Contemporary social and sociological theory: visualizing social worlds 1412913624, 9781412913621

This social theory textbook introduces undergraduates to a multitude of different theorists. Their contributions to cont

1,667 80 62MB

English Pages 471 Year 2006

Report DMCA / Copyright

DOWNLOAD FILE

Polecaj historie

Contemporary social and sociological theory: visualizing social worlds
 1412913624, 9781412913621

Table of contents :
Having a thought
Symbols, meaning &​ the social self : George Herbert Mead (1863-1931) and Herbert Blumer (1900-1987)
Constructing social reality : Peter Berger (1929-) and Thomas Luckmann (1927-)
Organizing ordinary life : Harold Garfinkel (1917-)
Performing the self : Erving Goffman (1922-1982)
Emotion and interaction ritual chains : Randall Collins (1941-)
Social and population structures : Peter M. Blau (1918-2002)
Gender inequality : Janet Saltzman Chafetz (1942-)
The replication of class : Pierre Bourdieu (1930-2002)
Global capitalism and the decline of American hegemony : Immanuel Wallerstein (1930-)
Social systems and their environments : Niklas Luhmann (1927-1998)
Modernity and reason : Jürgen Habermas (1929-)
The juggernaut of modernity : Anthony Giddens (1938-)
Defining the possible and impossible : Michel Foucault (1926-1984)
Language on the rocks : Jacques Derrida (1930-2004)
The end of everything : Jean Baudrillard (1929-)
Race matters : Cornel West (1953-)
Gendered consciousness : Dorothy E. Smith (1926-)
Materializing sex and queer theory : Judith Butler (1956-)
On being unsettled

Citation preview

Contemporary Social and

Sociological Iheory Visualizing Social Worlds ••

n

\ 1

**% 1



9 .litt ....'

1

«

••

.

*.

l i



ill

I

^H"

011* t

MsTCR

Digitized by the Internet Archive in

2010

http://www.archive.org/details/contemporarysociOOalla

Contemporary Social and

Sociological Theory

©

Copyright

2006 by Pine Forge

All rights reserved.

No

Press,

part of this

an Imprint of Sage Publications,

book may be reproduced or

Inc.

utilized in

any form or by

any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any

mation storage and

retrieval system,

without permission

infor-

writing from the publisher.

in

For information:

Pine Forge Press

An

Imprint of Sage Publications, Inc.

2455 Teller Road

Thousand Oaks, California 91320 E-mail: [email protected] Sage Publications Ltd. Oliver's Yard

1

55 City Road

London EC 1Y ISP United Kingdom Sage Publications India Pvt. Ltd. B-42, Panchsheel Enclave Post

Box 4109

New

Delhi 110 017 India

Printed in the United States of America

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Allan, Kenneth, 1951-

Contemporary p.

social

and sociological theory visualizing :

social

worlds

cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 1-4129-1362-4 1.

Sociology.

2.

(pbk.)

Sociology

— Philosophy.

3.

Sociologists.

I.

Title.

HM585.A52 2006 301.01— dc22 This book

is

06

08

07

2005030933

printed on acid-free paper.

09

Acquisitions Editor:

10

9

7

6

5

Benjamin Penner

Associate Editor

Katja Werlich Fried

Editorial Assistant:

Camille Herrera

Production Editor:

Laureen A. Shea

Copy

Teresa Herlinger

Editor:

Typesetter:

C&M

Proofreader:

Dennis

Cover Designer:

Michelle Kenny

Digitals (P) Ltd.

Webb

4

3

2

1

/

Kenneth Allan.

Contents

Having a Thought

ix

Acknowledgments

xv

INTRODUCTION TO SECTION THE SOCIAL SITUATION AND 1.

I:

ITS

PEOPLE

1

Symbols, Meaning, and the Social Self: George Herbert Mead (1863-1931) and Herbert Blumer (1900-1987) The

Interactionist Perspective:

5

American Pragmatism

8

Concepts and Theory: Emergent Meanings Concepts and Theory: The Necessary

Self

Concepts and Theory: Empiricism and Symbolic Interactionism

19

Summary

22

23

Building Your Theory Toolbox

Web 2.

9 1

Byte



R. S.

Perinbanayagam and Dialogic Acts*

Constructing Social Reality: Peter Berger (1929-) and

Thomas Luckmann

27

(1927-)

Berger and Luckmann's Perspective: The

Phenomenon 29

of Reality

Concepts and Theory: The

Social Construction of Reality

Concepts and Theory: Changing and

Preserving Reality

45

Summary Building Your Theory Toolbox

Web

Byte

31

41



46

Stuart Hall and Reading Culture Through

Cultural Studies 3.

Organizing Ordinary

Life:

Harold Garfinkel (1917-)

Garfinkel's Perspective: Everyday

Methods

Concepts and Theory: Doing Society

*Web

Bytes arc available

at

http://www.pinefoige.com/csstStudy; lor more information, please see page

49 51

58

\iii.

6

Summary

69 70

Building Your Theory Toolbox

Web

Byte

—Candace West and Don H. Zimmerman:

Doing Gender 4.

Performing the

Self:

Erving

Goffman (1922-1982)

the World

73

a Stage

76

Concepts and Theory: Impression Management

78

Concepts and Theory: The Encounter

84

Summary

90

Goffman's Perspective:

All

Is

Building Your Theory Toolbox

Web

Byte



Arlie Russell Hochschild

92

and the

Presentation of Emotion 5.

Emotion and Interaction Concepts and

95

Ritual Chains: Randall Collins (1941-)

Emotion, and Exchange

98

Theory: Interaction Ritual Chains (IRCs)

101

Collins's Perspective: Science,

Concepts and Theory: The Micro- Level Production 107

of Stratification

Concepts and Theory: Sociology of Creativity

1

Summary

115

Building Your Theory Toolbox

Web

Byte

—Thomas

J.

Scheff:

1

When Shame

Gets Out of

10

1

Hand

INTRODUCTION TO SECTION SOCIAL STRUCTURES AND SYSTEMS II:

6.

Social

and Population

119

Structures: Peter

Blau's Perspective: Calculating Science

M. Blau (1918-2002)

127

Population Structures

Concepts and Theory: Exchange, Power, and Structure

131

Concepts and Theory: Population Structures

136

Summary

142

Building Your Theory Toolbox

Web 7.

Byte

Gender

— Karen

S.

Cook: Power

in

1

43

Exchange Networks

Inequality: Janet Saltzman Chafetz (1942-)

147

Concepts and Theory: Coercive Gender Structures

151

Concepts and Theory: Voluntaristic Gender Inequality

155

Concepts and Theory:

1

Stratification Stability

Concepts and Theory: Gender Change

Summary

Web

Byte

59

160 166

Building Your Theory Toolbox

8.

123

and

1

67

— Randall Collins and Conflict Theory

The Replication of

Class: Pierre

Bourdieu (1930-2002)

169

Bourdieu's Perspective: Constructivist Structuralism

171

Concepts and Theory: Structuring Class

176

Concepts and Theory: Replicating Class

183

Summary

187

Building Your Theory Toolbox

Web 9.

Byte

— Erik Olin Wright: Measuring

1

Global Capitalism and the Decline of American

Hegemony: Immanuel Wallerstein (1930-) Wallerstein's Perspective:

191

194

World-Systems Critique

Concepts and Theory: The

195

Dialectics of Capitalism

Concepts and Theory: The End of the World as

We Know

It

Summary Byte



1

99

209

Building Your Theory Toolbox

Web 10.

88

Class Inequality

2

1

James O'Conner: Selling Nature

Social

Systems and Their Environments:

Niklas

Luhmann (1927-1998)

213

Luhmann's Perspective: Thinking Systemically

215

Concepts and Theory Self-Referencing Systems

219

Concepts and Theory

222

Social Evolution

Concepts and Theory Changing Sociology's Question

231

Summary

235

Building Your Theory Toolbox

236

INTRODUCTION TO SECTION III: MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

239

11.

Modernity and Reason: Jiirgen Habermas (1929-) Habermas's Perspective:

Critical

243

Theory

Concepts and Theory Capitalism and Legitimation Concepts and Theory The Colonization of Democracy Concepts and Theory Communicative Action and

Civil

Society

Summary Building Your Theory Toolbox 12.

The Juggernaut of Modernity: Anthony Giddens (1938-)

261

263

Giddens's Perspective: Recursive Structures

266

Giddens's Perspective: Reflexive Actors

271

Concepts and Theory: The Contours of Modernity

273

Concepts and Theory: The Experience of Modernity

279

Summary

283

Building Your Theory Toolbox 13.

245 248 252 257 260

284

Defining the Possible and Impossible:

287

Michel Foucault (1926-1984) Foucault's Perspective: Truth

Games

Concepts and Theory: The Practices of Power Concepts and Theory: Power Over the Body Concepts and Theory: Power Over the Subject

Summary Building Your Theory Toolbox

290 293 298 302 307 308

14.

Language on the Rocks: Jacques Derrida (1930-2004) Derrida's Perspective: Presence

Concepts and Theory:

Through Absence

313

314

Linguistic Structuralism

Concepts and Theory: Poststructuralism

317

Concepts and Theory: Implications of Textual Worlds

322

Summary

327

328

Building Your Theory Toolbox 15.

