The society of singularities

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Rolling Stones concert, Knebworth House 1976
A cruise ship in Venice
Eames ' plastic chair

The society of singularities. The title of a book by the German sociologist Andreas Reckwitz published in 2017 by Suhrkamp Verlag is on the structural change of modernity . The rights to translate the book into English, French, Chinese, Korean, Turkish and Danish have been granted to foreign publishers by Suhrkamp Verlag.

The central thesis of this analysis of late modern societies since the 1970s is that, in contrast to classical modernity, it is no longer primarily characterized by a social logic of the general, but by the systematic creation of uniqueness and singularities.

Structure and content

The analysis of contemporary society takes place in addition to the introduction ("The explosion of the particular") and conclusion ("The crisis of the general?") In six chapters, with chapters II to VI each focusing on individual subject areas (economy, the world of work, digitization, lifestyle and the field of the political).

The explosion of something special

In the introduction, Reckwitz begins with a panorama of phenomena in which uniqueness has a formative effect in contemporary society: This applies not only to individuals , things, places or events but also to collectives : projects and collaborations in the world of work, political subcultures , diaspora communities as well as fundamentalist communities. According to Reckwitz, these subvert universal rules and standardized procedures and instead cultivate their own worlds with their own identity (10). The striving for uniqueness and exceptionality is not just a subjective wish, but a paradoxical social expectation (9). Behind this is a fundamental structural change in modernity that goes beyond the phenomenon of individualization : the guiding 'social logic' shifts from expectations of the general to expectations of the particular. Linked to this, the level of culture and its valuation of the valuable (the singular) are given an important role: the 'society of singularities' is a 'valorisation society'. The economic factor of the rise of cultural capitalism, the digital revolution, and the rise of the university-educated new middle class are introduced as drivers of singularization. Reckwitz emphasizes that the processes of singularization explain both the achievements of late modernism and its problems, especially in the form of social polarizations ( social inequality , cultural conflicts). He therefore turns against both uncritical praise and "blanket, culture-critical condemnation" (23) of late modernism.

Cape. I: The modern age between the social logic of the general and the particular

Reckwitz assumes that in modern society two opposing systems of evaluation of the social, two "social logics" of the social, compete with each other: a social logic of the general and a social logic of the particular.

To define modernity, Reckwitz first starts with the concept of formal rationalization , but defines it praxeologically : Modernity is characterized by four interconnected practices that are oriented towards doing generality (28f.):

  • Observation Practices
  • Assessment Practices
  • Practices of Creation
  • Practices of Appropriation

Rationalization as a praxeologically modified process term can now be related to both the macro and the micro level; formal rationality as a superordinate structural feature of modern society thus appears itself as the result of a process in which all elements of the social (Reckwitz differentiates between subjects , objects , Temporalities, spaces and collectives ) »always newly 'made' rationally« (33), i. H. generalized, standardized, and formalized to ensure predictability and efficiency.

In late modernity , i.e. since the 1970s and 80s, according to Reckwitz, a social structural change can be observed, which consists in the fact that the social logic of the general with its practices of social rationalization and objectification, which culminated in industrial ›organized modernity‹ ( 1920 to 1970), loses its predominance due to the social logic of the particular. Although the logic of the general with its urge towards standardization and formal rationalization does not disappear in late modernity either, its status and form change: it becomes a background structure for the social fabrication of competitive singularities. The logic of singularization, "which is at the same time one of culturalization and intensification of affect," forms the structure of society as a whole (103). Reckwitz introduces a value-oriented concept of culture , which he distinguishes from a general, broader concept of culture. Culture in the strong, value-oriented sense is found wherever value is ascribed in social practice, beyond usefulness and functionality (79). The sphere of culture is accordingly one of valorization and depreciation (75ff.).

The term singularization used by Reckwitz is explicitly influenced by the economic sociology of Lucien Karpik and the cultural anthropology of Igor Kopytoff . It refers to the philosophical-sociological explanation of a relationship between the general (concept) and the particular (perception), as discussed by Immanuel Kant in Critique of Judgment . The term can be defined negatively as » non-generalizability , non-interchangeability and non-comparability « (51). Singularities are to be distinguished from "specimens [n] of the general-particular" (ibid.), That is, versions or variants of a general order, as well as idiosyncrasies which, in their peculiarity, move outside the social (49). Rather, "we are dealing with entities that are perceived and valued, fabricated and treated as special within social practices" (51) and are characterized in their internal structure by intrinsic complexity and inner density (52). Singularities are not objective facts, but depend on practices of singularization: observation, evaluation, creation, appropriation. Things / objects, subjects, spatial units (places), temporal units (events) and collectives (communities etc.) are singularized.

