April 18, Thursday
10.30 – 11.00 Registration
11.00 – 13.00 Plenary session / main library hall
Professor Viktor Vahstayn Entanglement / Disentanglement: two implications of one conceptual opposition

Emeritus Professor David Byrne The Social Sciences – especially but not only Sociology – and Complexity Theory: A necessary engagement

Moderator Dr. Svetlana Bardina, MSSES, Scientific Advisor to the Conference
13.30 – 18.30 Soviet in the post-Soviet: between memory and history / room 514
Section Leaders: Tatyana Uskova (tanijioja@gmail.com), Egor Sokolov (sokolovgeorg@gmail.com)

History still too often turns out to be a "policy overturned into the past." The more important are the intellectual tools that make it possible to question thematic hierarchies, the ways of describing and explaining, especially when it comes to subjects that are chronologically close and politically significant for us. Memory studies based on the thesis of Maurice Halbvaks about the social nature of memory, its role in maintaining group identity, are one such tool. Not only because they provide an opportunity to revise the linear temporality of the "positivist" history, but also because, forcing to take into account many different perspectives, they allow to question the foundations of their own research position, to "objectify the subject of objectification". How is it possible to write Soviet history during the "war of memory"? How do Soviet institutions (political or academic) still determine our ability to comprehend them? How is the memory of the Soviet used in post-Soviet societies for the formation of collective identity, the legitimation of the political order, the justification of territorial claims or cultural policy? We invite you to take part in a rich discussion!

Maria Maiofis, Associate Professor, School of Cultural Studies, Faculty of Humanities, HSE

Dmitry Verhovtsev Invisible flourishing of the ethnos theory
Egor Sokolov Soviet philosophy in the collective memory of the philosophical community
Arina Tsareva Stalin in Russian collective memory: image construction
Alexey Safronov Automated Planning Estimates System (APES) in the shadow of
Nationwide Automated Data Processing and Control System (NADPCS): why the popular narrative of the soviet managment system prefer the dream to the real archievments?
Alexander Andriichuk Serve as object vs. serve to the object: transformation of the memory of public good in the postsocialist railway city
Julia Sekushina "The no rotten people": The Problem of Recycling in Modern Patriotic Guidance
Julia Svisheva History as an Basis of the Political Language of Vladislav Surkov
Darya Khohlova, Nikita Khohlov Soviet Union did not fall: Post-Truth and Utopie in Russian Popular Music
13.30 – 19.00 To live or to believe: religion outside and within social interactions / room 511-513
Section Leaders: Kirill Markin (markink20@gmail.com), Alexander Kalgin (akalgin@edu.hse.ru)

The modern society is often referred to as secular. It is often assumed that the levels of religiosity and development are negatively correlated. Is this actually the case? Is modern scientism, propagated as self-evident commons sense, just one of the many forms of world religion? Is secularization a result of the religious war lost by old world religions? From this point of view, the object of the sociology of religion is now not just marginal area of society designated as religion, but the whole of society. This perspective links us with the classical period of sociology that recognized the fundamental nature of religiosity for all aspects of social life.

In this section we invite researchers to discuss the shifting role of religion in modern society and theoretical perspectives of the sociology of religion.

Ivan Zabaev
, Associate Professor, Head of the Sociology of Religion Scientific Laboratory, PSTU
Dmitry Uzlaner, Director, Center for the Study of Religions, RANEPA
Alexander Filippov, Professor, Head of the Laboratory of the Center for Fundamental Sociology, National Research University Higher School of Economics (Moscow)

13.30 – 19.00 Authorities and celebrities: leadership and social action in a depoliticized society / room 508
Section Leader: Vasily Kostyrko (vasilij.kostyrko@mail.ru)

The Russian media of the mid-tenths and modern Russian society are a vivid illustration of the modern global demand for depoliticization. In a society that got tired of reforms, a special system of values and a picture of the world has been established: political activists (people who join the political struggle to protect the common good and insist on civilian control over the actions of the authorities) and celebrities (media figures involved in the entertainment industry or just known only because they are known) unexpectedly acquire similar features in the public space. Both those and others appear before the general public, first of all, as immoral persons, troublemakers and heroes of scandals. The very idea of authority as a government without violence is called into question.

However, as historians and sociologists believe, the crisis in the public sphere generates a particularly acute need for authority. A society cannot exist without social action, which is often impossible without certain types of leadership and authority.