The End of Everything: Jean Baudrillard (1929-) Baudrillard's Perspective: Inverting

Marx

338 340 346 349 350

Concepts and Theory: Losing the World Concepts and Theory: The Postmodern Person

Summary Building Your Theory Toolbox

INTRODUCTION TO SECTION

IV:

IDENTITY POLITICS

Race Matters: Cornel West (1953-) West's Perspective: Prophetic Democracy

362

Concepts and Theory: Race Matters

367

Concepts and Theory: Postdemocratic Age

373

Summary

380

Web

Byte



Patricia Hill Collins

381

and Intersecting Oppressions

Gendered Consciousness: Dorothy

E.

Smith (1926-)

Concepts and Theory: The Standpoint of

Women

Summary

401

Building Your Theory Toolbox

Materializing Sex and Butler's Perspective:

Queer Theory: Judith Butler (1956-)

Conditions of

Possibility

Concepts and Theory: Bodies That Matter

383

386 389 400

Smith's Perspective: Standpoint Theory

18.

353 357

Building Your Theory Toolbox

17.

331

334

Concepts and Theory: Mediating the World

16.

311

and

Intelligibility

403 406 408

Concepts and Theory: Haunting, Subversion,

and Queer

Politics

Summary Building Your Theory Toolbox

On

Being Unsettled

415 420 422 425

References

437

Index

447

About the Author

455

Having a Thought

Formerly, one could think

.

.

.

that he

simply by looking at a person that he wanted

tell

now wished

to

thought: he set his face as for prayer

stood

still

on one

and stopped walking; when

for hours in the middle of the road

leg or

two

legs.

to

become wiser and prepared himselffor a

That seemed

to

yes,

one even

the thought arrived



be required by the dignity of the

matter.

(Nietzsche, 1974, p. 81)

Did

you read the quote?

inside of you.

This kind of thought

demanding and

do

is

an event.

It

modern

busyness.

have a thought, to be captured by an idea

have

a

thought.

a thought or

is

describing

it?

requires or perhaps captures the entire person.

And

that's

two with me.

It

what

will

this

When

life

was slower,

it

was

eas-

when you least expected it. Most of but we can still quite deliber-

us today are too busy to be taken over by an idea ately

And let what Nietzsche says get Of course you think quite a

so.

a thought?

inspiring. Notice that Nietzsche says "formerly." He's referring

to a time before the seduction of ier to

please

But have you ever had a thought in the way Nietzsche

bit.

It's

If not,

Have you ever had

book



is

about. I'm inviting you to have

require time and

effort.

But once you've had

a

thought, you'll never be the same again.

The Organization of the Book Every book

tells

novels, but theory

books

tell

stories too.

the text: In each chapter of this book, theories

tells a

when we are talking about The most apparent way they do is through

a story. That's probably pretty obvious

we review someone's

story about society. But theory books

subtle ways as well.

theory,

tell

and each of those

stories in

much more

Sometimes these more subtle ways are the most powerful. For

CONTEMPORARY SOCIAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY

example, for most of sociology's history,

More of them do now, but

female theorists or theorists of color. of structuring theory texts

theory textbooks did not contain

classic

story in part by

tells a

its

of society. Likewise, the organization of this book also In broad terms, the story this sociology. In distinctive

many

ways,

I

book

tells is

not

tells

the introduction of social theory into

think that this increasing presence of social theory

earmark of contemporary theory. But

debate one way or the other, but

it's

I

do think

But before we get into the

important

it is

specifics,

we need

social theories. I'm fortunate in this

because

in

is

the

important to note that the intro-

porary theory to give you a sense of this transition. The book to try

my

is

set

have no interest

I

teaching contem-

in

up

and define

to

do

just that.

sociological

mailbox today was the

American Sociological Association Theory Section

issue of the

That way

a story.

duction has not been smooth; theory has become contested terrain. in the

all.

omissions of certain segments

newsletter.

and

latest

The

lead-

ing article addresses this very issue. While definitions of debated topics tend to

be contested themselves, Let

me

give

I

think the author does a good job of outlining the issues.

you the definitions of both forms of theory (Sanderson, 2005):

Sociological theorists are less concerned with criticizing

than with understanding

it.

They tend

and

in

on formulating

some

cases

specific theories of particular substantive

commentators and

formulating theoretical critiques of modern society as

and

theory, or con-

phenomena,

combine the two.

Social theorists see themselves as social

explaining social

a scientific sociology,

They may do general

as least in the broadest sense of the term.

centrate

and rebuilding society

be committed to

to

life.

They

are usually not

are often strongly opposed to

much

committed

as,

critics

or

and

more

as

than,

to scientific sociology

Their goals are primarily or even exclu-

it.

sively political, (pp. 2-3)

Our book moves, then, from more sociological theories to more social theories, from theories more concerned with empirically describing and explaining social behavior to those concerned with critiquing and rebuilding. But the book has a

more

issues.

change and develop

structure,

One

of analytical

what

levels.

I

is

level

I

not only want you to have a sense

want you

issues such as the

start this

to

come.

book

On

The micro

to see

how

micro-macro

certain theoretical

link,

agency versus

off with symbolic interaction (SI)

first

level

is

part of the

sometimes

to

easier for students to see.

that

it

do

it

phenomena: the

the arena of face-to-face encounters, the level addresses societal-level

book generally

considering the social situation and

and systems. One reason

is

a very basic level, SI sensitizes us to the issue

concerns organizations, and the macro

and systems. The

structures

structures

also

Generally, sociology sees three levels of social

micro, meso, and macro.

We begin



I

oriented around a few theoretical

is

meaning, and the person.

of the reasons

sets the stage for

meso

that

As we are progressing through the book,

of sociological and social theories, issues

one

subtle organization as well,

its

follows those contours.

people and then

like this

is

move up

to social

that micro-level processes are

Having a Thought

However, setting things up

The

issue

first

is

way

this

also sensitizes us to a couple of problems.

problem of the micro-macro

called the

are the levels of face-to-face interactions

and

Simply

link.

stated,

how

social structures/systems related?

have two theories that address this issue, and they

sit

We

right at the transition point

between the sections on interaction and structure. Both Peter Blau and Randall

how

Collins offer insights as to

thing organizing the

how

book

two

these

does

like this

different levels can be joined. So,

give

is

you a sense of

this transition

one and

the different levels might be linked to one another.

Another

problem

theoretical

the tension between agency

structure talks about free will?

how

and

see

by organizing the book

Agency

refers to free will

social behaviors are patterned over time.

sure seems so. But

It

we can

that

structure.

if

people

this

way

is

and choice, and

Do

are always free to choose,

people have

how

can we

account for patterns in behavior? Structures are of course one of the central issues in all

of sociology.

I

would guess

most of what you have learned

that

addressing race, gender, or other forms of inequality

many

of view. For

came from

in classes

a structural point

one degree

sociologists, structures are the social facts that to

or another influence our thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. For these sociologists, structures are the primary

mechanism through which

interactions are patterned.

Symbolic interaction directly addresses the agency/structure debate. argues that behavior

is

the result of social interaction

Basically, SI

and agency. In face-to-face

encounters, people negotiate and respond to meanings as they emerge through interaction.

The symbolic

interactionist theory of the self

is

in fact based

notion that individuals have agency and freedom of choice. As the book,

and up the micro-macro

ask us to see

how

and structure

in

of you, you'll

feel

that

ladder,

we

as

Keep the idea of agency

you move through these chapters.

the tension

among

something fascinating happens

we move through

are going to encounter theories that

social structures actually reduce agency.

mind

on the

If

you keep

these different approaches

to the idea of

agency

in

— and

it

in front

you'll notice

Chapters 13 to

18.

In terms of the agency/structure tension, things turn interesting in Chapters 8

and

with the work of Pierre Bourdieu and Anthony Giddens. Both theorists

12,

want

to

do away with

yes!

And

and

yes, their

their

theories that

debate entirely. Their answer to the question of agency

answer to the question of structure

is

yes! Yes,

end with in the

a similar conclusion

people have free will

—agency and structure occur

the

same behaviors. meaning

is

central to

human

beings and that meaning

emerges through symbolic interaction. In the second chapter of

and Luckmann agree

that

meaning

is

central to

human

isn't real in

the

same way

a

ful culture

appear objectively

Luckmann

give us

rock real,

is real.

when

it

Once we

hit

book, Berger

is

meaningful, then

how do humans make a meaningisn't? Good question, and Berger and

So,

good answers. But watch what happens

further through the book.

this

beings, but they use that

idea to talk about the social construction of reality. If our world

ing,

at

other issues that the organization of the book addresses are meaning and

the person. SI argues that

it

is

behaviors are structured. Bourdieu and Giddens offer us different

same time and

Two

this

to

meaning

as

we move

Derrida, Foucault, and Baudrillard,

symbols, representation, and structures

all

go out the window.

mean-

xi

— xii

CONTEMPORARY SOCIAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY

We ment

way

will also see shifts in the

We

are seen.

the individual and his or her political involve-

begin with the interactionist understanding of the

which

self,

is

the epitome of what a democratic citizen ought to be: free and responsible for his

or her nity

own

choices. But in Chapter 12,

no longer

where the central political a

Giddens

us that societies in late moder-

tells

we have

practice emancipatory politics; instead,

and the

issues are choice

freedoms and

rights.

And we end

lifestyle politics,

reflexive project of the self rather than

book considering

the

identity politics

very different sort of political action.