Reckwitz identifies three mutually reinforcing factors that explain this social transformation towards a society of singularities since 1970/1980:

An economic, a technological and a sociocultural factor work together. Economy and technology, which only standardized in industrial modernity, are now also singularizing: At the beginning of the 1970s, industrial Fordism fell into a crisis and post-industrial, cultural capitalism was a way out. At the same time, a new middle class emerged after 1968, for which the values ​​of individuality and authenticity play an important role, which therefore expects singularization. Then there is the technical development of digitization.

Reckwitz emphasizes that the processes of singularization lead to patterns of social polarization on different levels , between recognized singularities and those who do not succeed. This applies to the goods on the economic markets, for workers, for lifestyles or also for cities and regions. These polarizations are responsible for the crisis of late modernity.

Cape. II: The Post-Industrial Economy of Singularities

According to Reckwitz, the transition from the industrial to the post-industrial economy is not only related to the change in the structure of employment (expansion of the service sector ). Rather, it also extends to the level of goods, the level of production and its organizational forms, the level of consumption and the level of markets (113f.). While industrial modernity was primarily geared towards the production of standardized, functional bulk goods, goods in the post-industrial economy are increasingly taking on the form of singular affective goods, which are represented as cultural goods through narrative-hermeneutic, aesthetic-sensual, creative, ludic and / or characterize ethical properties and are valorized primarily with regard to these qualities (125ff.). In addition to things, three other types of goods in particular have gained in relevance in late modernity : media formats, events and services that work in practices of observation, creation, evaluation and appropriation to the object of authenticity and in the course of this, and if this succeeds Singularity goods (137). They all contribute to the transformation from industrial to cultural capitalism .

The standard markets for functional bulk goods of industrial modernity, which can also be characterized as price and performance markets , change their form in late modernity and are "more and more replaced by cultural markets " (147). In the late modern era, goods compete primarily for visibility and recognition; the relationship between goods and consumers or audience is an affective one, i.e. H. Singularity markets are primarily attention and attractiveness markets that live from cultural valorization. The overproduction of goods is constitutive for the singularity markets, and they are also highly speculative and ubiquitous . On the one hand, according to Reckwitz, a general cultural economization of the social can be observed, which subjects more and more segments of society to the imperatives of the singularity markets - e.g. educational institutions, partnerships, religions, etc. (152f.). On the other hand, they are characterized by a high degree of uncertainty, because "attention streams, successful surprises and value attribution evade planning and control" (161). In addition, attention and appreciation are mostly distributed very asymmetrically; the singularity markets are based on structurally risky and unbounded winner-take-all competitions. They share essential structural features with the field of art and the creative industries , which serve as a "structural blueprint" for the cultural singularity capitalism of late modernism (155).

Cape. III: The singularization of the world of work

The singularization of the world of work affects various aspects. Above all, the work subjects themselves are singularized in late modernity , not only formal qualifications are required, but the maintenance of an original, as unique as possible profile , i.e. a bundle of competencies, talents, potentials and personality traits that is singular in its composition, which the non- Ensures interchangeability and distinguishability of the work subject. The subjects' bundles of competence, talent and potential do not come into their own in the singularistic world of work in the form of formal, factual performance and general comparability, but rather as performance . The late modern work subject is a »performance worker« (209) who presents his uniqueness to an audience, similar to a casting constellation (210).

The post-industrial world of work is characterized by a profound antagonistic polarity between the low and the highly qualified, between simple services and the knowledge economy, i.e. between ›profane-routinized‹ and creative-singular work activities, which are characterized by an appreciation of the latter and a social devaluation of the former ( 184f.).

The organizational structure of the knowledge and culture economy is project-based, as Reckwitz emphasizes following Luc Boltanski and Ève Chiapello . Reckwitz interprets projects in the context of a logic of singularization: projects have the character of an episode, i. H. they are temporary and eventful. At the level of the project collective, it is again about the ›right mixture‹ of singular subjects, which not only binds them together additively and through project goals, but also creates a form of the social that Reckwitz describes as a “heterogeneous collaboration” and a common work practice which is not only goal-oriented, but is also characterized by affective density and cultural intrinsic value and makes the project itself singular as a collective unit (194f.). Another form of heterogeneous collaboration that is gaining importance in the late modern era is networks, as dynamic cooperative relationships (199f.).

