Born in Hungaryhe moved to Germany to study philosophy and sociology, with a particular emphasis on the roots of culture.
He attended school in that city and then studied at the universities of Berlin, Budapest, Paris, and Freiburg before going to the University of Heidelberg, where he habilitated as a Privatdozent in At that time Heidelberg was still the major intellectual center of the German academic world.
Mannheim lived and worked in Heidelberg until he was called to the professorship of sociology at the University of Frankfurt in He remained at that post until the spring ofwhen, following the coming to power of the National Socialists, he took refuge in Great Britain.
There he was lecturer in sociology at the University of London London School of Economics from to ; and from until his death, he was professor of the sociology and philosophy of education in the Institute of Education at the same university.
In the first phase the sociology of knowledge—its methodological legitimation, its epistemological implications, and its substantive application—formed his main field of work. In the second phase the study of the structure of modern society came to the fore.
In these latter studies he combined macrosociological and microsociological concerns with an explicit interest in social policy. They were attempts to revise its epistemology in an instrumentalist direction and constituted a critique of its conception of intellectual history as an autonomously developing sequence of ideas.
In this first phase of his work Mannheim was much influenced by the tradition of historicism and by the Marxist model of society; no less fundamental to his thought was his interest, derived from the classics of German sociological thought and from Marxism, in the structure and determinants of agreement and disagreement, of consensus and dissensus.
Mannheim went further than Marx and Tonnies: Mannheim saw social cleavages not merely as divergences of interest but as divergences of modes of thought, of the categories in which events are conceived, and even, indeed, of the very criteria of validity.
He was always concerned with the re-establishment of consensus: This essay represents an effort to legitimate a mode of understanding intellectual works as manifestations, expressions, or parts of something else. He regarded the Weltanschauung of an individual, school, or epoch as the nonrational matrix from which every particular work was an emanation.
Thus, the problem with which Mannheim was concerned was the subsumption of a particular work under the pattern of other works like it and of the style of the Weltanschauung as a whole.
Each particular intellectual work was treated—and accounted for—as related to or derived from something else. Although Mannheim first applied this conception to art historyits implications for the next stage of his thought were patent.
The question may be asked, Did he really succeed, in this first phase of his work, in freeing himself from the ideological interpretation he tried to transcend?
His work became sociological through scattered assertions that particular views are correlated with particular value orientations, characteristic of particular roles or statuses—for example, membership in particular social classes or the practice of particular occupations or styles of life.
In this period he attempted fewer correlations with social structural variables than with the culture or value orientations of classes or occupational strata.
Nonetheless, the specification of the social group which possesses a particular culture or Weltanschauung did represent a genuinely sociological extension of the ideological approach, rather than its replacement or negation.
The sociological variables Mannheim used in this phase of his career were largely derived from Marxism, e. The correlations were at best no more than correlations. Mannheim avoided the task of causal imputation and of a differentiated analysis of the process or mechanism through which ideas and social position are connected.
It was a contradiction which he did not overcome and of which he was unaware.Franz Adler, "Essays on the Sociology of Culture. Karl Mannheim, Ernest Manheim, Paul Kecskemeti," American Journal of Sociology 62, no.
5 (Mar., ): Mannheim’s sociology of knowledge sought to outline a method for the study of ideas as functions of social involvements. Once the image of an autonomous evolution of ideas was abandoned it was feasible to explore the relationship between thought and .
Mannheim, Karl. Sociology of knowledge. The structure of modern society. Mannheim’s influence. WORKS BY MANNHEIM.
SUPPLEMENTARY BIBLIOGRAPHY. Karl Mannheim (–), German sociologist, was born in Budapest. He attended school in that city and then studied at the universities of Berlin, Budapest, Paris, and Freiburg before going to the University of Heidelberg, where he habilitated .
EMBED (for vetconnexx.com hosted blogs and vetconnexx.com item tags)Pages: Essays on the sociology of culture. Karl Mannheim. Routledge & Paul, - Social Science - pages.
0 Reviews. From inside the book. What people are saying - Write a review.
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places. Contents. General Sociology 3 Sociology of Culture. Karl Mannheim was one of the leading sociologists of the twentieth century. Essays on the Sociology of Culture, originally published in , was one of his most important vetconnexx.com it he sets out his ideas of intellectuals as producers of culture and explores the possibilities of a democratization of vetconnexx.com: Karl Mannheim.