Our journey is filled with amazing questions and equally striking answers: What is society? What (rather than who) are you? Where do you fit in society? How do you fit in society? Are there global structures and a global system? Do we now live in a

symbolic space where the local and global collide?

How are economic shifts and

the proliferation of mass media and advertising images influencing you, society, politics,

and the world order?

claims, or

is it

Is

textual, as Jacques

the social world empirical, as Herbert

Derrida

Can we have

insists?

Blumer

a social science, or

is

and

political conditions,

as Michel Foucault argues? Is there a generalized other, or does

our very conscious-

the idea of the social sciences simply an effect of historical

ness change by gender, as Dorothy Smith tation to think. Let this

book challenge you

One more interesting What about the body? In

thinking about

may be

riences it

the

that this



book

an

invi-

we embark on our

trip:

—George Herbert Mead — and one

Judith Butler:

.

.

.

against the assumption that the

as a perceptual object provides a center to

be attached, thus creating a private and psychical

germ of representation and

is

I'm going to leave you with two quotes,

it,

necessary again to utter a warning

may

hope

to find questions rather than answers.

book with

this

from the person we end the book with

It

I

thread for us to consider before

one from the person we begin

body of the individual

us?

tells

which expe-

field that

has in

so of reflection. (Mead, 1934, p. 357)

[There] are certain constructions of the

body constitutive

in this sense: that

could not operate without them, that without them there would be no

"I,"

we no

"we." (Butler, 1993, p. xi)

How to

Use This Book There are

a

few unique features

sational tone.

I

try to speak in

examples and try excited

to

convey

and caught up

That might sound

in this

my

odd, but

try to let the voice of the theorist

scheme on the scientific,

I

Second, think

I

it

as

I

is

is

written in a conver-

as possible.

—and

I

I

use personal

actually get pretty

don't believe in any of these theories.

it's

a

good

critical,

I

I

thing. As

much

as possible,

I

don't intentionally impose a

present

it

as critical,

and

if it is

as scientific.

There are two implications of this approach that

book has many

book

little

come through.

theories. If the theory

present

the

First,

experience with theory

in this stuff.

a little

book.

academic jargon

voices.

It's

polyvocal,

which

is

I

part of

think are important.

First,

the

what makes up the landscape

Having a Thought

of contemporary theory. The second implication of these theories. Every theory in here

when

that

first

lightbulb goes on. If

just say that getting

you

to think a

theory

is

makes us most human,

I

remake your world.

And

the theories

that

I

many critiques

don't offer

And

can get you to "get

the real thrill of

it"

.

.

me

well, let

.

an ultimate high for me.

is

It's

what

think.

Obviously, the next step in theory

you.

I

new thought

In fact,

all hit

it is

by themselves

all

you should

to be able to critique, but

is

have a lightbulb experience. They won't ories will

is

absolutely amazing!

is

you

like this,

my explicit

will

do

that.

first

but some of these the-

and

intent to disturb

unsettle

However, the critiques of the

theories are actually within the book. Each theory offers a different perspective than

the one before claims, or

it.

is it

Blau argues?

For example, what

Is

society? Is

is

made up of population

structures

a system, like Niklas

it

the subject dead, as Jean Baudrillard claims, or

is

theories

and form your own

The book well.

also has

some

like Peter

the self the central

organizing feature of the encounter, as Erving Goffman claims?

once you understand a theory, you

Luhmann

and exchange networks,

My

point

will automatically think differently

is

that

about other

critiques.

structural features I'd like to bring to your attention as

Every chapter has an "Essential" box

"Building Your Theory Toolbox" feature

at

beginning of the chapter, and a

at the

The

the end.

two other sections

brief biographical sketch, as well as

that

"Essential" I

hope

box

gives

you

will give

you

a quick

handle on what's going on: Passionate Curiosity (the central questions the theorist interested in)

and Keys

to

Knowing

The "Building Your Theory Toolbox" you go beyond what's presented tant

section has a

fairly consistent

book's

Web

site

interesting topics

element of Check

Bytes, students

main chapter;

Out

work of

and power) could be

list

resources to help the

more impor-

Out highlights some of the

the

Web Byte

feature. Available

Web Bytes are

on the

relatively short

10 additional theorists. Using these

Web

a theoretical issue raised in the

can be used in concert with the book to emphasize cer-

tain areas of society or theory. For example, tus,

is

and professors can further explore

or, these Bytes

It

I

is

for).

from the chapter and points you to resources. It

(http://www.pineforge.com/csstStudy),

yet substantial introductions to the

number of

book. In Learning More,

in the

primary and secondary works for an author. Check

more important or

A

your eye open

(central concepts to keep

a

built

an entire course on inequality

by using Chapters

(class, sta-

5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 16, 17,

and

18,

coupled with the Web Bytes for Stuart Hall and Reading Culture Through Cultural Studies; in

Candice West and

Don

H.

Zimmerman: Doing Gender; Karen

S.

Cook: Power

Exchange Networks; Randall Collins and Conflict Theory; Erik Olin Wright:

Measuring Class Inequality; and Patricia Hill Collins and Intersecting Oppressions. This

example

is

only one of

many themes that can be

developed. Seeing the World consists

of review questions that you should be able to answer after studying the chapter.

Engaging the World offers suggestions for using the theory; and,

finally,

Weaving

the

Threads are questions that ask you to compare, contrast, evaluate, critique, and synthesize certain ideas that

two or more

theorists have in

common. These

Threads

should also sensitize you to the central issues in contemporary theory.

One more

feature

may be

either highlighted in italics or

online Glossary of Terms.

of interest to you. Important terms and concepts are

marked

in

bold.

The terms

in

bold are defined

in the

xiii

Acknowledgments

n any project of for

many

this type, there are

different reasons.

many

However,

people that should be acknowledged

want to acknowledge and thank weekends, and

and

laughter.

my

I'll

my life-partner.

dark hours of

stress.

my

I'll

the

all

all

it

you gave

editorial staff at Pine Forge:

through missed deadlines, shifting tables of content, a

list

you are the A-Team! One editor deserves

to patience:

my copy editor, Teresa

cal

and

support

special

been eradicated

I

suffered patiently

all

lost picture credits,

this

monstrous book. You

mention when

Herlinger. Teresa, you've put

spelling errors that should have

I

Benjamin Penner, Katja

of inconveniences that would be longer than

are the best;

me

spend a lifetime trying. Next,

Werlich Fried, Annie Louden, and Laureen A. Shea. You

word counts, and

patience. First,

rest:

you endured long days, missed

Jen,

And through

never be able to repay you, but

acknowledge and thank

book, one reason for

in the case of this

appreciation and acknowledgment stands out from

it

comes

up with grammati-

in high school, with refer-

ences that are either incomplete or superfluous, and with obtuse language that was better at hide-and-seek than at revealing. But

and questions; you keep project: the faculty

me on my toes. Two

— my thanks

for

its

thought.

know

We

that.

I

are

— and

at

especially the

the University of

department head,

my students: Thank

you

various iterations; thank you for listening to

inevitable rabbit trails; and,

your insights

your patience over missed meetings and

infrequent presence in the department. To

work through

gifts are

and students of the sociology department

North Carolina, Greensboro. To the faculty Steve Kroll-Smith

your greatest

other groups also gave patiently to this

most of all, thank you

most human when we most

also want to thank the many,

for taking a

for reading

my

reviewers

and

chance and having a

clearly think; but, then,

many

rants

my my

who

at

you already one time or

another contributed to this work. Without your input, this book would be substantially different. In particular,

I

thank Stephan Groschwitz (University of

Cincinnati) for understanding and for critical and supportive input, and Jeffery

Ulmer (Pennsylvania

State University) for specific

recommendations

organization of the book and ideas about symbolic interactionism. Finally, to

thank Jerry Westby. You took the

First

chance and

it's all

your

thank

I

for the I

want

fault.

xv

xvi

CONTEMPORARY SOCIAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY

Pine Forge Press gratefully acknowledges the contributions of the following individuals:

John

P.

Bartkowski

Shoon Lio

Mississippi State University

University of California-Riverside

Elena Bastida

James

The University of Texas Pan

University of Northern Colorado

P.

Marshall

American Marietta Morrissey

Bob Bolin

University of Toledo

Arizona State University

Glenn W. Muschert

Miami

Joseph Gerteis

University

University of Minnesota

Yvonne Olivares Stephan

F.

Groschwitz

The Ohio

State University

University of Cincinnati

Frank

J.

Page

University of Utah

Sarah Horsfall Texas Wesleyan University

Dan Ryan John A. Hughes

Mills College

Lancaster University Jeff

Basil

Ulmer

Penn

Kardaras

State University

Capital University

Pablo Vila

Alem Kebede

Temple University

California State University, Bakersfield

Eleanor A. LaPointe Rutgers University, Georgian Court University,

College

and Ocean County

INTRODUCTION TO SECTION

I

The Social Situation and Its People

'd like

you

What happened? What

friends.

you would say something

game on

football

put

it

you got together with

to think about the last time

TV."

another way,

does watching

like

did you do?

"we

If

Now, how would you answer

how would you answer game

a football

group of your

you could answer me, chances

hung out and

just

a

are

"we watched the

talked" or

that question theoretically?

To

How How can you think about hanging

the question in sociological terms?

relate to society?

