Биология vs. социология и напредъкът на националното тяло (Един теоретичен дебат в българското общество от междувоенния период)
Biology vs. sociology and the progress of the national body (a theoretical debate in Bulgarian society in the inter-war period)

Summary/Abstract: This text discusses the debate pro and contra the possibilities of biological sociology, the new scientific trend, with respect to its possible benefit for the progress of the nation – a priority issue in the inter-war period. The author presents the arguments of Bulgarian philosophers, sociologists, psychologists, psychiatrists, and other thinkers in the field of the humanities, who commented on the achievements of biology and medicine and their applications for “improving” man and making social life healthier by means of various kinds of negative eugenics. The article focuses on the theoretical controversy between the two approaches to society; their serious consequences are commented on primarily in the context of this debate. The discussion is also viewed as echoing European trends at that time regarding this new role of biology. Two philosophical schools in Bulgaria – Rehmkeanism and Marxism – supported “autonomous sociology,” according to which human society is radically different from the sphere of nature, and the biological factor is not important for changing society. The opponents of this view, more numerous, maintained that heredity was more important than the influence of social environment and upbringing; hence, eugenics – the science of the genetics-based improvement of people and mankind – held many possibilities. The article presents the variety of stances that appeared after the change of the intellectual paradigm of “biologizing” social sciences, as well as the actual attitudes underlying these stances. The author looks for traces of this debate coming down to the present day.

• Details
• Contents