Cape. IV: Digitization as Singularization: The Rise of the Culture Machine

Since the 1980s, the technological structure of society has been transforming towards digitization , computerization and networking (p. 225 f). In contrast to modern industrial technology, which "was the motor of functional rationalization and objectification" (ibid.), A " technologically stimulated singularization " can be discerned in late modernism (227). The digital culture machine is characterized by the following features (238–242):

  • an » extreme overproduction of cultural formats « (texts, [moving] images, tones and sounds, computer games) with at the same time scarce attention
  • a generalization between cultural producers and consumers
  • a de-hierarchization of the cultural formats, which all compete with one another on one level for visibility
  • a temporalization of the cultural formats: the Internet is characterized by simultaneity, novelty and updating and the cultural formats are »not stable, but processual objects«
  • a culture of constant recombination (e.g. mashups ) in the network

According to Reckwitz, the digital revolution is the second decisive cause of the society of singularities, alongside the economic transformation towards post-industrial capitalism.

The singularization of the digital subjects takes place in two forms: on the one hand, the subject (›behind his back‹) is produced by machine as a modular singularity. This is the case, for example, in data tracking or in the ' personalization ' of the Internet. On the other hand, it is culturally fabricated as a compositional singularity within the framework of the digital attention economy (245). For the machine and cultural (self) singularization of the digital subject, the format of the profile is fundamental (248) and for the latter, a successful performative authenticity is decisive (244ff.). The authenticity performance of the digital subject on the digital media attractiveness market takes place via the successful and visible composition of various Components (249). The " visually represented experience " (250) functions as the dominant form of self-singularization of the profile subject . The algorithmic observation systems also model the digital subject as a special profile subject that is singularized in a modular manner, i.e. composed of discrete components (255).

Furthermore, Reckwitz differentiates between three different forms of sociality in the digital world: heterogeneous collaborations; Singularity Markets and Neo-Communities (262). The latter are electoral communities (in contrast to traditional communities) "which act as communities of interpretation and collective attention filters" (264).

Cape. V: The singularistic way of life: lifestyles, classes, subject forms

The primary support group of the late modern, singularistic lifestyle, so the central thesis of the fifth chapter, is the new (academic) middle class as a social-cultural class (274). Reckwitz characterizes late modern society as a cultural class society in which subjects differ from one another not only in terms of unevenly distributed material resources, but also and especially in terms of their lifestyles and their informal and formal (educational qualifications) cultural capital (275ff.). Late modern society is a »three-thirds society«, insofar as there is a polarity between the new (expanding) lower class , the new middle class and the old (non-academic) middle class, which as a lifestyle descendant of the leveled middle class society (1950 to 1970s) in the society of singularities is on the defensive (281f.) Characteristic of late modern class society is a "paternoster effect": while the leveled middle class society was characterized by a comparable material level and largely similar lifestyles, there has been an increased polarization between the 1980s the new middle class (plus the upper class) and the new lower class (and partly the old middle class) (282). While the new middle class is actively promoting self-culturalization, the "everyday logic of muddling through " dominates in the lower class (351). Through "processes of valorization and devaluation between the classes" the forms of life of the lower class (and to some extent also of the old middle class) become objects of devaluation. A "culturalization of inequality" (350ff.) Is thus characteristic of the society of singularities.

As exemplary building blocks for the distinctive lifestyle of the new middle class, Reckwitz analyzes and describes in detail the practices of eating, living, traveling, body and movement cultures, as well as upbringing and educational practices. This is characterized by a curatorial attitude (295ff.), Which fundamentally understands culture as a resource for enriching and enhancing the self (298ff.) The singularization work always includes the performative , i.e. H. (as authentically as possible) exhibited development and ›realization‹ of the self (305f.). The social status is not an end in itself, but the successful self-expression and self-realization with accompanying, " concurrent status investment " (ibid.).