What is going on when we are face-to-face these may seem like silly questions, but they are

out and talking in theoretical terms? with other people?

from

far

happens

The

book of

five theories

and around

in

presented in this section

social situations, like

when you

all

talk or

look

watch

at

what

TV

with

theories we'll be looking at don't present a complete understanding of

what's going a

the surface,

broad way, the

In a

friends.

On

it.

on

its

in the situation; to present

own. In some

such

a

robust understanding would take

cases, the theories reach

beyond the

situation, as with

Berger and Luckmann's understanding of social reality and Randall Collins's theory

of the micro-macro

link.

But together these theories give us a good place to begin

thinking about the situation and

its

people.

The book begins with the idea of meaning. bit,

but

thing

it's

important for us to stop and take

human

beings do

things in our world

meaning

is

is

built

may mean

We

use the term "meaning" quite a

look

at its significance. First,

around meaning. Our a lot

or a

little,

entire

idea of

meaning

And

here's

gets played out in

which deals with symbolic interaction,

world

is

every-

meaningful;

but there's always meaning. Second,

never the thing-in-itself. By definition, meaning

other than an event or object.

The

a

where things two ways

is

always something

get interesting for us.

in Section

we'll see that

I.

First, in

Chapter

meaning emerges out

1,

ot

CONTEMPORARY SOCIAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY

meaning

interactions. If

is

something other than the thing

meaning and how can we know what us

is

meaning

that

nonverbal cues. That

is,

that

meaning emerges from the meaning

is

situation.

addressed in this section

constructivist theory of Berger

and Luckmann (Chapter

argue that creating meaning

necessary for

ronment. order a

is

underdeveloped within

instinctually

We

is

interaction gives

negotiated through the back-and-forth interplay of verbal and

is

The second way

then where

itself,

The answer symbolic

it is?

a

human

through the

is

Humans are born human envi-

survival.

world that has no

social

These two theorists

2).

specifically

use meaningful culture to both substitute for instincts and create and

human

world. There

however, a problem: Meaning

is,

isn't real in

same

the

way physical elements like mountains are real. So, how do we make something appear objectively real

Chapter

The The

self

social entity.

That

role-taking, the self

see that the self

— society needs

is

an

a self.

stages of social role-taking in interaction.

able to take the perspective of the generalized other.

is

and making society

Goffman

In Chapter 4,

possible.

takes the idea of the self in a different direction.

concerned about the "internalized

feature

We will

self.

individuals don't need a self

is,

theory.

then works to provide control over individual behaviors, thus producing

social order

isn't

and Luckmann's

That's the topic of Berger

isn't?

formed through successive

self is

Through

it

also introduces us to the idea of the

1

immanently

when

and guiding

and manage

uals present

social situation

dramatic

force in

self."

social encounters. Situations

all

a self for others to see

and

demand

react to



is

more

at

home

in the situation

social order

is

a a

sec-

imperceptivity

self

an unintended consequence of impression management.

Like Goffman, Harold Garfinkel (Chapter 3)

meaning or the interaction per social order in the if

And

is

encounters. In other words,

all

is

concerned with

unlike Goffman, Garfinkel doesn't consider the self at

Generally,

way

the self

First,

than the individual.

ond, the situational requirement of presenting and managing a

produces the interaction order that undergirds

that individ-

the only

it's

can occur. This implies two things for Goffman:

effect that

Goffman

Rather, he sees the self as the principal

we

se.

What

most ordinary and unnoticed ways,

social order.

But

nor does he think about

Garfinkel allows us to see

is

that

as in saying

we achieve

"you know."

we think they are What does "you know" accomplish in

ever think about such things as "you know,"

meaningless. But ask yourself this question:

an interaction?

all;

It

doesn't

mean something;

it

does something.

Randall Collins (Chapter 5) takes a different tack and claims that

we

are

more

concerned with diffuse emotional feelings than with meaning, order, or the According to Collins, interactions, with

it's

much more

likely that

our emotions working

we

feel

our way

and

as a kind of radar

to

self.

and through

reservoir, rather

than manage an impression or negotiate meaning. Further, Collins sees rituals as the most important part of the interaction. In rituals,

energy and collect higher

levels

of cultural capital



we charge up our emotional

at least, that's

our

Collins also provides a transition point into the next section of the the ideas of social structure

macro

link

is

one

classical theory.

nomena and

that

is

and the micro-macro

obvious

in

link.

The

contemporary theory and

intent.

book through

issue of the

virtually

micro-

unknown

in

For some time, sociologists have thought about macro-level phe-

micro-level interactions separately. In

some ways,

the two different

The

domains seemed

Mead saw

to discount

social institutions

one another. Micro-level

more

theorists like

Social Situation

George Herbert

in terms of symbols and ways of thinking and

behaving, with their importance and influence emerging out of interactions. the other hand, structuralists such as Emile

and behaviors ogists

began

and

On

Durkheim saw human consciousness

as being the result of institutional arrangements. Eventually, sociol-

to see a theoretical issue here. If there are

face interactions

and

then

social structures,

how

two separate

fields, face-to-

are they related?

Collins provides us with a theory that links the micro level of the situation with

macro-level processes. Simply, Collins argues that ritualized interactions are linked together through cultural capital and emotional energy. Individuals actually pro-

vide the link as they

move from

where they are most

likely to increase their holdings of cultural capital

ritual to ritual,

being drawn to those interactions

and emo-

tional energy.

We'll see that Collins

able to explain such large-scale

is

phenomena

as stratifica-

tion through his theory of interaction ritual chains. The interesting thing about Collins's theory, however,

is

that he argues against the existence of social structures.

According to Collins (1975), a

myth

(p. 53).

"All social structure

is

problematic, quite possibly only

when they encounter each other" is everything. What appear to be "structures"

that people talk about or implicitly invoke

For Collins, then, the situation

are in reality chains of interaction rituals. So,

what did you do the

didn't start a social

last

time you got together with your friends? Maybe you

movement, but

in that

bolic meanings; engaged in self-talk

and maintained your of social order and

self

and the

mundane

situation

and evaluation though

self

you negotiated sym-

role-taking;

managed

of everyone else present; achieved a sense

reality; participated in rituals that

confirmed

social reality;

exchanged cultural capital and emotional energy; and linked up your one

social sit-

uation with others occurring in the present, the past, and the future. Sounds

you were busy, and we've only made

it

through the introduction.

like

Its

People

CHAPTER

1

Symbols, Meaning, and the Social Self George Herbert Mead (1863-1931) and Herbert Blumer (1 900- 1 987)

Photo: Reprinted with permission of The Granger Collections.

Photo: Reprinted with permission of the American Sociological Association.

83

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

The

ITS

6

3

1

PEOPLE

American Pragmatism

Interactionist Perspective:

Concepts and Theory: Emergent Meanings

Meaning

9

9

Interactions

1

Symbols and Social Objects

1

Concepts and Theory: The Necessary

The Self

Self

1

1

Social Action

Society

8

1

1

Concepts and Theory: Empiricism and Symbolic Interactionism

Summary

19

22

Building Your Theory Toolbox

Who

23

was Martin Luther King,

Jr.?

that tried to bring equality to

Was he a good man, a civil all

humankind?

national heroes, worthy of a holiday, statues,

Is

rights leader

he one of America's

and

streets

and parks

named after him? Or, was he a social agitator who at best ought to be forgotFrom the perspective of symbolic interactionism, the truth or falsity of such

being ten?

statements

From an matters

is

of no consequence.

It

doesn't matter

interactionist point of view, there

how

is

is

who

or what King "really" was.

no ultimate

people use the idea of Martin Luther King.

When, why, and how

is

an idea of King brought up

truth about King.

How

What

King spoken

is

in interactions?

How do

of?

people

organize their behaviors around the social object of Martin Luther King? According to symbolic interactionists, the

meaning of Martin Luther King emerges

as people

negotiate different practical (and political) issues through social interaction. (For an interesting

Let

idea of

me

example of this approach

ask you another question:

what

a

woman

is?

Or, can the

What does "woman" mean? meaning of words

"gay") change from one interaction to another? in

which she

is

& Piatt,

to understanding King, see Lilley

like

Is

1994.)

there only

one

"female" (or "black" or

A woman may

have an interaction

treated with respect as a professional colleague, but in the very next

interaction be treated as a sexual plaything, an object of gaze. But

meaning

simply a one-way

meanings are

street.

According to symbolic interactionists,

subject to negotiation within each

the professional

woman

may,

in

and every interaction by

one of her many work

all

all

isn't

the participants. So

situations, see

someone

that

she finds attractive and might try to get the person's attention, thus becoming an object of gaze for that person.

Symbolic interactionism came into existence primarily through the work of two theorists:

George Herbert Mead and Herbert Blumer. Mead was an

self

and

society.

early 20th-

who theorized extensively about the symbolic nature of the Mead called his approach social behaviorism. Blumer (1969)

century philosopher

— Symbols, Meaning, and the Social Self

coined the term "symbolic interactionism" to refer to Mead's work, although he

"somewhat barbaric neologism

characterizes his term as a

offhand way" a

(p. In).

name: He systematized Mead's work and gave

it

a

coherent methodology.

competing definition of symbolic interaction came from

Kuhn

coined in an

I

work

(1964a, 1964b). Kuhn's

is

One man named Manford

of symbolic interactionism.

told, there are actually several versions

Truth be

that

However, Blumer did more than simply give Mead's work

a

so different that eventually Kuhn's

Blumer's work became categorized respectively as

symbolic interaction. The primary discrepancy between the two approaches

Kuhn

the influence of structure: ing behaviors;

Blumer argues

argues that structure

that any structure

and

the Iowa and Chicago schools of

is

a

primary force

lies in

in pattern-

must be enacted through emergent

social interactions.

