Critique potential of common sense in Goffman’s frame analysis

U ovom radu ćemo pokušati da razmotrimo kritički potencijal sociologije Ervinga Gofmana. Polazna hipoteza će biti da Gofmanovo shavatanje zdravog razuma koje je ponudio u Analizi okvira otvara mogućnost za formulaciju kritičkog uvida u strukturalne datosti svakodnevne društvene prakse. Pokušaćemo takođe da pokažemo da je ovakvo Gofmanovo razumevanje zdravog razuma bilo pod jakim uticajem pragmatizma i fenomenologije, te da su često zanemarene epistemološke razlike između ova dva teorijska pravca ostavile posledice i na gofmanovsku sociologiju. Naime, u Analizi okvira možemo uvek iznova da iščitamo svojevrsnu teorijsku napetost između pragmatičkog insistiranja na autonomnom teorijskom značaju zdravog razuma i redukcionističkih nastojanja koje su fenomenolozi gajili spram ove forme mišljenja. Shodno tome, tvrdićemo da je upravo ova ambivalencija po pitanju uloge zdravog razuma u tumačenju društvene stvarnosti predstavlja glavni razlog što kritički potencijal Gofmanove sociologije ostaje u velikoj meri implicitan po svom karakteru.In this paper, I will try to appraise the critique potential of Erving Goffman’s sociology. The starting hypothesis will be that Goffman’s understanding of common sense offered in Frame Analysis opens the possibility of attaining a critical insight into the structural givens of everyday practice. I will also try to show that Goffman’s understanding of common sense was under heavy influence of pragmatism and phenomenology - and that the often-overseen epistemological differences between these two schools of thought had significant consequences on his sociology. Namely, in the Frame Analysis we can easily find a certain tension between insistence on the autonomous theoretical importance of common sense put forward by the pragmatist and reductionist tendencies towards this type of thought found among the phenomenologists. Therefore, I will argue that this ambivalence regarding the role of common sense in interpreting social realty is the main reason why critique potential of Goffman’s sociology remains implicit in its character