The way of life of the lower class differs from that of the middle class in a fundamentally different relationship to work: work does not serve as a source of self-development and identification, but purely as an instrument to make a living (352). The time beyond work is primarily shaped by practices of dealing with shortages (ibid.). Reckwitz cites three defense strategies of the lower class (in addition to social advancement) against the processes of devaluation of their forms of life, which themselves rely on singularity: the imagination of advancement qua talent; the creation of socially illegitimate singularities that are recognized in subclass environments; and bringing forth and maintaining plebeian en authenticities (361ff.). However, according to Reckwitz, the double structure of cosmopolitan self-development and concurrent social status investments is fundamentally charged with tension: the new middle class is caught in a "romantic status dilemma", as one wants to bring two life orientations into a fragile balance, which strictly speaking contradict one another.

Cape. VI: Differential Liberalism and Cultural Essentialism: The Change of the Political

In the last chapter, Reckwitz examines how the singularization of the social affects the field of the political and how this in turn is influenced by politics (371ff.).

A culturalization of politics takes place in the late modern era in two respects. On the one hand, a form of governance has developed in Western Europe and North America that is oriented towards both competition and cultural diversity . This is the politics of an apertist-differential liberalism . Apertistic because it aims at permanent economic, social and cultural opening and crossing borders; differential because it highlights and promotes social and cultural differences. On the other hand, political tendencies can be observed on a global level, which despite their heterogeneity can be characterized as culture essentialism or culture communitarianism . While apertist-differential liberalism (neoliberalism and left-wing liberalism), which has become dominant since the 1980s and which is mainly supported by the new middle class, is actively promoting economic and cultural globalization , cultural essentialists mostly position themselves against the hybridizing effects of globalization. Reckwitz differentiates between four forms of cultural essentialism: ethnic , religious / fundamentalist , national / regional and national / right-wing populist . Each of these movements promise unbreakable collective identities and can also be interpreted as a mobilization of the periphery against the urban cosmopolitan centers. The liberalism of the borderless markets has further unleashed the polarization between high and low-skilled work, between socio-cultural climbers and declines, between boom regions and shrinking regions. According to Reckwitz, the political challenge of liberalism is how it not only directly encounters cultural essentialism in its various forms in the political debate, but also and precisely how it responds to the social and cultural devaluation processes that have favored and continue to favor its development.

The general crisis?

At the end of the book, Reckwitz asks whether the structure-forming power of the social logic of singularities is shaking the project of modernity , namely the normative ideal of (overall) social progress , i.e. leading to a post-modern social formation and a general crisis .

At the beginning of the 21st century, according to Reckwitz, three fundamental crises of the late modern era are visible:

  • a crisis of recognition resulting from the transformation of the industrial mass economy to the post-industrial knowledge economy. The shining winners are those who are directly involved in the design of complex uniqueness goods; those with interchangeable routine jobs are left behind
  • a crisis of self-realization, which as a countercultural promise of breaking out of the corset of social constraints, now - where it has become the dominant model of lifestyle - increasingly proves to be a source of deficit experiences and a generator of disappointment
  • a crisis of the political, which results from the loss of the possibilities of control for society as a whole in the society of singularities. Not least driven by the development of digital media, the political debate is shifting to separate sub-publics

All of the crises mentioned can be interpreted as manifestations of a general crisis. In the self-understanding of classical modernism, the political played a prominent role in promoting and representing the general. In view of the subdivision of media sub-publics in the late modern era, the question of a reconstitution of the general public becomes virulent, in which subjects from different classes and milieus of society come together. The work on universality , on generally binding norms and shared goods becomes a permanent task: what is needed is a political doing universality that can counterbalance the omnipresent doing singularity . In the context of a new paradigm that could be called regulative liberalism , according to Reckwitz, the decisive challenge would be to regulate both: the social with a view to questions of social inequality and the labor market, and the cultural with a view to safeguarding general cultural goods and norms.

Reception and criticism

In the media

The Society of Singularities has been presented to a broader public in the feature sections of the established German-language media since its publication in early October 2017. Half a year earlier, on April 30, 2017, Deutschlandfunk had broadcast a contribution by Andreas Reckwitz that addressed a central aspect of the book: " Hyperculture versus cultural essentialism - the struggle for cultural understanding". The broadcast was repeated on July 8, 2018. At the beginning of 2019 Reckwitz placed the theses of the book in the context of a "crisis of the West" in the media. In its multi-year project bauhaus , the magazine ARCH + refers to the thesis of digitization as singularization. The philosopher Konrad Paul Liessmann criticized in the Neue Zürcher Zeitung, among other things, with reference to The Society of Singularities , that whoever tries to grasp society as a whole often inadmissibly leaves a negative mark on it.

