Integral Theory of Knowledge

  • Emiliana Mangone
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Psychology book series (BRIEFSPSYCHOL)


The need to reflect on the dyad knowledge/reality, as well as on the sociology of knowledge, highlights how knowledge is nothing but the construction of reality. A multidimensional and multifaceted reality. The first configuration of knowledge that individuals resort to in their everyday actions consists of the idea of constructing the lifeworld/s (social representations). Referring to Sorokin’s Integrality is important because many of the concepts he uses are still current or actualizable. The aim is to understand the ways and forms through which knowledge can influence the construction of reality. This influence also affects the development of societies, the relationship between individuals, and that between individuals, knowledge, and society. It is therefore desirable that an integral theory of knowledge develops and becomes reflexive knowledge capable of promoting the construction of relationships between living environments and individuals, as well as between the very individuals. This should be done acknowledging the autonomy of the individual disciplines of social sciences (sociology, psychology, anthropology, etc.) and, at the same time, abandoning the excess of self-referentiality that encloses them within their own frameworks and paradigms.


Integralism Knowledge Method Reality Sociology of knowledge 


  1. Barthes, R. (1964). Le degré zéro de l'écriture, suivi de Eléments de sémiologie. Paris: Ed. Gonthier.Google Scholar
  2. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  3. de Saussure, F. (1971). Cours de linguistique générale. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
  4. Ford, J. B. (1963). Sorokin as philosopher. In P. J. Allen (Ed.), Pitirim A. Sorokin in review (pp. 39–66). Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Homans, G. C. (1967). The nature of social science. New York: Hartcourt.Google Scholar
  6. Johnston, B. V. (1999). Pitirim A. Sorokin on order, change and the reconstruction of society: An integral perspective. Comparative Civilizations Review, 41(3), 25–41.Google Scholar
  7. Lévy, P. (1994). L’intelligence collective. Pour une anthropologie du cyberspace. Paris: Éditions La Découverte.Google Scholar
  8. Luhmann, N. (1983). Struttura della società e semantica. Rome-Bari: Laterza.Google Scholar
  9. Mangone, E. (2012). Persona, conoscenza, società. Milan: FrancoAngeli.Google Scholar
  10. Mangone, E. (2015). Knowledge for the future of Europe. Cava de’ Tirreni: Areablu edizioni.Google Scholar
  11. Moscovici, S. (1984). The phenomenon of social representations. In R. M. Farr & S. Moscovici (Eds.), Social representations (pp. 3–69). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Schütz, A. (1946). The well-informed citizen. An essay on the social distribution of knowledge. Social Research, 14(4), 463–478.Google Scholar
  13. Sorokin, P. A. (1928). Contemporary sociological theory. New York: Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar
  14. Sorokin, P. A. (1956). Fads and foibles in modern sociology and related sciences. Chicago: Henry Regnery.Google Scholar
  15. Sorokin, P. A. (1957). Social & cultural dynamics: A study of change in major systems of art, truth, ethics, law and social relationships. Boston: Porter Sargent.Google Scholar
  16. Sorokin, P. A. (1958). Integralism is my philosophy. In W. Burnett (Ed.), This is my philosophy. Twenty of the world’s outstanding thinkers reveal the deepest meaning they have found in life (pp. 180–189). London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  17. Sorokin, P. A. (1962). Society, culture, and personality. The structure and dynamics. A system of general sociology. New York: Cooper Square.Google Scholar
  18. Sorokin, P. A. (1963a). Sociology of my mental life. In P. J. Allen (Ed.), Pitirim A. Sorokin in review (pp. 3–36). Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Sorokin, P. A. (1963b). Reply to criticisms of my integral system of knowledge by professor Joseph B. Ford and Dr. Daya Krishna. In P. J. Allen (Ed.), Pitirim A. Sorokin in review (pp. 383–400). Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Wright Mills, C. (1959). The sociological imagination. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emiliana Mangone
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Human, Philosophic and Education Sciences (DISUFF)University of SalernoSalernoItaly

Personalised recommendations