It can be assumed that in modern Russia these phenomena took a specific, deliberately depoliticized form, which requires the use of special scientific optics from the researcher. First of all, it is the theory of charisma and the theory of social action, starting with its classical version, formulated in the works of Max Weber, and ending with the latest and the newest, including microsociological, modifications in the works of Irwin Hoffmann and Jürgen Habermas.

On the section to discuss the following problems:
- similarities and differences between the figure of a celebrity and a political activist in modern Russia;
- types and potential of leadership and social action in traditional media and social networks;
- authority, leadership and social action at the grassroots or atomic level (local government, charity, communities of interest, protection of the environment and architectural monuments, etc.)
- authority and social action in acephalic communities.

Sociologists, political scientists, anthropologists are invited to participate.

Evgenia Vezhlyan
, Associate Professor, Department of Modern Russian Literature, RSUH
Alexander Markov, Professor, Cinema and Modern Art Department, RSUH
Elisabeth Schimpfossl, lecturer in sociology, University of Aston, author of the book "Rich Russians" (Birmingham)

18.00 – 20.00 Hybrid urbanism and urban reality: what challenges do urban researchers face in the digital age? / room 509
Section leaders: Anastasia Smirnova (responseon_free@mail.ru), Anastasia Salova (anastasiya.s.salova@gmail.com)

The intensification of the development of digital platforms and services that are being introduced into the physical environment and exploited by its resources leads to the formation of a hybrid, digital-physical reality. In urban fabrics, there are phenomena that form unstructured data of huge interconnected networks - the interval of online platforms in offline mode and other phenomena. The increase in diversity, complexity and speed of urban processes leads to significant changes in the subject area of urban planning. These changes provide an incentive for research (sociological and urban planning).

Together with the available research tools, the minimum amount of case studies using new methods for analyzing urban processes is not ensured by the effectiveness of research and project activities when interacting with the digital-physical reality of the city.

As part of the work of this section, it is proposed to discuss the specifics of the consequences of introducing digital technologies into the life of cities, their origin and development in the context of megacities.

Timur Chekasov, head of urbantekh of the Affinum company

Discussion Participants:
Ruslan Dokov
, R&D lead, Habidatum
Lelya Jvibris, Research Leader, Studio of Transportation Planning
Danyar Yusupov, Ledear, Department of the Urban Enviroment Development, design : : unit
19.30 – 22.00 Invitation to Ragnarok/ room 508
19.30 – 22.00 Contrathropology and ontological anarchy: presentation of STUDIES#1 / main library hall
19.30 – 22.00 Soviet Science Studies / room 511-513
Moderator: Yegor Sokolov (sokolovgeorg@gmail.com)

Discussion of the history of Soviet science in the second half of the 20th century using a wide range of historical and social data, in the logic of a critical approach (Pierre Bourdieu, Fritz Ringer, Victor Carady), with particular attention to the complex interweaving of biographical, social, and political conditions for the production of scientific knowledge.

Alexander Dmitriev, Leading Researcher, Institute of Humanitarian Historical and Theoretical Research named after A. Poletayev (IGITI) HSE.
Galina Zvereva, Head of the Department of History and Theory of Culture, RSUH.
Yury Pushchaev, Researcher, Faculty of Philosophy, MSU
APRIL 19, Friday
10.30 – 15.00 The Right to the City: Practices and Strategies for Assignment / room 514
Section leaders: Anastasia Salova (anastasiya.s.salova@gmail.com), Olga Mostinskaya (omostinskaya@gmail.com)
12.00 – 16.30 The interaction of art and social sciences: from conceptualizations to research / room 511-513
Section Leader: Alexey Voronkov (alexeyvoronkov62@gmail.com)

Social sciences and art have a long history of productive collaboration. On the one hand, art not only always had its own answers to the question of what its specificity is but also provided these answers by the social scientist himself. The latter, in turn, found mechanisms based on research optics, rather characteristic of artists and writers. At the same time, in the process of finding new ways of self-description, post-war art has opened its conceptual and/or social character. The content and forms of art have changed in many ways under the influence of various philosophical and social theories, starting with neo-Marxism and ending with object-oriented ontology. The clear boundary between social scientists and artists has been deconstructed on both sides. However, despite the fact that art and social theory find in each other sources of inspiration on a conceptual level, so far this connection has not led to serious consequences for their practices - neither for research nor for art or curatorial ones. The processes of creating and presenting works of art and conducting research are largely predetermined by discussions within closed professional communities.