In science

The book was discussed in detail in a book forum set up by the social science news portal Soziopolis at the end of 2017. In addition to Andreas Reckwitz, Wolfgang Knöbl , Cornelia Koppetsch , Berthold Vogel , Felix Trautmann, Martin Saar, Dirk Hohnsträter, Hartmut Rosa and Stephan Moebius took part in the debate . In this debate, among other things, the question of the spatial and social scope of the society of singularities, the question of the relationship between economic and cultural capital in class society, the relationship between the distinction between general / particular and rationalization / culturalization, the continued existence of industrial Modernism, the exact location of the new middle class, the role of affects in the society of singularities, the scope of the explanation of social change in the book as well as the political evaluation of the society of singularities are discussed.

In the Cologne journal for sociology and social psychology , Thomas Kilian criticizes the fact that the book does not fulfill the claim of a comprehensive social theory of the late modern era, but merely describes the image of society and the mentality of the younger academic and culturally affine middle class. In his review, media researcher Michael Meyen compares Reckwitz's construct of singularization (quote: “On the Olympus of social theorists, new vocabulary is needed”) with the theoretical approach of medialization . He comes to the conclusion that the "singularity performances" are mainly on Facebook and Co. Daniel Frank from the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology sees Reckwitz's scientific approach more idiographically than nomothetic , more hermeneutical than measuring. Lorenz Erdmann from the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research and Bastian Lange, University of Vechta , examined the epistemic implications of singularization for technology assessment using the example of open workshops .

In its explanation of the award of Andreas Reckwitz with the Leibniz Prize as the most important and highly endowed German research award , the German Research Foundation emphasizes the importance of the book in 2019. The Leibniz Prize honors Reckwitz's complete works, with the DFG evaluating "The Society of Singularities" as the previous "culmination point" of Reckwitz's fundamental analyzes of the transformation of Western society, as he began in 2006 in the book Das hybride Subject and in The Invention of Creativity (2012) continued. In his laudation, DFG President Peter Strohschneider stated: "Hardly anyone should have analyzed (the complex structural changes of modern Western societies) more profoundly than the cultural sociologist and social theorist Andreas Reckwitz."

On December 11, 2018, the Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society at the University of the Arts Berlin hosted a discussion with Andreas Reckwitz , Jeanette Hofmann and Thomas Krüger on the topic of digitization and the society of singularities .

In politics

At the invitation of the German Bundestag, Andreas Reckwitz lectured from his book on June 11, 2018 in the large reading room of the Marie-Elisabeth-Lüders-Haus in the library of the German Bundestag. Wolfgang Schäuble , President of the German Bundestag , who moderated the event, attested the work to be an important contribution to the current political debate.

Honourings and prices

In November 2017, the book was awarded the Bavarian Book Prize and selected by a jury of 30 critics for the top spot on the newly created joint monthly non-fiction best-list from Deutschlandfunk Kultur , ZDF and Die Zeit .

In 2018 the book was nominated for the Leipzig Book Fair Prize in the non-fiction / essay category and was shortlisted for the EGOS Book Awards. It was also awarded the "International Humanities Translation Prize" from the German Book Trade Association.

