Sociologia dell’Intimità e Teoria sistemica. La forma sociale dell’amore dalla solidarietà senza scelta alla solidarietà senza consenso

Generally men and women bind themselves driven by what they call love. Creative and identity renewing exaltation, revolutionary force which suddenly makes the insipidness of one’s life visible, love is a profound emotion. The transition from love to loving, from love as pure emotion to active love i...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	Rosalia Condorelli
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	DE EN ES FR IT
Publicado:	Firenze University Press 2021
Materias:	Intimacy Sociology Systemic Thinking complexity social codification of intimacy contemporary love Sociology (General) HM401-1281
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/195d847b3e4d466587500b709a1c360f
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:195d847b3e4d466587500b709a1c360f
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:195d847b3e4d466587500b709a1c360f2021-11-17T09:31:58ZSociologia dell’Intimità e Teoria sistemica. La forma sociale dell’amore dalla solidarietà senza scelta alla solidarietà senza consenso10.36253/smp-132302038-3150https://doaj.org/article/195d847b3e4d466587500b709a1c360f2021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://oajournals.fupress.net/index.php/smp/article/view/13230https://doaj.org/toc/2038-3150Generally men and women bind themselves driven by what they call love. Creative and identity renewing exaltation, revolutionary force which suddenly makes the insipidness of one’s life visible, love is a profound emotion. The transition from love to loving, from love as pure emotion to active love in relationship, marks the difference between lovers of yesterday and lovers of today, over time and societies, highlighting the social form of intimacy. What, then, is the “form” of contemporary love? Do the risks that characterize today’s intimate life mean that love has now become emptied of meaning, sucked into the semantic code of a ‘light’ and ‘inconsistent’ love, as Bauman seems to want? Or is there another interpretative possibility, on the line that runs from Luhmann to Giddens to Beck? Paradoxically, is it perhaps that love seems to have no meaning because it has ‘too much’ meaning? In the framework of the relationship between Systems Theory and Intimacy Sociology, the paper addresses these questions, revisiting to this purpose the morphogenesis of love in the transition from solidarity without choice to solidarity without sharing. Rosalia CondorelliFirenze University PressarticleIntimacy SociologySystemic Thinkingcomplexitysocial codification of intimacycontemporary loveSociology (General)HM401-1281DEENESFRITSocietàMutamentoPolitica: Rivista Italiana di Sociologia, Vol 12, Iss 24 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	DE EN ES FR IT
topic	Intimacy Sociology Systemic Thinking complexity social codification of intimacy contemporary love Sociology (General) HM401-1281
spellingShingle	Intimacy Sociology Systemic Thinking complexity social codification of intimacy contemporary love Sociology (General) HM401-1281 Rosalia Condorelli Sociologia dell’Intimità e Teoria sistemica. La forma sociale dell’amore dalla solidarietà senza scelta alla solidarietà senza consenso
description	Generally men and women bind themselves driven by what they call love. Creative and identity renewing exaltation, revolutionary force which suddenly makes the insipidness of one’s life visible, love is a profound emotion. The transition from love to loving, from love as pure emotion to active love in relationship, marks the difference between lovers of yesterday and lovers of today, over time and societies, highlighting the social form of intimacy. What, then, is the “form” of contemporary love? Do the risks that characterize today’s intimate life mean that love has now become emptied of meaning, sucked into the semantic code of a ‘light’ and ‘inconsistent’ love, as Bauman seems to want? Or is there another interpretative possibility, on the line that runs from Luhmann to Giddens to Beck? Paradoxically, is it perhaps that love seems to have no meaning because it has ‘too much’ meaning? In the framework of the relationship between Systems Theory and Intimacy Sociology, the paper addresses these questions, revisiting to this purpose the morphogenesis of love in the transition from solidarity without choice to solidarity without sharing.
format	article
author	Rosalia Condorelli
author_facet	Rosalia Condorelli
author_sort	Rosalia Condorelli
title	Sociologia dell’Intimità e Teoria sistemica. La forma sociale dell’amore dalla solidarietà senza scelta alla solidarietà senza consenso
title_short	Sociologia dell’Intimità e Teoria sistemica. La forma sociale dell’amore dalla solidarietà senza scelta alla solidarietà senza consenso
title_full	Sociologia dell’Intimità e Teoria sistemica. La forma sociale dell’amore dalla solidarietà senza scelta alla solidarietà senza consenso
title_fullStr	Sociologia dell’Intimità e Teoria sistemica. La forma sociale dell’amore dalla solidarietà senza scelta alla solidarietà senza consenso
title_full_unstemmed	Sociologia dell’Intimità e Teoria sistemica. La forma sociale dell’amore dalla solidarietà senza scelta alla solidarietà senza consenso
title_sort	sociologia dell’intimità e teoria sistemica. la forma sociale dell’amore dalla solidarietà senza scelta alla solidarietà senza consenso
publisher	Firenze University Press
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/195d847b3e4d466587500b709a1c360f
work_keys_str_mv	AT rosaliacondorelli sociologiadellintimitaeteoriasistemicalaformasocialedellamoredallasolidarietasenzasceltaallasolidarietasenzaconsenso
_version_	1718425593398165504

Sociologia dell’Intimità e Teoria sistemica. La forma sociale dell’amore dalla solidarietà senza scelta alla solidarietà senza consenso

Ejemplares similares