The reason I'm using

the

the other theorists in this

Mead-Blumer approach

book

is

that

it

us up to talk about

sets

that are concerned with the sociology of the every-

day (the theories of Goffman, Garfinkel, and Collins) and

it

tunes us into

some

of

the specific ideas that are laced throughout the entire book. In broad brush strokes,

we begin

the

book with meaning and end with meaninglessness; we begin with the

we begin with symbols and end with signs; we begin with a critique of structure, we then see the power and production of structure in the mid-section of the book, and we end the book self

and end with the death of the subject and

with the deconstruction of structures. After after we've set

for this

our stage



Essential

we

consider symbolic interactionism

we'll visit these ideas again,

and the next chapter

The

identity politics;

is

meaning and

its

now the central issue human beings.

but for

ramifications for

Mead and Blumer

Biography George Herbert Mead was born on February 27, 1863, Massachusetts.

was 16 and

Mead began

years old and graduated

surveyor,

in

South Hadley,

in

when he

education at Oberlin College

his college

1883. After short

stints as a

school teacher

Mead took his graduate studies in philosophy at Harvard. In Mead to join him to form the department of philosophy

John Dewey asked

University of Chicago, the site of the States.

first

department of sociology

Mead's major influence on sociologists came through

in social

psychology, which he starteo teaching

his students.

Herbert Blumer University of

Among

his

was born on March

Chicago

in

1928;

Psychology. Blumer was on the faculty

which time he also played professional mediated labor disputes. at Berkeley to chair

its

In

at

1952, Blumer

the United

and

Society,

published

was Herbert Blumer.

1900. He completed

was

titled

Ph.D. at the

his

Methods

in

Social

Chicago from 1927 to 1952, during

football, interviewed

new department

ology's premier journals, the

7,

Self,

students

his dissertation

in

graduate course

1900. Those lectures formed

in

the basis for Mead's most famous work, Mind,

posthumously by

his

1893, at the

moved

gang members, and

to the University of California

of sociology. Blumer edited

one

American Journal of Sociology, from 1940

and he was president of the American Sociological Society

in

1955.

of soci-

to 1952,

8

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

ITS

PEOPLE

Passionate Curiosity

Mead and Blumer are intensely interested in the social basis of meaning, self, What is the self? Why are humans the only animal to have a self? Where is meaning and how is created? How are people able to act rather than react? Both

and

action.

it

Keys to Knowing pragmatism, meaning,

social

objects, the act/action,

mind,

interaction,

self,

generalized other, institutions, joint actions, the problem of reification

The

American Pragmatism

Interactionist Perspective:

There were many influences on Mead's thinking. In

fact, his

work

is

an early exam-

ple of theoretical synthesis, bringing together several different strands of thought to create

something new

poses,

we

(for

will concentrate

Mead's influences, see Morris, 1962). But for our pur-

on symbolic

interactionism's (SI) debt to the philosophy

of pragmatism.

Two of the most important tion of reason

and the search

characteristics of classical philosophy are the exaltafor truth.

These two issues are

interrelated. Socrates,

the father of Greek philosophy, was responding to the Sophists' claim that truth relative.

He argued and

tual rigor

and argued

that the discovery of truth

self-criticism. Plato, a student

that sense perception

Knowledge gained through the each individual

—and

is

five

reality wasn't

senses are only picking

only possible through

is

intellec-

of Socrates, took these ideas further

method

a problematic

senses

is

for recognizing realitv.

constantly changing and particular to

is

thought to be

up shadows of the true

relative.

According to Plato, our

the reality of forms or ideas.

reality,

This reality can only be accurately discerned through reason, not the physical senses. Because reason ical

impulses,

it

is

subject to abstract laws of logic

and not fluctuating phys-

alone can perceive truth. Reason then became the

final arbiter

of

truth.

Plato thus gave both existence

one

that

is

sense knowledge

of

reality.

and knowledge

unshakable and unchanging. is

And

a firm base in ultimate realitv,

Plato confirmed Socrates' notion that

undependable: Our senses only pick up the changing shadows

The only way to

perceive reality

and truth

is

through reason.

It's

the

mind

that has the potential to perceive truth, not the senses.

Pragmatism proposes an

utterly different approach.

It

rejects the

there are any fundamental truths and proposes, rather, that truth place,

and purpose.

in

any ultimate

reality.

is

not found in in the actions

any idea or moral

of people; specifically, people find ideas to be true fits.

Reason

in this perspective

can make anything seem social entity.

relative to time,

is

Truth can only be found

In other words, the "truth" of

what people believe or

notion that

if

they result in practical bene-

can and often does function as legitimation. Reason

right. Further, as

we

will see, SI conceives

of the mind as a

Symbols, Meaning, and the Social Self

Pragmatism

is

the only indigenous and distinctively

9

American form of philoso-

War (Menand, 2001). The Civil number of dead and wounded exceeds that of The extreme: in the War was costly any other war that the United States has fought. And the dead on both sides were phy,

and

family

its

birth

linked to the

is

members and

American

Civil

fellow Americans. This extreme cost

and doubtful about the ideas and

beliefs that

left

people disillusioned

provoked the war.

It

wasn't so

much

the content of the ideas that was the problem, but, rather, the fact that ideas that

appeared so

right,

moral, and legitimate could cause such devastation.

took the

It

United States almost 50 years to culturally recover and find a way of thinking and seeing a world that

Pragmatism 2001,

p. xi).

is

could embrace. That philosophy was pragmatism.

it

"an idea about ideas" and a way of relativizing ideology (Menand,

this relativizing doesn't result in relativism. Classic

But

based on reason and the

common social

philosophy

Pragmatism

belief that truth can be discovered.

is

is

based on

sense and the belief that the search for "truth and knowledge shifts to the

and communal circumstances under which persons can communicate and

cooperate in the process of acquiring knowledge" (West, 1999,

p. 151).

Understanding pragmatism helps us see the basis for the symbolic interactionist concern for meaning, social entity that

act deliberately

and

self,

a necessary

is

and

As we

society.

to interact socially;

argues that the self

will see, SI

component of every

interaction.

We

need

a

is

a self to

allows us to consider alternative lines of

it

behavior and thus enables us to act rather than

react.

Thus, in pragmatism,

human

action and decisions aren't determined or forced by society, ideology, or preexisting truths. Rather, decisions

through interaction self.



a

and

emerge out of a consensus

ethics

consensus that

is

based on a free and knowing subject: the

Understanding the pragmatic base of SI helps us see the

the ideas of meaning,

self,

and

that develops

political

undertones in

social action.

Concepts and Theory: Emergent Meanings All animals are

only

humans

confronted with the challenge of material subsistence, but

are straddled with the vexing question of

Anderson, 1992,

p.

its

meaning. (Snow

&

230)

Meaning What's the meaning of meaning? it

It's

an odd question,

Asking

it

it

in the

isn't

a play

form

that

I

on words;

it's

At

"how much wood could

looks like a play on words, kind of like

chuck?" But

isn't it?

a

a serious question that has

first

woodchuck an answer.

did helps to point out something significant about the

answer. Webster's (1983) defines meaning as "1. that which exists in the 2.

that

which

is

intended to be, or in

stood by acts or language" the

glance,

(p. 1115).

fact

is,

mind

.

.

.

conveyed, denoted, signified, or under-

We're going to put the

moment and concentrate on the second. Meaning

is

first

definition aside for

something

veyed, denoted, or signified by acts, words, or objects. Notice what

is

con-

meaning

isn't.

that

— — 10

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

Meaning thing

PEOPLE

ITS

the act, word, experience, or object. By definition, meaning

isn't

whatever that thing might

itself,

be.

use a powerful example to see

Let's

The important thing

person. person's

has ended;

life

it's

for

this:

think about one person killing another

our purposes

the actual act or the fact that a

isn't

the context in which the killing takes place. Killing can

be war, or terrorism, or accidental homicide, or suicide, or religious first-degree murder, or execution as a

punishment

can be legitimate or morally wrong, depending on doesn't matter, in

and of

the

isn't

itself; it's

for first-degree its

meaning

the context that matters.

context.

or

sacrifice,

murder

killing

Human

Remember

life

movie

the

or the actual events surrounding Apollo 13? The eyes of the entire world were on the three

men

and had

ror

trapped

heartfelt

same time hundreds

in that spacecraft.

concern for the if

give

of those three Americans

Life itself doesn't matter;

in hor-

— while

not thousands of people were being killed or

Vietnam by American servicemen.

meaning we

America watched the catastrophe

lives

at the

maimed

what matters

is

in

the

it.

why do we place such importance on meaning? Ah, that's a very good question. Why can't human beings get away from meaning? The first part of the answer is that humans are utterly and completely social. Being social is how we as a species But

exist.

Every species

whales, lions, and

is

defined by

hummingbirds

method of

its

all

different?

survival or existence.