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa from Andreas Reckwitz: The Society of Singularities. On the structural change of modernity . 5th edition. Suhrkamp, ​​Berlin 2018, ISBN 978-3-518-58706-5 (page numbers in the article refer to this edition of the book. The book project was funded by the Volkswagen Foundation as part of the 'Opus magnum' program).
  2. ↑ Prof. Dr. Andreas Reckwitz • Faculty of Cultural Studies • European University Viadrina / EUV. Retrieved June 27, 2018 .
  3. ↑ Suhrkamp Verlag, Foreign rights - accessed on July 3, 2019
  4. ↑ Undine Eberlein: Uniqueness. The romantic individuality concept of the modern age . Campus Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 2000, ISBN 3-593-36606-1 , p. 400 .
  5. ↑ THOMAS SCHÄFER: The legacy of romanticism . In: The daily newspaper: taz . November 17, 2001, ISSN  0931-9085 , p. 16 ( taz.de [accessed July 31, 2018]).
  6. ↑ Lucien Karpik: More value. The economy of the unique . Campus Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 2001, ISBN 3-593-39467-7 , pp. 328 .
  7. ↑ Igor Kopytoff: The cultural biography of things: commoditization as process . In: Arjun Appadurai (Ed.): The social life of things. Commodities in a cultural perspective . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1986, ISBN 0-521-35726-8 , pp. 64 - 91 (English).
  8. ↑ Georgios Chatzoudis: Interview with Andreas Reckwitz: "Working from home - this is the new middle class". LISA Science Portal Gerda Henkel Foundation, April 20, 2020, accessed on April 26, 2020 .
  9. ↑ Cultural sociologist Andreas Reckwitz - How societies change. Andreas Reckwitz in conversation with Thorsten Jantschek. Deutschlandfunk Kultur, August 8, 2020, accessed on August 29, 2020 .
  10. ↑ 3sat.online: "Society of Singularities" - 3sat.Mediathek. October 18, 2017, accessed on June 18, 2018 (German).
  11. ↑ Meredith Haaf: We are all with ourselves . In: sueddeutsche.de . 2017, ISSN  0174-4917 ( sueddeutsche.de [accessed on July 13, 2018]).
  12. ↑ Katrin Kruse: «Self-realization must be presented to the outside world» | NZZ . In: Neue Zürcher Zeitung . March 2, 2018 ( nzz.ch [accessed April 18, 2019]).
  13. ↑ Everyone wants to be special! Everyone is the curator of their life! | ttt - title, theses, temperaments. (No longer available online.) November 13, 2017, archived from the original on June 20, 2018 ; accessed on June 18, 2018 (German). Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.daserste.de
  14. ↑ Mirko Schwanitz, Bayerischer Rundfunk: "The Society of Singularities": Be unique! | BR.de . November 2, 2017 ( archive.org [accessed June 20, 2018]).
  15. ↑ Middle class: We are unique . In: ZEIT ONLINE . October 4, 2017 ( zeit.de [accessed June 18, 2018]).
  16. ↑ Andreas Reckwitz: "The Society of Singularities" - instructions for use for the nervous age . In: Deutschlandfunk . ( deutschlandfunk.de [accessed June 18, 2018]).
  17. ↑ Nikolaus Halmer: "There is a general crisis" . In: Contemporaries - Wiener Zeitung Online . March 3, 2018 ( wienerzeitung.at [accessed June 20, 2018]).
  18. ↑ orf.at: The hunt for the extraordinary . In: oe1.orf.at . 2018 ( orf.at [accessed on July 9, 2018]).
  19. ↑ Silke Weber: Hype about uniqueness: A society of unicorns . In: Spiegel Online . December 25, 2017 ( spiegel.de [accessed June 20, 2018]).
  20. ↑ Tobias Becker :: Applause, applause, applause! In: Der Spiegel . November 23, 2017 ( spiegel.de [accessed June 29, 2018]).
  21. ↑ Andreas Reckwitz: "The Society of Singularities" - "Digitization leads to the general public being eroded" . In: Deutschlandfunk Kultur . March 10, 2018 ( deutschlandfunkkultur.de [accessed July 12, 2018]).
  22. ↑ Silvan Lerch: Trend towards singularization. Today the I is at the top. SRF, March 22, 2018, accessed June 20, 2018 .
  23. ↑ Square idea | ARTE. Retrieved June 27, 2018 .
  24. ↑ On the particular and the general - Andreas Reckwitz paints a crisis-ridden picture of modernity in “The Society of Singularities”: literaturkritik.de. Retrieved on July 17, 2018 (German).
  25. ^ Badische Zeitung: Only the very special counts - literature & lectures - Badische Zeitung . January 24, 2018 ( badische-zeitung.de [accessed August 4, 2018]).
