GRK 1608: Self-Making. Practices of Subjectivation in Historical and Interdisciplinary Perspective

主体的地位及其代理能力已成为当今时代的关键问题之一。市场机制、技术自动化和遗传学的明显主导地位，与对终身学习、灵活性、创造力和竞争力的需求并列在一起。与此同时，人们通过退出和弃权的方式进行新的抗议和抵抗、自我模范和自我解放。因此，在20世纪80年代的人文科学辩论中，这门学科似乎衰落了，现在在我们看来，这是一门学科主体性的激进化和多元化。这不再是关于主权主体的问题，而是在不同的历史背景下(本质上)支离破碎的主观性的出现。因此，我们超越了概念上的考虑，着眼于(日常)社会实践中的主观化过程。作为一个分析范畴，主观化使我们能够挖掘跨越历史时代的自我创造现象。我们认为，由于其关注的是实践，主题分析是跨学科的：它结合了物质安排、话语和技术，在这些技术中和通过这些技术，主题形成了自己和正在形成。在我们研究生研究小组的第一阶段，重点是人们如何成长为特定的学科形式以及这些形式的变异性。然而，我们的实证研究使我们意识到这些形成过程的矛盾心理和挑战，以及在实践中谈判、反思和批评的必要性。因此，我们的经验研究揭示了当前实践理论的盲点：它们未能解决自我定向能力和(批判性)反思能力-这两个传统上与自主主体相关的特征-是如何在实践中获得的。然而，如果我们不仅要理解社会再生产，而且要理解转化、创新和越轨，而不是主张自治主体的回归，就必须解决这些问题。因此，在研究生课题组的第二阶段，我们将关注社会秩序的形成及其主题在或有历史实践中的同时性。三个研究领域(性格的形成；行动潜力的实现；转化、批评和退出)的相互关系使个人作为主体对自己负责的能力的出现和出现脱颖而出。我们的概念的纲领性目标是一门主体性的跨学科行为学。

The status of the subject and its capacity for agency has become one of the key issues of current times. The apparent dominance of market mechanisms, technical automatisms, and genetics is juxtaposed with a demand for lifelong learning, flexibility, creativity, and compe-tence. At the same time, people engage in new forms of protest and resistance, self - model-ing, and self-liberation by means of dropping out and abstention. Subsequently, what seemed to be a ¿decline of the subject¿ in debates of the humanities in the 1980s, now appears to us as a radicalization and pluralization of the subjectivity of the subject. This is no longer about the sovereign subject, but rather the emergence of (intrinsically) fragmented subjectivities in disparate historical contexts. Consequently, we look beyond conceptual considerations to the process of subjectivation in (everyday) social practices. As an analytical category, subjectivation allows us to unearth the phenomenon of self-making across historical epochs. With its focus on practices, subject analysis, we argue, is interdisciplinary: it incorporates material arrangements, discourses, and techniques within which and through which subjects form themselves and are being formed. During the first phase of our graduate research group the focus was on how people grow into specific subject forms and the mutability of these forms. However, our empirical studies have made us aware of the ambivalence and challenges of these formation processes and the need for negotiation, reflection, and criticism in practices. Thus, our empirical studies have brought to light a blind spot of current practice theories: they fail to address how the capabili-ties of self-orientation and (critical) reflection ¿ both characteristics traditionally associated with an autonomous subject ¿ are acquired in practices. However, these issues must be tackled if we wish to comprehend not only social reproduction, but also transformation, inno-vation, and transgression without arguing for the return of the autonomous subject. Therefore, in the second phase of our graduate research group we will focus on the simultaneity of the formation of social order and its subjects in contingent historical practices. The interrelation of three research fields (formation of dispositions; actualization of action potential; trans-formation, criticism, and exit) brings to the forefront the emergence and appearance of (re-flexive) abilities through which individuals make themselves accountable as subjects. The programmatic aim of our concept is an interdisciplinary praxeology of subjectivation.