What theoretical points of view can be useful to justify the transition of cooperation between producers of artistic and scientific objects from conceptual to practical level?
Why art may not be interesting to social scientists as just another subject of study?
What trends in contemporary art and art criticism theories are interested in empirical studies of their actors and viewers?
What examples of such cooperations already exist?

This section invites representatives of both the research and artistic communities who have experience in the implementation of such interaction or are interested in reflecting on the possibilities for their convergence to participate.

Nikolai Ssorin-Chaikov
, Professor, HSE (St. Petersburg)
Sarah Wilson, Professor, Courtauld Institute of Art (London)

11.00 – 16.00 Another Space: Utopias and Practicies / room 509
Section Leader: Denis Sivkov ION RANEPA (d.y.sivkov@gmail.com)

Space exploration is an area in which the modern narrative of colonization, of a single humanity and a masculine frontier, exposed in all other areas of the Earth, feels very confident. Utopias of the space race and the salvation of Earth civilization still determine attempts to represent and conquer outer space. Is another space possible at the intersection of imaginary and material practices? The section assumes an interdisciplinary and interplanetary conversation about (re)assambling in science fiction, philosophy and social sciences.

Key speakers:
Alexander Vetushinsky
, philosopher, MSU
Arseny Zhilyaev, artist
Artem Zubov, Literary Criticist, Moscow State University
Evgeny Kuchinov, philosopher, Minin University
Alexey Sukhanov, anthropologist, TSU
Leonid Yuldashev, sociologist, coordinator of the Internet and Society Club
13.45 – 16.45 "The boundaries of my language mean the boundaries of my world": the languages of international relations between academia and politics/ room 508
Section leaders: Alexander Budisenko (kakshantaram@gmail.com)

"There is no escape from theory; any empirical research or practical analysis is based on theory. Pragmatic politicians believe that theoretical debates deserve about as much of their attention as medieval scholastic disputes about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Meanwhile, the pen of an intellectual leaves a deep imprint in the minds of politicians [...] they, without even realizing it, become captives of ideas born of a "university scribble" a few years earlier, "this biting, and very poisonous phrase, dropped almost forty years ago, Robert Keohane, then a young researcher, and today - one of the most cited political scientists in the world. This phrase vividly outlines the special position taken by the political researcher. Intellectuals produce languages that are later used in the media and in private meetings by other participants in international relations: journalists, politicians, representatives of the state apparatus. The degree of use of these languages allowed Keohain to point out the dependence of participants on them - and in the modern world this judgment is just as it was in the second half of the twentieth century.

At the same time, the language used by politicians allows not only to describe phenomena, but also, perceiving them within its framework, to take very specific decisions in the international arena. Thus, tangible processes ranging from the most neutral agreements to major international catastrophes, depend on how the language is constructed. At this point, the intellectual is involved in international politics and, at the same time, begins to be accountable to the international community, as well as to those who are excluded from making a political decision.

This section will be devoted to a discussion of the role and responsibility of an intellectual in international relations. Within its framework, issues such as:

1. Is it possible to be a strictly academic intellectual when researching international politics?
2. Is a political scientist, the theorist in particular, responsible for the languages of the description of the world that he produces?
3. What languages have been created to describe and explain international politics in recent decades?
4. Are new "big debates" possible today, like those that shook international politics several decades earlier?

This is only a small part of the questions that will be addressed in the section. Students, political scientists, researchers of international relations are invited to participate in the section.

Stanislav Kozheurov
, Head of the World Politics Program, Faculty of Political Sciences, MSSES
15.00 – 17.00 Happy but separate: is it possible the political life without coomunity? / main library hall
17.30 – 19.00 Evening Plenary Session / main library hall
Professor Nikolay Ssorin-Chaikov Rethinking performativity in the anthropology of science and art: the ethnographic conceptualism method

Professor Sarah Wilson From Courbet to Conceptualism: 'realisms', interdisciplinarity and political practice

