How can sociology of morality exist? Mental dialogue with G.S. Batygin

This historical study examines an article by G.S. Batygin about sociology of morality, in which he proves its impossibility. The author sees the relevance and significance of the article in the fact that it has become a dividing milestone on the path from the “old” to the so-called “new sociology of morality”. The argumentation of G.S. Batygin is reconstructed, the main provisions and concepts of the article are critically analyzed. For comparison, the points of view on sociology of morality of other Russian authors are provided, who believe that this sociological discipline is not only possible, but actually exists. According to the author, the moral phenomena themselves are interpreted by G.S. Batygin not entirely correctly — only as reflected phenomena of consciousness — obviously because this corresponded to the requirements of the scientistic paradigm which he decided to adhere to in his article. Nevertheless, the author believes that within the framework of this paradigm, G.S. Batygin’s argumentation aimed at proving the impossibility of morality is irrefutable in notional and logical respects. But if it is proven that scientific sociology of morality is impossible, then the question arises whether it is possible in another paradigm and based on another way of cognition, namely philosophical? The path towards it was outlined by the pioneer of the sociology of morality, E. Durkheim, as noted by G.S. Batygin. The author considers M. Scheler’s “material ethics of values” and “sociology of knowledge” as examples of philosophical sociology of morality. In conclusion, he characterizes his own theoretical and methodological position, in light of which Batygin’s article is regarded as a morally significant act.

history of Russian sociology, G.S. Batygin, sociology of morality, “new sociology of morality”, social science, E. Durkheim, I. Kant, M. Scheler, phenomenology, scientism