Sociologies (Nov 2017)
La consistance des êtres collectifs. Contribuer avec Peirce à une sociologie de l’engagement
Abstract
Every engagement binds the one who engages himself or is engaged to what, with whom, for what, in what... he engages or is engaged. Through these links, it therefore contributes to making the collective, whether it builds on its previous consistency, adds to it or constitutes it. This article attempts to capture what the term "engagement" may mean by broadening the spectrum of engagement far beyond its most common meaning in its decision-making or intentional models. Commit by contract, marrying a cause, being attached to beings, living a passion, vibrating together, being engaged without having decided, perhaps without realizing it, answering a call, letting oneself be embarked by an atmosphere, following a movement... these are, with others, the forms of engagement that will be investigated and distinguished. In particular, we will seek to understand how we live and express our engagement to the collective when it responds, but especially when it no longer responds to the sole decision-making model. It will also be necessary to understand how, in these different forms of engagement, we relate to groups, populated by other actors but also by objects and devices..., trying to distance ourselves from the only model of the autonomous and responsible actor according to which we usually think of engagement. We will therefore also give ourselves the means to grasp collectives in a wide variety of forms, paying particular attention to the forms by which they invite themselves in language, to the forms by which the actors lend them an agency, at least grammatically, as when we make the market the subject of a proposal for action, or when we express our engagement by favouring the I, the We or the One.
