The social imaginary as a battlefield: Resources for a critical thought

Enzo Colombo & Paola Rebughini

International Sociology2025https://doi.org/10.1177/02685809251394712article
AJG 2
Weight
0.37

What the paper says

This article introduces a conflictual perspective to the study of social imaginaries, emphasizing their capacity to represent spaces of social critique. Critically revisiting the now classic conceptions of Cornelius Castoriadis and Charles Taylor, the article proposes to look at the social imaginary as a battlefield for the hegemony of shared meaning and the definition of social reality. It engages in a theoretical analysis that foregrounds the political dimension of social imaginaries, indicating them as the social space in which the prefiguration of possible futures arises from a critique of the existing and contributes to eliciting emotions and a sense of involvement that push to action. The article underlines the heuristic importance of conceiving the social imaginary as the space in which different possible forms of social orders fight to define the real of social reality. Given its nature based on the representation of the possible and desirable – as well as the fearsome and the avoidable – the social imaginary is the battlefield on which possible alternatives to the existing are constructed in an endeavor to make them hegemonic, that is, credible, preferable, or inevitable, and thus orient collective aspirations and actions.

1 citation

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/02685809251394712

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{enzo2025,
  title        = {{The social imaginary as a battlefield: Resources for a critical thought}},
  author       = {Enzo Colombo & Paola Rebughini},
  journal      = {International Sociology},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/02685809251394712},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

The social imaginary as a battlefield: Resources for a critical thought

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.