  26. ↑ Hyperculture versus Cultural Essentialism - The Struggle for Understanding Culture . In: Deutschlandfunk . April 30, 2017 ( deutschlandfunk.de [accessed June 18, 2018]).
  27. ↑ Global Conflicts - The Struggle for Understanding Culture . In: Deutschlandfunk . July 8, 2018 ( deutschlandfunk.de [accessed July 8, 2018]).
  28. ^ The Crisis of the West, Andreas Reckwitz in conversation with Karin Fischer. In: Deutschlandfunk. January 13, 2019, accessed January 14, 2019 .
  29. ↑ ARCH + 234, 2019: projekt bauhaus 3: Datatopia - digitization as singularization: the rise of the cultural machine. Retrieved April 16, 2019 .
  30. ↑ Konrad Paul Liessmann: Are we a society of fear? July 18, 2019, ISSN  0376-6829 ( nzz.ch [accessed on August 12, 2019]).
  31. ^ Reckwitz-Buchforum (1): Wolfgang Knöbl, Eine neue Moderne? November 7, 2017 ( soziopolis.de [accessed June 18, 2018]).
  32. ↑ Reckwitz-Buchforum (2): Cornelia Koppetsch, A cultural-sociological mapping of the present - but is it also true? November 10, 2017 ( soziopolis.de [accessed July 25, 2018]).
  33. ↑ Sociology Column . A wave of nostalgia. The academic middle class and the illiberal society - Mercury. Retrieved on August 29, 2018 (German).
  34. ↑ Reckwitz-Buchforum (3): Berthold Vogel, Dare to dare more nostalgia? November 21, 2017 ( soziopolis.de [accessed July 25, 2018]).
  35. ↑ Reckwitz-Buchforum (4): Andreas Reckwitz, Eine Replik . December 12, 2017 ( soziopolis.de [accessed July 25, 2018]).
  36. ^ Reckwitz-Buchforum (5): Felix Trautmann, The democratic society is not a society of singularities . December 21, 2017 ( soziopolis.de [accessed July 25, 2018]).
  37. ^ Reckwitz-Buchforum (6): Martin Saar, Affekt und Singularität . January 15, 2018 ( soziopolis.de [accessed July 25, 2018]).
  38. ^ Reckwitz-Buchforum (7): Dirk Hohnsträter, Culture, Consumption and the Society of Singularities . January 23, 2018 ( soziopolis.de [accessed July 25, 2018]).
  39. ↑ Reckwitz-Buchforum (8): Hartmut Rosa, Dynamic Stabilization or Metric Singularization? February 14, 2018 ( soziopolis.de [accessed July 25, 2018]).
  40. ↑ Reckwitz-Buchforum (9): Stephan Moebius, The sacrality of the singular and their symbolic power . March 12, 2018 ( soziopolis.de [accessed July 25, 2018]).
  41. ^ Reckwitz-Buchforum (10): Andreas Reckwitz, contribution to a common discourse . April 17, 2018 ( soziopolis.de [accessed July 25, 2018]).
  42. ^ KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie (2018), Volume 70, Issue 2, pp. 311-313 - Springer. Retrieved August 4, 2018 .
  43. ↑ singularization vs. Medialization . In: MEDIA REALITY . April 3, 2018 ( hypotheses.org [accessed July 13, 2018]).
  44. ↑ Daniel Frank: Late modernity or the explosion of the special. In: Journal for Technology Assessment in Theory and Practice (TATuP), Vol. 27 No. 2 (2018). Retrieved September 3, 2018 .
  45. ^ Bastian Lange, Lorenz Erdmann: Technology assessment for the society of singularities . In: TATuP Journal for Technology Assessment in Theory and Practice . tape 28 , no. 1 , April 3, 2019, ISSN  2199-9201 , p. 65–70 , doi : 10.14512 / tatup.28.1.65 ( tatup.de [accessed April 10, 2019]).
  46. ↑ German Research Foundation Leibniz Prize 2019 . March 13, 2019 ( dfg.de [accessed December 10, 2018]).
  47. ↑ German Research Foundation Leibniz Prize 2019 . 2019 ( dfg.de [PDF; accessed on March 24, 2019]).
  48. ↑ Digitization and the Society of Singularities. In: HIIG. December 11, 2018, accessed January 14, 2019 .
  49. ↑ Laura Heyer: German Bundestag - Andreas Reckwitz "maps" late modern society . In: German Bundestag . June 12, 2018 ( bundestag.de [accessed June 19, 2018]).
  50. ↑ Book Detail | Bavarian Book Prize. Retrieved June 18, 2018 .
  51. ↑ Top list of non-fiction books - The 10 best non-fiction books in November . In: Deutschlandfunk Kultur . November 1, 2017 ( deutschlandfunkkultur.de [accessed June 18, 2018]).
  52. ↑ Non-fiction / essay writing | Prize of the Leipzig Book Fair -. Retrieved June 18, 2018 .
  53. ↑ Award-winning works April 2018. Retrieved on July 11, 2018 (German).