SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Trakya Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2025 / Cilt: 27 Sayı: 2

Metaphorical Approaches to Postmodernity

Postmoderniteye Metaforik Yaklaşımlar

Ömer Faruk Darende(KAHRAMANMARAS SUTCU IMAM UNIVERSITY, ACADEMY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES)0000-0003-2622-0565
Mehmet Ali Kirman(CUKUROVA UNIVERSITY, FACULTY OF THEOLOGY)0000-0002-3610-8190
Pages
286–296
Publication Date
2025-12-26
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

This study aimed to render the postmodern period more comprehensible by assembling the metaphors that sociologists have conceptualized and used to express social reality.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Sociologists, seeking to understand and explain the social reality in which they live and the changes occurring within it, have approached the subject through various conceptualizations and typologies, thereby making significant contributions to the field of social sciences.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this context, although the distinction between traditional and modern society was long used to explain the changes and transformations experienced by societies, the typology based on the distinction between modern and postmodern has recently come to the fore.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This study aimed to render the postmodern period more comprehensible by assembling the metaphors that sociologists have conceptualized and used to express social reality.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Sosyoloji · Din Sosyolojisi · Postmodernite

Abstract

Sociologists, seeking to understand and explain the social reality in which they live and the changes occurring within it, have approached the subject through various conceptualizations and typologies, thereby making significant contributions to the field of social sciences. In this context, although the distinction between traditional and modern society was long used to explain the changes and transformations experienced by societies, the typology based on the distinction between modern and postmodern has recently come to the fore. Yet, amid growing criticism of modernity, discussions have emerged concerning postmodern society, a concept on which sociologists remain divided. Defining and naming the new society thus presents a persistent problem in the field of social sciences. The period generally regarded as postmodern is viewed by some sociologists as a new era and by others as a continuation of modern society. This study aimed to render the postmodern period more comprehensible by assembling the metaphors that sociologists have conceptualized and used to express social reality.

Özet

İçinde yaşadıkları toplumsal gerçekliği ve bu gerçeklikte meydana gelen değişmeleri anlama ve açıklama çabasıyla hareket eden sosyologlar, konuya çeşitli kavramsallaştırmalar ve tipolojiler ışığında yaklaşmışlar ve sosyal bilimler alanına önemli katkılar sağlamışlardır. Bu bağlamda toplumların tecrübe ettiği değişim ve dönüşümleri açıklamak için geleneksel ve modern toplum ayrımı kullanılırken, son zamanlarda bunun yerini modern ve postmodern ayrımına dayalı tipolojinin aldığı görülmektedir. Ancak bu hususta modernite üzerindeki eleştirilerin artması karşısında sosyologların üzerinde hemfikir olamadığı modern sonrası toplumla ilgili tartışmalar başlamıştır. Yeni toplumu tanımlama ve adlandırma da sosyal bilimler alanında başlı başına bir problem olarak kendini göstermektedir. Genel anlamda postmodern olarak kabul gören dönem, bazı sosyologlar tarafından yeni bir dönem, bazıları tarafından ise modern toplumun devamı şeklinde düşünülmektedir. Öncelikle modern ve postmodern kavramıyla ilgili açıklamalardan sonra özellikle post-moderniteyi açıklamak üzere dolaşıma giren bazı metaforik yaklaşımlara değinecek olan bu makalede amaç, toplumsal gerçekliği ifade etmek için sosyologlar tarafından kavramsallaştırılan ve kullanılan metaforları bir araya getirerek postmodern dönemi daha anlaşılır kılmaktır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Darende, Ö. F., Kirman, M. A. (2025). Metaphorical Approaches to Postmodernity. Trakya Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 27 Sayı: 2, 286–296. https://ajindex.com/articles/1132217

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (53)