Moderator Alexay Voronkov, MA of Sociology
19.00 – 21.00 Sociodramaturgy of the relationships: partners across the life / room 514
Leader: Roman Zolotovitsky, Moreno Institute
APRIL 20, Saturday
11.00 – 16.30 Alternative video game worlds: at the intersection of reality and virtual space / room 512b
Section Leader: Lyudmila Pashkovskaya (liudmilapashkovskaya@gmail.com), Ksenia Krotova (ks.krotova.msu@gmail.com)

The virtual world often intersects with the real world, forming new, hybrid forms of reality at the intersection. The problem of multiplicity of realities, studied by Alfred Schütz, leads to the question of the semantic structure of the worlds of their interpenetration. In this section, we will try to understand how the virtual and real worlds interact. Neither the players nor the experts who study video games can not give a clear answer to this question today. The interpenetration of video games and the real world is closely connected with the study of hidden meanings. The message put into the game by the developers, as well as the way the players interpret it and apply it in reality, determines the intersection of the game world and the real world.
The ambiguity of the interaction of the virtual world and the real world leaves a wide field for research. This, in turn, justifies the importance of various areas related to its study. Video game research, in particular game studies, is a developing area that implies a certain dialogue between sciences, including sociology. The main task of game studies is to develop a unified theoretical framework for studying video games. In connection with this, research on the study of various aspects of virtual worlds, as well as their intersection with reality, is of particular importance. A number of questions arise that are closely related to the interpenetration of two worlds. The main ones are how the two worlds interact and what is virtual reality.

This section invites students to participate in a dialogue on the interpenetration of the real world and the virtual world.

Hans-Joachim Backe, Associate Professor of Digital Design, Computer Games Research Center, IT University of Copenhagen (Copenhagen)

Hans-Joachim Backe.
Alina Latypova / The agency creating in the computer games with the AI technologies
Maxim Podvaliniy / The work, symbolic appropriation and property of the gamer in the single user videogames.
Hans-Joachim Backe / The coherence of incoherence. Game-specific modes of allusion
Alexander Lenkevich/ Reality as epiphenomenon of the computer games
Julia Avgustus, Artem Reiniuk, Alexander Shirokov / Professional point of view: the use of the IT-tracker for the action analysis in the videogames
Ksenya Mayorova/ Physical and imagined spaces of videogames: musical simulations in the VR age
Alexander Vetushinsky/The basic game forms on the bothe sides of the screen
11.00 – 18.00 On the other side of the body and mechanism: objects, systems, souls, rhythms, organs/ main library hall
Section Leaders: Eugene Kuchinov (pph.pop.philosophy@gmail.com), Armen Aramyan (aaaresearchgroup@gmail.com)

What is a technical object from the perspective of organism? A prosthesis? A projection of an organ? External memory? What is an organism from the perspective of the technical object? A model or a material? A master or a slave? Question concerning technology gets involved in the oscillatory motion of thought from organism to mechanism (and back). It inevitably places us in the interval, which is occupied by the process of re-defining / re-inventing both organism and mechanism. Here question concerning technology becomes a question concerning life, and vice versa. History and contemporary features of this interval will constitute the thematic frame of an interdisciplinary session 'Beyond organism and mechanism'. From Organoprojection, Organicism and Organology - to machine-oriented ontologies, cosmotechincs and digital materialism (and back). We invite philosophers, anthropologists and sociologists of technologies, as well as researchers in sci-fi and utopianism, programmers and engineers, inventors and hackers to participate in our session.

Preliminary list of topics:
  1. Soul of a technical object;
  2. Machinic animism;
  3. Rhythms of technical life;
  4. Technics as organ(on), organism, (self?)organization;
  5. Decolonization of technical imagination (cosmotechnics);
  6. Technics beyond human;
  7. Contingency of laws of nature and technical systems;
  8. Prometheus: pro et contra;
  9. Technical fabulations in science and extro-science fiction
  10. Technical utopia etc.
The Expert of the section:
Yuk Hui,
Visiting Associate Professor at the School of Creative Media of City University in Hong Kong

Pavel Odincov. An organism as an object, a mechanism as an assemblage? (Moscow).
Nikita Safonov. Autonomous concepts between knowledge and thinking: the genealogy of new sound production (St. Petersburg).
Martin Pogacar. Fish cans and the Adriatic: nodal mnemotechnical objects (Ljubljana).
Anastasiya Gacheva. Technics and organic in the philosophy of cosmism and Russian poetry of the late 1910s - early 1920s (Moscow).
Elena Bolotnova. Extro-science technics and ways to consider it (Nizhny Novgorod).
Yroslav Mihaylov. Computation as Сontrolled Deduction (Moscow).
Eugene Kuchinov. Transfer of indetermination: to the question concerning animatechnics (Nizhny Novgorod).
12.00 – 17.30 Philosophical Realism and the Social Sciences: the question of mathematization / room 511-513
Section Leader: Valerii Shevchenko (valerii.s.shevchenko@gmail.com)

