Abstract
In this article, I consider whether and to what extent the concept of social pathology can serve to better understand relatively long-term disruptions of the social order. I compare the findings present in practically oriented studies on types of social pathology and attempts to explain it grounded in the body of sociological/social theory and social philosophy, serving the critique of society. I understand social pathology as a structured process. I try to indicate its conditionalities and to what extent the dynamics of this process affect the quality of social existence of individuals and collectivities. I show the emergence of relatively durable assemblages that "preserve" negatives in the form of pathological behaviors and their (often ideological) justifications. Seeking the possibility of theoretical synthesis in the thick approach formula, I indicate two positions that can be a starting point for further analyses: the concept of Vytautas Kavolis (set in the tradition of studies on social problems) and the concept of forms of life by Rahel Jaeggi (fitted in the formula of critical theory). I begin by recalling and criticizing the "classical" approaches to social pathology. Then, I reveal the connections between normativity and normality, and attempts to theoretically explain out-of-order phenomena. In the next part, I refer to the concepts of Kavolis and Jaeggi, portraying their relationships with critical theory. The final part is a tentative balance and an indication of issues worth taking up in the name of theoretical codification of knowledge about social pathology.