  1. Ahmed, A. S. (1992). Postmodernism and Islam. Routledge.
  2. Alvesson, M., & Sandberg, J. (2022). Re-imagining the research process: Conventional and alternative metaphors. Sage Publications.
  3. Anderson, P. (1999). The origins of postmodernity. Verso.
  4. Baudrillard, J. (2012). Amerika (Y. Avunç, Çev.). Ayrıntı Yayınları.
  5. Baudrillard, J. (2024). Simülakrlar ve simülasyon (O. Adanır, Çev.).
  6. Bauman, Z. (1991). Modernity and ambivalence. Polity Press.
  7. Bauman, Z. (2006). Liquid modernity. Polity Press.
  8. Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. Sage Publications.
  9. Beck, U., Bonss, W., & Lau, C. (2003). The theory of reflexive modernization: Problematic, hypotheses and research programme. Theory, Culture & Society, 20(2), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276403020002001
  10. Beck, U., Giddens, A., & Lash, S. (1994). Reflexive modernization: Politics, tradition and aesthetics in the modern social order. Stanford University Press.
  11. Bentham, J. (2016). Panoptikon: Gözün iktidarı (B. Çoban & Z. Özarslan, Çev.).
  12. Berger, A. A. (2022). Everyday life in the postmodern world: An introduction to cultural studies. Springer.
  13. Berman, M. (1988). All that is solid melts into air: The experience of modernity. Penguin Books.
  14. Brownsmith, E. (2020). Inconspicuous consumption: Conceptual metaphors of women as food in the Deuteronomistic History [Doctoral dissertation, Brandeis University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.
  15. Castells, M., & Cardoso, G. (2005). The network society: From knowledge to policy. Johns Hopkins Center for Transatlantic Relations.
  16. Cocozza, A. (2020). Unexpected action and insecurity: Some structural characteristics of postmodernity. Geopolitical, Social Security and Freedom Journal, 3(2), 26–41.
  17. Debord, G. (1990). Comments on the society of the spectacle (M. Imrie, Trans.). Verso.
  18. Debord, G. (2021). Gösteri toplumu (A. Ekmekçi & O. Taşkent, Çev.). Ayrıntı Yayınları.
  19. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (2005). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (11th ed.). University of Minnesota Press.
  20. Eisenstadt, S. N. (2000). Multiple modernities. Daedalus, 129(1), 1–29.
  21. Emer, F. K. (2024). Milenyumda postmodernizm: Kavramsal bir tur ve iki postmodern metin okuması (Patrick Süskind). Akademisyen Kitabevi.
  22. Flax, J. (2023). Thinking fragments: Psychoanalysis, feminism, and postmodernism in the contemporary West. University of California Press.
  23. Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977. Vintage.
  24. Foucault, M. (2002). The archaeology of knowledge. Routledge.
  25. Foucault, M. (2019). Hapishanenin doğuşu (M. A. Kılıçbay, Çev.). İmge Yayınevi.
  26. Fuhse, J. A. (2022). How can theories represent social phenomena? Sociological Theory, 40(2), 99–123.
  27. Giddens, A. (1996). The consequences of modernity. Stanford University Press.
  28. Habermas, J., & Ben-Habib, S. (1981). Modernity versus postmodernity. New German Critique, 22, 3–14. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/487859 JSTOR
  29. Hackett, D. T. (2019). Looking through the kaleidoscope: A metaphor for convergences of identities. In I. W. Leigh & C. A. O’Brien (Eds.), Deaf identities: Exploring new frontiers (pp. 370–394). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190887599.003.0016 ResearchGate
  30. Hall, S. (1990). Cultural identity and diaspora. In J. Rutherford (Ed.), Identity: Community, culture, difference (pp. xxx–xxx). Lawrence & Wishart.
  31. Harvey, D. (2020). The condition of postmodernity. Blackwell.
  32. Hasselman, F. (2023). Understanding the complexity of individual developmental pathways: A primer on metaphors, models, and methods to study resilience in development. Development and Psychopathology, 35, 2186–2198. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579422001442
  33. Jackson, S. (2021). Exploring the use and adoption of workplace automation through metaphors: A discourse dynamics analysis. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 49(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.04902
  34. Jameson, F. (1991). Postmodernism, or the cultural logic of late capitalism. Duke University Press.
  35. Kellner, D. (1988). Postmodernism as a social theory: Some challenges and problems. Theory, Culture & Society, 5, 239–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276488005002004
  36. Kellner, D. (2024). Reappraising the postmodern: Novelties, mapping and historical narratives. In Postmodernism: What moment?
  37. Kirman, M. A. (2005). Din ve sekülerleşme. Karahan Kitabevi.
  38. Kirman, M. A. (2010). Yeni dini hareketler sosyolojisi.
  39. Kirman, M. A. (2013). Rasyonel seçim kuramı. KSÜ İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 22, 66–98.
  40. Kirman, M. A. (2016). Din sosyolojisi sözlüğü. Karahan Yayınevi.
  41. Lyotard, J.-F. (1984). The postmodern condition. University of Minnesota Press.
  42. Macionis, J. J. (2022). Sosyoloji. Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
  43. Mandel, E. (2013). Geç kapitalizm (C. Badem, Çev.).
  44. Mathiesen, T. (1997). The viewer society: M. Foucault’s panopticon revisited. In [Book title missing] (pp. 215–233). Sage Publications.
  45. Mykhalchuk, N., Bihunova, S., Fridrikh, A., & Vietrova, I. (2021). The cross-cultural understanding of metaphors in the information technology sphere. Cognitive Studies / Études Cognitives, 21, 2475. https://doi.org/10.11649/cs.2475
  46. Pylypenko, S. G. (2021). Philosophical reflections in the challenges of the postmodern society. Amazonia Investiga, 10(48), 81–88. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2021.48.12.9
  47. Ritzer, G. (2005). Enchanting a disenchanted world. Pine Forge.
  48. Schreiner, G., & Lyddon, W. J. (2002). Modern and postmodern metaphors of self, mind, and memory. In T. Scrimali & L. Grimaldi (Eds.), Cognitive psychotherapy toward a new millennium (pp. 39–50). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0567-9_3
  49. Siahaan, H., & Siahaya, J. (2023). The dialectics between the unity and diversity of the church: A jigsaw puzzle metaphor. Verbum et Ecclesia, 44(1), 2645. https://doi.org/10.4102/ve.v44i1.2645
  50. Sprague, R. D. (2007). From Taylorism to the omnipticon: Expanding employee surveillance beyond the workplace. Journal of Computer & Information Law, 25(1), 1–35.
  51. Swedberg, R. (2020). Using metaphors in sociology: Pitfalls and potentials. The American Sociologist, 51, 240–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-020-09470-1
  52. Touraine, A. (2018). Modernliğin eleştirisi (H. Tufan, Çev.). Yapı Kredi Yayınları.
  53. Wilson, P. (2023). Cultural kaleidoscope: Understanding diversity through studies. International Journal of Research and Review Techniques, 2(3), 9–15.