They

Why

are

are different because they have

What makes human beings different from whales, lions, and hummingbirds? Humans have a different mode of existence. But being social is only part of the answer. There are a number of species that exist socially, like ants and bees, so what makes humans different? It is the magnitude of our sociability, and, more importantly, the way in which we create our social different

ways of existing

in the world.

bonds. Most other social species instinctually create social bonds through a variety

Humans

of things such as scent, physical spacing, and so on.

use symbols to create

meaningful social bonds. Granted, there are some species that have degree of culture, but no other animal uses culture to the extent that

a

kind and

humans do

and no other species uses symbols.

We are

primarily built for and oriented toward using signs and symbols. Culture

and language are the reasons we have the brain structure that we do; culture reason

we have

the kind of vocal structures that

kind of hands that lifts

we do

out the object from

—culture its

abstraction or transcendence a self,

Keep

and

to

have society.

this idea

on the

do; culture

is

is

the

why we have

the

the defining feature of humanity.

Meaning

rooted existence in time and space. This

move of

is

We

we

is

necessary for us to be conscious, to interact, to have

will visit this idea

front burner so

of meaning throughout the book.

you can add

to

it

as

we go

along.

Interactions Okay,

if

meaning

isn't in

the object, word, language, or event, then where

meaning

is it?

mind. However,

as

with most everything in a society infatuated with the individual, that definition

is

The quote above from

Webster's says that

exists in the

only partially correct. The individualized definition also lines up with an important

Symbols, Meaning, and the Social

philosophical school of thought: idealism. Idealism and realism are two sides in the philosophical debate about reality (ontology or metaphysics) and knowledge (epis-

temology). To even begin to scratch the surface of this debate would take

more time and

than

text

over 2000 years), but in

our day-to-day

Meaning

we

is

a

In pragmatism, ideas

humans and

need

are not at

pragmatic

to.

issue.

it

Meaning, then,

ideas.

facilitates behavior.

people hold onto what works, and what works

humans.

in people's

bol, or object

is

Pragmatism argues that

the only truth that endures for

is

meaning

is

Thus, the meaning of any idea, moral, word, sym-

pragmatically determined, or determined by

while meaning comes to be in the mind,

emergent

is,

a tool for action

behaviors and that meaning emerges out of social interaction

in response to adaptive concerns.

ically

is

In true pragmatic form, symbolic interactionism argues that

found only

That

are organizational instruments.

behaviors based on

organize their

Symbolic interaction teaches us that

interested in ontology or epistemology.

all

and meanings

has value to us only insofar as

it

much

(philosophers have been debating these issues for

really don't

we

life,

humans

for

we have

social interactions



it is

that

produced and

its

which

in the

is

practical use. Thus,

exists

mind

within pragmat-

only a residue of

is

these social interactions.

Seeing meaning in pragmatic terms implies that meaning fined in an ongoing

manner

as

we

interact with

is

defined and rede-

one another. As we would assume,

symbolic interactionism has a very specific definition of interaction:

It is

the ongo-

ing negotiation and melding together of individual actions. There are three steps that is

must occur before we can say

given. But the cue itself doesn't carry at school.

In order to determine



response to the cue, "Is everything

must be

a

all

it

interaction. First, an initial cue

is

specific

What does more properly,

son crying in the halls

or,

that there

any

meaning.

mean?

achieve

right?" Yet

we

It

Let's say

could

mean

We

me

you

see a per-

lots

of things.

— meaning there has

still

to

be a

don't have meaning. There

response to the response. After the three phases (cue, response, and

response to the response), a meaning emerges: "Nothing's wrong, asked

distinct

to

my boyfriend just

marry him."

probably

still

aren't done,

because her response has become yet another cue.

What does that cue mean? We can't tell until you respond to her cue and she responds to

your response. This process

Meaning

results

we cannot tell

is

how meaning emerges from

the interaction.

from the back-and-forth negotiation over a symbolic

until after the interaction

is

object.

Thus

completed what the different social objects

meant to the people involved. And we may not even be done then. Quite often we take the

meaning of one interaction and make

Symbols and

it

a

cue

in

another interaction.

Social Objects

While meanings are negotiated through interaction, the negotiation takes place

around known

social objects that are indicated in

wouldn't have noticed the person crying social objects

and

their symbolic

if

meanings provide

for interaction. In fact, social objects are

an interaction; you probably

"crying" wasn't a social object. These initial

stimulus and orientation

our primary stimulus

for action.

Of course

Self

11

12

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

PEOPLE

ITS

when

possible for a physical object to provide motivation, like

it is

your hand. But something truly amazing happens not long

you

—you turn both

To

A

natural signs. for

So,

fire.

and the pain into

it

sign

something

is

that stands for

My

signs.

fire. It

call

appears that

consider

let's

smoke stands

else, like

and report

a fire,

box being opened or the tone of

treat

But the

even

many animals can

dog, Gypsy, for example, gets very excited and begins to salivate

sound of her treat?"

something

we see smoke coming out of a room, we will

if

though we may never actually see the

on

falls

social objects.

understand the issue behind symbols and social objects,

really

rock

a

after the rock hits

my voice when

I

ask,

use the

at

"Wanna

of animals to use signs varies. For instance, a dog and

ability

a

chicken will respond differently to the presence of a feed bowl on the other side of

The chicken

a fence.

vation, but the

back

dog

bowl and

to the

simply pace back and forth in front of the fence

will

will seek a eat.

break

in the fence,

The chicken appears

one stimulus, where the dog

is

to only be able to

respond directly to

able to hold his response to the food at bay while he

seeks an alternative. This ability to hold responses at bay level

important for higher-

is

thinking animals.

These signs that we've been talking about may be called natural

also gets excited at the

vidual experience with

it

sound of the

—Gypsy

didn't

treat box,

it is

signs occur apart

from the agency of the animal.

the association between the

its

meaning of these and

come out of

signs

is

treat box.

object,

are

your

treats,

There

and these

I

did. So, in the

isn't a

true natural

the natural experiences of the animal, and the

determined by

a structured relationship

between the sign

object.

its

Humans, on

the other hand, have the ability to use what symbolic interaction-

significant gestures or symbols. In contrast to natural signs,

ists call

abstract

and

arbitrary.

With natural

natural (as with

signs, the relationship

smoke and

is

and completely arbitrary

ple, the

year 2006 doesn't exist in the physical world.

what calendar

is

used,

and the

(in

fire).

What

year

it

is

is

depends on

different calendars are associated with political

up the Chinese and Muslim

dars on the Internet). Symbols are also reflexive, calling out the

person speaking and

its

terms of naturally given relations). For exam-

religious issues, not nature (for examples, look

"Tomorrow

symbols can be

between the sign and

But symbolic meaning can be quite

referent

abstract

in the

if

Gypsy did not

In other words,

sound of the box and her

absolute sense, the relationship between the sound and the treat sign. Natural signs

They

So,

because of the dog's indi-

your dog about the

tell

be a natural relationship between the sign and

also tends to

make

signs.

and learned through the individual experience of each animal.

private

dog

in aggra-

go through the break, and run

listening.

For example,

I

may

Monday." Chances are that neither one of us

call

will

and

calen-

same response

you up and

say,

be happy about that

Monday is a social object and thus reflexive, it is also subject to Thus Monday becomes something totally different when I say, "And all

situation. But while

interaction.

classes are cancelled."

Symbols, then, are verbal and nonverbal signals that convey

meaning, require interpretation, and are reciprocal. According to symbolic cues

is

its

set

interactionists, the

meaning

that a

symbol or

social object

of organized sets of responses. In other words, symbolic meaning

Symbols, Meaning, and the Social Self

is

not the image of a thing seen

dictionary, but the

meaning of

the

wooden

meaning of

a chair

word

a

it is

"chair."

into small pieces

it

is

it

and

On

and use

to start a fire,

it

lines of behavior. This definition

is

it

if

I

I

sit

For example,

no longer

it's

its

Picture a

it.

down on

take that

defined in terms of

of action

calls out.

we can do with

a slatted back. If

the other hand,

wood. So the meaning of an object

exactly correspond to the

the action that

the different kinds of things

object with four legs, a seat,

then the meaning of

break

is

nor does

at a distance,

13

this object,

same object and a chair



it's

fire-

uses, or legitimated

created through social interaction,

is

both past and present. Because the meaning, legitimated actions, and objective availability (they are objects because

duced

we can point them out

and ideas

such as the

freedom can

like

makes

itself that

it

all

Smoky Mountains,

be social objects. There

a social object; an entity

our interactions around

it.

Through

you look around the room you

object. In fact, there objects.

a

invisible things like ghosts, is

nothing about the thing

a social object to us

call

attention to

it,

through

name

it,

and

it.

are sitting in, everything

profound way

filled

in

you notice

which people only see and

is

a social

relate to social

with social objects rather than physical objects. But can

things that aren't social objects? Yes,

lem

we

a social

Human reality is constituted symbolically; it's a symbolic world, not a phys-

one,

ical

is

becomes

interaction

attach legitimate lines of behavior to If

Any idea or thing can be

in social interactions, they are social objects.

object. Natural features

of symbols are pro-

as foci for interaction)

for us to

we

can, but

respond to because we won't

that the response itself

becomes

a social object

investigating an unidentified entity,

if

know

we

notice

we

do, the object will be a prob-

the

meaning of the thing

(running from an

unknown

— note

danger,

and so on).

Concepts and Theory: The Necessary Self The

self

has the characteristic that

it is

an object to

itself.

individual get outside himself (experientially) in such a object to himself? This

is

way

.