The philosophy of the Social Sciences has been traditionally concerned with various epistemological issues, ranging from structure/agency problem to the perspectives of mathematical formulations of theories. Many of these topics are connected to the question of objective knowledge, which is invariant to conceptual resources used to formulate it. The realist study of the social phenomena is primarily dependent on the philosophical reflection of the real and the ways of accessing its referent, which may entail radically different theoretical implications.

In particular, Quentin Meillassoux's speculative materialism claims mathematical formalization to be the only way to access the "in-itself" of the phenomena studied. Considering sociology, this means formalizing theory itself and not just using mathematical methods to process the data and draw conclusions from it. This implies the possibility of social theory evolving along the path similar to that of the natural sciences.

Secondly, Manuel DeLanda's "flat" social ontology does not require mathematical formalization as the necessary condition of accessing the "in-itself" of the social world. Instead, it introduces an assemblage as a basic ontological unit, describes its characteristics and the rules of interactions with other assemblages. By doing this it partially follows the natural sciences path.

Finally, Roy Bhaskar's critical realism as the most elaborated philosophy of social science in this list defines the real as a set of mechanisms generating causal laws, which form the social world. All of the philosophical conceptions described above illustrate the need for choice which social theory is facing today. It involves the discussions of the objectivity as a possible cornerstone of the further development of the discipline.

Therefore, the conference section will be devoted to discussing main epistemological concerns of the realist-oriented social theory, the questions of its mathematical formalization, and also the epistemological issues of computational social science.

Speakers and experts:
David Byrne
, Professor Emeritus, Durham University, author of "Complexity Theory and Social Sciences"
Daria Maltseva, Ph.D., deputy head of the laboratory, ANR-Lab, HSE

Valerii Shevchenko
What kind of realism social theory needs?
David ByrneWhat are we measuring when we measure? The necessity of thinking about dynamic traces in complex realist terms.
Philip Haynes Exploring case differences in complex social systems: Dynamic Pattern Synthesis (by skype)
Petr Strokin Pragmatist agent-based modeling for social and cultural studies
Darya Maltseva Social Network Analysis: Brotherhood Without Banners
Daniil Haitovich Realist social ontology of J. Searle: the problem of representation
Maria ErofeevaWhen philosophy goes practical: the discussion about realism in IS research
Roman Matvienko Sociology after Speculative Turn: sociological implications of the denial of correlationism in Meillassouxian philosophy
Phedor Syrnikov Criticism and speculative realism - to the issue of divorce
10.00 – 10.50 Reality of the client/ family and reality of the counseling: what will win? / room 514
11.00 – 13.30 Art-Therapy and Psycological Readiness for the Changes / room 514, workshop
11.00 – 13.30 Psycology and Economic Behaviour / room 519
14.30 – 19.45 Conference «Narrative answers in difficult life situations». Pre-Conference Seminars / room 514
18.00 - 21.30 Сlose of conference and drinks reception/ room 511/513
Travel and accommodation expenses are covered by the conference participants. At the request of the participant, the conference organizing committee can assist in finding and booking a hotel in Moscow. At the request of the participant, the organizing committee may send an official invitation to the conference for presentation at the place of study or work.
How to come?
Gazetniy line., 5/3 bld. 1, Moscow

Metro stations:

Okhotny Ryad (Red line) - Teatrelnaya (Green line) - Ploshad Revotutsii (Deep Blue line)
Biblioteka imeni Lenina (Red line)
Arbatskaya (Deep Blue line)

Moscow Higher School of Social and Economic Sciences (Russian-British Magistracy in Sociology, Psychology, History, Law, International Politics, Management of Socio-Cultural Projects, Urbanism, Media Management)

Contact information of the organizing committee

Phone: 8-985- 136-35-40 (Nata Volkova)
E-mail: vectors@universitas.ru

Сайт подготовлен Наталией Яблонской, в оформлении использована авторская графика.
Made on