Although Parsons encountered the works of both Simmel and Weber during his stay at Heidelberg in the late 1920s, his appropriation of the two became increasingly asymmetrical, issuing in a lifelong devotion to Weber and a pronounced disavowal of Simmel around the time Parsons published The Structure of Social Action. This reaction deprived Parsons of the substantial support he could have found in Simmel's work for his effort to counteract `utilitarian' theories of action. Simmel not only went beyond Parsons in (...) revealing a number of perspectives that demonstrate the permeation of action by moral orientations, but he counteracted economistic thinking along a number of other dimensions. These include: showing the limits of cost-benefit calculations in social exchange; presenting strong theoretical arguments against the assumption of hedonism; presenting strong theoretical arguments against the assumption of egoism. (shrink)

While much attention has been paid to the various strains of modernity’s development from its emphasis on instrumental rationality to its construction of the advent-guard, what I want to do here is examine the intersection of modernity, affectation, and acceleration. This essay contends nostalgia ameliorates identity disruption from social acceleration in late modernity. Existential threats evoke nostalgia, reconstituting familiar “homeworlds” and enabling experiential normalcy. Subjects recoup weak role-identification and unstable archetypes – byproducts of pluralisation, entrepreneurialism, and insecuritization – through nostalgia. (...) As compensatory, nostalgia proffers refuge; yet precipitating consumption, it incarnates cultural dialectics. This essay argues that the prevalence of nostalgia in late modern societies is the result of social acceleration, but the nostalgia born of this acceleration is also a spiritual palliative for its destabilising effects. (shrink)