The article is devoted to the development of Polish sociology from the 19th century until the period of the Second Republic, when sociology became an established academic field. The first Polish sociologists studied sociology at various European universities, but later worked in different professions i.e., Supinski was an owner of a textile weaving shop, Krupinski was a priest and a teacher, while Limanowski, Świetochowski and Krzywicki worked as journalists. Their sociological interest was secondary to their professional life. What is interesting is that they first joined European sociological institutions as members of the Institut international de sociologie (The International Institute of Sociology), gave papers at international Sociological congresses and only much later spoke at Polish conferences. They published in „Annee sociologique” and „Revue international de sociologie.” At times they also taught at different European universities, for example Gumplowicz taught at the University of Grazu and Petrazycki in the St. Petersurg University. The first sociology programs were established in Poland after it regained its independence: in 1920 Leon Petrazycki was appointed chair of sociology at the University of Warsaw and Ludwik Krzywicki was appointed chair of a program called the history of socio-political systems. Sociology was treated then as an auxiliary academic field for the study of law. Sociology as an autonomous field was first created in Poznan and its main inspirer was Florian Znaniecki. Not until the second decade of the Second Republic was sociology established as a separate department at the universities in Kraków and Warsaw. At the wake of the WWII sociology was a well established academic field in Poland with its own programs of study, research intstitutes, scholarly journals and a professional association of practitioners.
While considering the anthropological and sociological aspects of development of the historic city of Zamość , it is necessary to mention the elements of its residents’ life that brought intellectual values in the cultural space of the city entered in 1992 into the List of World Cultural Heritage. The paper has recalled a unique meeting place of the Zamość intelligentsia in the years 1957–2003 – the Ratuszowa café. It was located in the very heart of the city, in the Zamość Town Hall. The paper proves that it was not only a place of careless entertainment but of creative debate and work. It has also evoked memories of the “café life” and regular visitors to coffeehouses in Lviv, Krakow and Warsaw
In the 21th century we can observe a return to Marx, particularly in the circles of New Left. A critical approach to the legacy of Karl Marx implies a readiness to revise or even reject the false or no longer valid propositions of Marx in order to be able to confront his legacy with the current state of contemporary science. Some of his views have already been definitely rejected (particularly the theory of revolution and of the dictatorship of proletariat). But a part of his contribution remains valid: (1) the philosophy of praxis, i.e. a theory oriented toward a social change, and (2) the sociological theory that interprets politics in terms of class interests.
Inspired by the Chicago School sociology and anthropology of Mary Douglas authors of the article show the special cultural status of new urban peripheries in comparison to villages, old urban peripheries and city centers. Critically they relate to the thesis that new urban peripheries are “cultural deserts” or “bedroom/dormitory suburbs”, considering them as a form of collective organization or sustained activity patterns that replace an original kind of culture. According to Mary Douglas villages are characterized by low level of social energy and high degree of collective control, and the city centers are characterized by high level of energy and low collective control. Referring to this classification the authors of the paper claim that new urban peripheries are characterized by both low energy and low collective control. A more detailed characterization of a new urban periphery is presented in the article on the basis of materials collected in several qualitative sociological research projects. In the light of the empirical material, it can be revealed that in new urban peripheries direct forms of collective control have been replaced by social non-interference, development of individualistic self-control and privatization of micro-spaces of living and transporting. It was noted that the intensive development of individualized outdoor activity leads to gradual formation of the new body type of a new urban periphery resident.