.

.

How

as to

can an

become an

the essential psychological problem of selfhood or

of self-consciousness. (Mead, 1934, pp. 136, 138)

The

Self

Have you ever watched someone doing something? Of course you have. Maybe you watched

a

Friday night. in

worker planting

And

a tree

on campus, or maybe you watched

a

band

last

while you watched, you understood people and their behaviors

terms of the identity they claimed and roles they played. In short, when you

watch someone you understand her or him one, have you ever called have,

and

it's

him/it out."

what

it

is

someone

else's

as a social object. After

attention to that actor?

easy to do. All you have to say

And

the other person will

is

something

like,

watching some-

Undoubtedly you

"Whoa, check

her/

look and usually understand immediately

you are pointing out, because we understand one another

in

terms of

14

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

PEOPLE

ITS

being a social object. Sometimes we

sometimes we laugh

that person,

probably

will

same way

the

feel

People-watching

a pretty

is

— because the

common

person observed

is

a

us.

experience and most of us do

We can do

it.

terms of being a social object. Let

in

ask you another couple of questions. Have you ever watched yourself? Have

you ever

embarrassed or laughed

felt

We

symbolic interaction: objects,

and we

But there

someone

And

watching a band the audience.

We

isn't.

play,

We

easy to understand

is

it

Here

self

something decidedly odd about

is

else.

It

because

it

too

this statement.

our

to

easy to watch

It's

how we watch someone

our

self, call

Do you

our

we can

own

problem?

see the

call

attention to our

self,

So,

I

I

We must somehow

attention to our

self,

so that

how

done? That, as Mead

is it

says,

is

how

But

us.

and understand our

can

self as

divorce our self from

we can understand our

meaningfully relevant as a social object. That sounds convoluted, but

what we do.

am am in

else. If

can observe the other because we are standing outside of them.

a social object? self so that

are social

a social object.

is

can watch the band because they are on stage and

I

that

is

fundamental feature of

a

is

can point to them because they are there in the world around

we point

How

course you have.

and understand others because they

relate to

and understand the

relate to

Of

at yourself?

different than watching other people?

as

fact that the

both of

in

because we understand the other individual

me

for

we might

point out the other person to our friend, she

same responses

social object calls out the

it

When we

sense of admiration.

feel a

someone and be embarrassed

will notice

or with her or him, and other times

at

the

most

is

it

significant

self

exactly

problem

in social psychology.

Think about There

is

a

way

this idea

in

of the

which the

must

moment

in the

mind that

exist outside

is

made up of

here and now; that

is,

it

exist?

the self

this ability to

It is

monitor our behaviors and produce

selected images

a perspective if



someone

The question,

then,

not be

society.

is

else

The

and most It is

is

that the

own

this other self come from? How can part of us moment? How can we get outside and watch our-

achievement that comes through language, interaction,

own

self.

we

social situation,

Hiving (iotfman (Chapter 4) wrote

at

impression management. Role-taking

is

in the position

distinct

place our self in the position (or role) of

Students often confuse role-taking with what

might be called role-making. In every

is

able to achieve

this implies

through role-taking. Role-taking has a very specific defini-

another in order to see our

But role-taking

upon our being

were performing them.

the process through which

put ourselves

predicated

where does

self is a social

specifically

The self)

a symbolic platform on which to stand and view our

not be fixed in time, living in the selves?

is

from the constraints of time. What

it is

is

defin-

from the past and hoped-for images from the

Thus our conscious experience

behaviors as

tion:

and where does

immediacy of experience. By

of our direct experience.

that allows us to

a perspective divorced is

exist in the

is it

considers immediate behaviors with reference to a mental object (the

future.

self

moment. What

self doesn't live in the

does not

a transcendent thing that ition the self

self for a

we make

a precursor to effective

of the other in order to see

how

from impression management and

nism through which we are able

to

form

a role for ourselves.

length about this process and called

—we

they want us to

it is

a perspective outside

role-making

the

it

act.

main mecha-

of ourselves.

Symbols, Meaning, and the Social Self

As children, we role-take through three successive generalized other.

During

The

first

can take the

whom we depend for people with whom we have

upon

emotional and often material support. These are the long-term relations and intimate (self-revealing) play at being

Mead

ties.

some

must

calls this

the play stage

significant other in order to

much

see themselves. At this point, they haven't progressed to think abstractly, so they

the play stage.

is

or assume the perspective, of cer-

role,

tain significant others. Significant others are those

literally

game, and

play,

stage in the process of self-formation

this stage, the child

because children must

stages:

terms of being able

in

Here

is

a child must literally get outside

oj

act out the role to get the perspective.

the important point: In order to play like

this,

her- or himself.

Children play stuffed bear

and

being

at

talk to

it

mommy

as if she

ening experience because what you are faced with

your

own

the child

is

is

The

child

is

The next

—being

we

own

for the

So, as

self.

This

call self.

is

able to get outside of ourselves so that

This act

literally.

the genesis of the

we can watch our-

stage.

stage in the

development of self is the game

child can take the perspective of several others (sets

can be a fright-

might be unnerving

seeing herself from the point of view of the parent,

objective stance

on

It

learning to see her or his

the origin of the divorced perspective that

selves as if

it

mommy or daddy with a teddy bear, who is the bear? The child

playing

is

She

herself.

serious play.

is

child will hold a doll or

an almost exact imitation of

is

and even tone of voice.

behaviors, words,

parent, but this

The

or being teacher.

were the parent. Ask any parent;

stage.

During

this stage, the

and can take into account the

rules

of responses that different attitudes bring out) of society. But the role-taking

at this stage

is still

not very abstract. In the play stage, the child could only take the

perspective of a single significant other; in the several others, but they

all

game

stage, the child

remain individuals. Mead's example

game. The batter can role-take with each individual player

mine how

to bat

based on their behaviors. The batter

of the game. Children

at this stage

happen

until they



it

is

still

eralized other

aware of

don't have a fully

and

deter-

the rules

all

formed

self.

That

can take the perspective of the generalized other.

may

take

The

refers to sets of attitudes that

generalized other allows the individual to have a perspectives of

in the field

also

the general attitude or perspective of a community.

The generalized other toward himself

can take on

that of a baseball

can role-take with several people, and they are

very concerned with social rules. But they doesn't

is

is

an individual

more non-segmented

self as the

many others are generalized into a single view. It is through that the community exercises control over the conduct of

the genindi-

its

vidual members.

Up

until this point, the child has only

As the individual progresses is

also able to think

privacy of his

potato

I

am

at

been able to role-take with

in her ability to use abstract

specific others.

language and concepts, she

about general or abstract others. So, for example, a

home may

man

in the

think, "If the guys at the

gym

could see what a couch

woman may

look

in the

home, they'd

die."

Or

a

the reflection by the general image given to her by the

mirror and judge

media about how

a

woman

should look. There are no specific people involved, but we are able to see our

through the eyes of some generalized other, and we talk to ourselves about

it.

self

15

16

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

PEOPLE

ITS

what we mean by the

Part of

who we

an internal dialog about the world means, (the observer

of the

facets

and the

and the "Me." The

gressive stages of role-taking self that

and

Me

treated as a social object

is

Me

observes our behaviors. The

doesn't fully

view and analyze our

in order to

self that is unsocialized

two

calls these

self

interactive-

the self that results from the pro-

is

come

The Me,

are able to role-take with the generalized other.

we assume

between the two parts of the

is

Symbolic interactionism

actor).

carry on

what we are doing, where we are going, what

are,

and so on. This conversation

self the "I"

We

self is this internalized conversation.

own



it is

that part of

our

into existence until

then,

is

we

the perspective that

behaviors; the

I

is

that part of the

and spontaneous.

Remember what mentioned a moment ago concerning what and where the self exists? Notice what we just said, the self is an internalized conversation between the I and the Me. And what do we already know about conversations and interactions? They are emergent. You and may have a good idea of what we are going to talk about when we get together at the bar, but there's also a good chance that we'll end up talking about things we couldn't have imagined. Conversations shift and change, and meanings emerge through this negotiated interaction. And the same is true for I

I

the

self.

give

The

self doesn't exist in

meaning

to) that

any one

a social object (something

During the internalized interaction,

makes the process emergent. The

that

I

It is

is

I

the actor, and

from the Me, apart from the perspective given by the generalized

Our Web this

Byte for this chapter, the

notion of the

self

calls "dialogic acts."

and

human we

Specifically,

R. S.

main point

action

is

dialogic



it

talk to

each other.

is

it

specifi-

it is

can act apart

other.

Perinbanayagam, expands on

—what Perinbanayagam

Dialogic acts are those kinds of actions that are that the self

is

bound up with

specific to

humans

happens through and because of language

According to Perinbanayagam,

dialog.

as long as

work of

being intrinsically tied to interaction

talking or dialog. Perinbanayagam's

because

It's

it

doesn't matter what

we

talk about,

conversation that gives presence to the

people use rhetorical devices in order to be seen and noticed

from such devices, the

we

emerges through ongoing, internalized conversations and

social interactions (role-taking). cally the

place.

self

cannot

exist.

ramifications of the dialogic self in our

self.

— apart

Perinbanayagam explores these and other

Web

Byte.

Check

it

out.

Social Action So,

why do you have

created;

it

isn't

a self?

