The key mechanisms for integrating scientific knowledge with the aid of sociology


2020, Vol. 4. № 1 (11)

The key mechanisms for integrating scientific knowledge with the aid of sociology

For citation: Korosteleva O. T. 2020. ‘The key mechanisms for integrating scientific knowledge with the aid of sociology’. Siberian Socium, vol. 4, no. 1 (11), pp. 23-32. DOI: 10.21684/2587-8484-2020-4-1-23-32

About the author:

Olga T. Korosteleva, Dr. Sci. (Soc.), Associate Professor, Department of General Sociology, Altai State University (Barnaul, Russian Federation);


This article analyzes various mechanisms for integrating scientific knowledge with the aid of sociology. The author aims to show the integrative potential of sociological science, the correlation of subject and methodology in the processes of scientific synthesis, the significance of metaparadigmal dialogue and synthesis for the formation of an integral system of socio-humanitarian knowledge. The main research methods include the analysis of real integration processes involving sociology, as well as the comparison of various mechanisms and results of scientific integration. The results show that the main mechanisms of integrative interaction of sociology with social sciences and humanities are the formation of industry-specific sociologies (e. g., economic and political sociology) and sociological paradigms. Special attention is paid to the inclusion of sociology in the processes of scientific synthesis, which involve interaction with complex areas of knowledge, the structural elements of which are natural science, social sciences, humanities, and technical components, as well as the elements that go beyond the actual scientific knowledge. Ecology and anthropology are considered as examples of such synthetic fields of knowledge. The author shows that in the process of forming social ecology (with the participation of sociological science), its complex character (subject-methodological “Trinity”) becomes more pronounced. The most significant and methodologically interesting aspect of the interaction between sociology and social anthropology (as a section of anthropology — a comprehensive study of man) can be considered the combination of their efforts to create an optimal model of theoretical humanitarian knowledge. The main conclusion, which has a certain degree of novelty, is the position that sociology, being included in various mechanisms of integration of scientific knowledge, contributes not only to the meaningful convergence of social sciences and humanities, but also to their adequate, deeper theoretical, and methodological self-determination.


  1. Grigoryeva L. I. 2012. ‘Nature as the active beginning that awakens the human being in man’. European Social Science Journal, no. 3 (19), pp. 44-50. [In Russian]

  2. Deleuze G. 1998. ‘Plato and the Simulacrum’. In: Intensity and Textuality, pp. 225-240. Tomsk: Vodoley. [In Russian]

  3. Simmel G. 1996. ‘Social differentiation. Sociological and psychological research’. In: Selected works. Vol. 2. Contemplation of Life, pp. 301-465. Moscow. [In Russian]

  4. Davydov Yu. N. (ed.). 1998. History of Theoretical Sociology. Sociology of 19th Century (Professionalization of Social and Scientific Knowledge). Moscow: Izdatelstvo Magistr. 448 pp. [In Russian]

  5. Karpinskaya R. S., Liseev I. K., Ogurtsov A. P. 1995. Philosophy of Nature: A Co-evolutionary Strategy. Moscow: Interpraks. 352 pp. [In Russian]

  6. Korobkin V. I., Peredelskiy L.V. 2015. Ecology. Rostov-on-Don: Feniks. 601 pp. [In Russian]

  7. Korosteleva O. T. 2016. ‘Sociology and social anthropology: an interdisciplinary dialogue on the relationship between naturalistic and humanitarian methodology’. Sociology in the Modern World: Science, Education, Creativity, vol. 1, no. 8, pp. 10-18. Accesssed 11 March 2020. [In Russian]

  8. Lévi-Strauss C. 2000. Mythologiques. Vol. 3: The Origin of Table Manners. Saint Petersburg. 416 pp. [In Russian]

  9. Mironenko A. A. 2016. ‘Ecological culture of the population of Togliatti city district’. In: Kolesnikova O. N., Popov E. A. (ed.). Sociology in Contemporary World: Science, Education, Creativity. Vol. 1, pp. 92-93. Barnaul: Izdatelstvo Altaiskogo universiteta. [In Russian]

  10. Nikolaev V. 2001. ‘Comparative Sociology’. In: Radcliffe-Brown A. R. Method in Social Anthropology, pp. 297-390. Moscow: KANON-press-Ts, Kuchkovo pole. [In Russian]

  11. Popov E. A. 2015. ‘Specificity of interdisciplinarity in sociology’. In: Kolesnikova O. N., Popov E. A. (ed.). Sociology in Contemporary World: Science, Education, Creativity. Vol. 7, pp. 15-18. Barnaul: Izdatelstvo Altaiskogo universiteta. [In Russian]

  12. Prokhorov B. B. 2010. Students’ Textbook in Social Ecology. Moscow: Akademiya. 416 pp. [In Russian]

  13. Spenser G. 1999. ‘Classification of sciences’. In: Experiments in Science, Politics, and Philosophy, pp. 549-592. Minsk: Sovremennyy literator. [In Russian]

  14. Stepin V. S., Gorokhov V. T., Rozov M. A. 1995. Philosophy of Science and Technology. Moscow: Kontakt-Alfa. 384 pp. [In Russian]

  15. Eliade M. 2002. Initiation, rites, sociétés secrètes. Moscow: Gelios. 352 pp. [In Russian]

  16. Yudin B. G. 1981. ‘Methodological and socio-cultural certainty of scientific knowledge’. In: Ideals and norms of scientific research, pp. 120-158. Minsk. [In Russian]