turn, implies harmful psychic dislocations for individuals (Blithe & Wolfe, 2017) and relates to the differences in temporal perception (Carvalho, 2018;Güell & Yopo, 2016), directly connecting the central themes of this study to a broader research agenda.…”

“…Empirical studies in social sciences commonly focus on the objective measurement of time, conceiving it as a natural, preexisting, and objective resource, represented by clocks and calendars and whose meaning is reduced to its quantification (Güell & Yopo, 2016). This perspective relegates the fact that despite being a social construction (Berger & Luckmann, 2004;Elias, 1998), time is also individual, heterogeneous, and subjective and results from the overlapping and interdependence between nature, society, and individuals (Carvalho, 2018).…”

“Trabalho sujo”, significado, sentido e identidade: proposição de análise integrada e perspectivas de pesquisas

“…Corroborando estes achados, Paiva et al (2020) ressaltam que as questões temporais, por vezes, ampliam-se à medida que aprofundam as ambiguidades implícitas no trabalho de sujeitos que carregam sobre si os estigmas; assim, as consequências sobre estes se estendem para além do tempo dedicado ao trabalho, desnudando outras facetas referentes ao sofrimento ao longo deste, que têm sido desconsideradas nos estudos organizacionais. Algumas classes de "trabalhadores sujos", como é o caso das prostitutas, sob uma lógica do capital em que o tempo é dinheiro, são submetidas a um ritmo frenético de trabalho (Lainez, 2019) que induz à negação da vida pessoal no tempo presente para reservá-la a um futuro menos "manchado", implicando deslocamentos psíquicos danosos aos indivíduos (Blithe & Wolfe, 2017) em virtude de questões relacionadas a percepções temporais distintas (Carvalho, 2018;Güell & Yopo, 2016).…”

It is about time: Birthdays as modern rites of temporality

“…This line of investigation is not intended as an intervention in the epistemological discussion of time as a natural versus social category. Some theoreticians, like Bergson, Durkheim, and Elias argue—albeit from differing points of view—that time, as a category, is produced by humans alone, while others disagreed (e.g., Bastian et al, 2020; Carvalho, 2018; Gell, 1992: 3–15). As far as we are concerned here, the objectification and conventionalization of time can be explained as a process of “timing,” influencing the dimension of time itself, as proposed by Elias (1992); and as “temporalization of experienced life,” that is, merely a discursive process, as maintained by Koselleck (2002: 168), and also posited by Blumenberg (1983: 462–473) and Latour (1993: 10, 68–69).…”