The Vicious Circle of Metaculture: Challenges in the Study of Living Culture

🇵🇱 Polski
The Vicious Circle of Metaculture: Challenges in the Study of Living Culture

The Vicious Cycle of Metaculture: The Paralysis of the Social Sciences

Studying dynamic social processes is like trying to catch a river with a sieve. Contemporary science has fallen into the vicious cycle of metaculture: a lack of adequate data hampers the development of theory, while anachronistic concepts prevent the recognition of new phenomena. Consequently, the researcher of "living culture"—the sphere of practices that have not yet solidified within institutions—operates with categories that deform the subject of their work. This article analyzes why we must abandon rigid statistical frameworks in favor of a methodology based on participation and dynamics.

Public Statistics and the Fetishization of Data: A Dead Image of Culture

From the perspective of Statistics Poland, culture is reduced to budgets, building counts, and attendance figures. This is a dead image of a living culture, akin to studying fossils instead of living organisms. Such an approach leads to data fetishization—the dogmatic belief that what cannot be counted simply does not exist. Zygmunt Bauman described this phenomenon as the primacy of quantity over quality.

The problem is exacerbated by the colonization of the lifeworld by the system. As Jürgen Habermas noted, bureaucratic logic displaces spontaneous communication, flattening the complexity of human actions. Research institutions, constrained by bounded rationality, opt for the simplest

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the vicious circle of metaculture?
It is a self-perpetuating system in which the lack of adequate data and concepts hinders the development of methodologies, which in turn prevents the detection and description of new cultural phenomena.
Why do public statistics not reflect the state of living culture?
Traditional statistics reduce culture to measurable indicators such as the number of institutions or budgets, ignoring dynamic creative processes that are not yet institutionalized.
What is the fetishization of data in social research?
This is a dogmatic belief that every phenomenon can and should be reduced to numbers, which leads to the rejection of valuable phenomena that cannot be easily counted.
How does emergence theory change the approach to the analysis of culture?
It allows researchers to accept that qualitatively new forms are emerging in culture, which require the creation of a new conceptual framework instead of using old classifications.
What is the infosphere in the context of information ontology?
It is a vision of the world as an all-encompassing space of information structures, where information is the basic building block of reality, and not just a tool for description.

Related Questions

Tags: the vicious circle of metaculture living culture data fetishization creative industries structuration theory autopoiesis emergence information ontology infosphere transduction infraculture everyday practices the paradox of modernity public statistics autopoietic systems