Symbolic interactionism teaches us

something we're born with. In

as individuals that

makes

it

that predispose us

to

self is

we

see

toward having

adulthood apart from

he need, a

self.

there

a self.

But

society, that

if it

were possible for a

it

is

human baby

to

person wouldn't have, nor would she or

In fact, in such a state the self

from symbolic interactionism



anything within us

we have a self. Don't get me preconditions that make the self possible and

would be

Why? Because the social entity. What

a liability.

not an intrinsic characteristic of the individual;

behaviors

isn't

is

natural or imperative that

wrong, obviously there are internal

grow

fact,

that the self

it

is

a

that the self functions to control

allows us to act rather than react.

A

person

who had

our

lived alone for

her or his entire existence would need to react instinctuallv to situations, rather

Symbols, Meaning, and the Social Self

than respond to their social meaning. Thinking about the social ramifications of

some

would slow the beast down and make

action

mandated

Mead

socially,

not individually, so that

we can

vulnerable. Thus, the self

is

act rather than react.

argues that the act contains four distinct elements: impulse, perception,

manipulation, and consummation (behavior).

rather direct

—they

act,

we

We

an impulse to behave:

feel

to behavior

react to the stimulus using instincts or behavioristically

imprinted patterns. But for humans, impulse to

We

most animals, the route from impulse

are hungry, tired, or angry. For is

it

it is

a circuitous route. After

we

feel

the

initial

perceive our environment. This perception entails the recogni-

tion of the pertinent symbolic elements (including other people, absent reference

groups, and so on) as well as alternatives to satisfying the impulse. Perception all-important pause before action; this

is

where society becomes

the

is

possible. After

we

we manipulate the different elements. This mind and considers the possible ramifications of

symbolically take in our environment,

manipulation takes place

in the

using different behaviors to satisfy the impulse.

and generalized

ent

the task. After

all

that

is

that

stages,

too.

all

the situation symbolically,

is

distinctly

human

animals have impulses and

of Mead's

act.

both of which take place

are in a position to act.

first

and

are the middle

two

animals behave. Those are the

all

According to symbolic interactionists, the mind It

we could say What I mean by

fact,

takes place in the mind.

mind. And, guess what? The mind

in the

is

social

is

kind of behavior that in-

a

has the ability

1.

To use symbols

to

2.

To use symbols

as its

3.

To read and interpret another's gestures and use them

4.

To suspend response (not

5.

To imaginatively rehearse one's own behaviors before actually behaving

Let

me

give

denote objects

own

you an example

stimulus

woman

(it

can talk to

that

it

was

A

few years

man and men

one another. Both men were reaching out

violently

man was

There are to focus

on

is

we can

woman was to shake

introducing the

one another's hands. But it

he was picturing himself

to hit the

man, but he shook

his

to hit the other

he? Actually, that

man

we want man did. He

pull out of this cartoon, but the issue

the disparity between

to not hit the other

these behaviors.

"Glad to meet you."

a lot of things

had an impulse

Why didn't

said,

all

a balloon of his thoughts. In

punching the other man. He wanted

hand instead and

as further stimuli

a picture of three people: a

encompasses

arm-in-arm, and another man. The

above the single

itself)

out of impulse)

act

ago, our school paper ran a cartoon. In

to

we

available to complete

What makes behavior distinctly human

volves at least five different abilities.

a

role-take with significant pres-

of human action takes place in the mind. In

the action that

last stages

We

and we think about the elements

we manipulate

how much

Notice that

others,

what the man

felt

and what the

man, perhaps because he was jealous. But he

isn't as

good

a question as,

how didn't

he?

didn't.

He was

because of his mind. His mind was able to block his

able

initial

impulse, to understand the situation symbolically, to point out to his self the

17

18

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

PEOPLE

ITS

symbols and possible meanings, choose the behavior that best his

own

and

to entertain alternative lines of behavior,

The man used symbols

the situation.

fit

to stimulate

behavior rather than going with his impulse or the actual world.

The mind

we

iors that

is

something that we acquire;

learn. Infant

or,

more

correctly,

it is

a set of behav-

dependency, language, and interactions are the precondi-

tions for the formation of the mind.

Human

upon

babies are completely dependent

their parents for survival, more so and for longer periods of time than other species.

They

are thus forced to interact with others in already organized social environ-

ments.

When

babies are hungry or tired or wet, they send out what are called

"unconventional gestures," gestures that do not

The

hearer. In other words, they cry.

mean

caregivers

the

must

same

to the sender

figure out

and

what the baby

needs. After they have discovered what the baby needs, parents tend to vocalize their

behaviors ("Oh, did Susie need a ba-ba?"). Babies eventually discover that

mimic

they

if

the parents and send out a significant gesture ("ba-ba"), they get their needs

met sooner. This

is

the beginning of language acquisition; babies begin to under-

stand that their environment

symbolic

is

"ba-ba" and the object that brings

symbol

that she has a

object that satisfies hunger

is

"da-da." Eventually, a baby will understand

it is

as well: "Susie."

—the

Thus language

acquisition allows the child to

symbolize and eventually to symbolically manipulate her environment, including self

and

others.

Society The relationship between the self and society is a central concern for Mead "Human society as we know it could not exist without minds and selves" (p. (

1

934): 227).

Generally speaking, however, symbolic interactionism doesn't see society as having a reality "external to the individual,

of which

[it]

control[s]

an institution

"is

.

.

.

and endowed with

him" (Durkheim, 1895/1938,

power of coercion, by reason

p. 3).

Mead

(1934) argues that

nothing but an organization of attitudes which we

us"; they are "organized forms of group or

the individual

a

members of society can

all

carry in

— forms so organized

social activity

act adequately

and

socially

by taking the

that atti-

tudes of others toward these activities" (pp. 211, 261-262). Notice that Mead's definition of an institution

Blumer

is

very similar to his notion of the generalized other.

way

gives us another

action: interactions that are

ory

class for

weeks, will

I'll

example. I'm

be standing

have written out

of

my

obtain the books ("talk to

paragraph

formed

it

to the enrolled students,

and Dad";

— the

July.

now and

then,

4 I

and given them

interactions necessary to

class meetings,

a separate joint action during which several unexpected

the-

Within

"get financial aid"; "drive to the

"buy the books"; and so on). We'll have 15

joint

my graduate

month of

in the

They will perform whatever

Mom

is

as a whole. Let's take

graduate students. Between

syllabus, sent

their first reading assignment.

store";

how society works and

writing this

in front

my

to see

woven together

book-

each of which

ideas, conflicts,

and

is

rela-

tionships will emerge.

We

will

then link these class meetings together through the use of

and discussions about theses,

classes, ideas,

themselves be linked to other courses

at

tests,

papers,

and graduation. Those linkages

the university (prerequisites and the

will

like).

Symbols, Meaning, and the Social Self

of these

All

be linked together through various kinds of interactions,

will

and graduation ceremonies.

theses defenses

to the history of interactions

one of the students on, ad infinitum.

will

All of those joint actions will

and joint actions

19

like

be linked

where

that have occurred at the place

apply for a job or for further graduate work; and on and

Most of what we mean by

"society," then, exists in recurring

patterns of joint action.

At every point of interaction or joint action, there

behavior has to be purposefully initiated;

and

interaction

going on.

there

If

each interaction ferently;

or

may

uncertainty. All

is

a

is

may

human

not occur. Once begun,

abandoned. Even dur-

joint action can be interrupted, changed, or

ing the course of an interaction, participants is

may

it

is

have different definitions of what

common definition, there still may be differences in the way

carried out:

An

may perform

individual

his lines of action dif-

changes can impose themselves on the interaction in such a way as to make

people define and lean upon one another differently. And, that call into question the

actionism thus interaction.

we

it

link together various interactions.

arise

inter-

and joint action could

First, joint

The nature of

actions are

interactions

which we intertwine the many actions that create the interaction

the

way

my

friend introduce you,

in

may

Symbolic

grants freedom of choice to the participants.

few things we want to note about joint actions.

a

situations

question of patterned behaviors from the structure to the

shifts the

be different, and

created as

new

in the past.

entertains the possibility that each interaction

It

There are

ways things have been done

you" smile and extend

hear

(I

me and look at you, give my "nice to meet you see my hand as it is extending and you extend

you look

my hand,

lies in

at

I

I

your hand, our hands meet and we judge the firmness of the grip and carefully

match what we that

it

becomes

are given,

and so forth

a contest).

The same



is

or,

we do something

totally different so

true of joint actions, except there

we

link

together multiple interactions.

Second, joint actions to us,

which

books.

We

why

is

see

them

I

may

be spoken of as such. They stand as identifiable units

put quotation marks in

my

as distinct yet joined together

description of obtaining class

— "driving

to the bookstore"

and

"buying books" are separate actions and interactions, yet we link them together into the joint action of getting ready for school. And, third, each of the interactions joint actions

must be created anew each time they

dings are not simply expressions of structure of norms, values,

which

is

why your

elaborate

happen and qualify action, yet

it is

as

as fresh

and

a causal social structure called

beliefs doesn't

and

wed-

marriage.

The

determine the wedding; you do,

my barefoot event at the beach can both A wedding is a repetitive and stable form of joint

ceremony and

weddings.

and

are produced. For example,

creative each time

it is

achieved.

Concepts and Theory: Empiricism and Symbolic Interactionism The question of whether or not and again

in this

being a science

society

book. The issue

is

determined by

is

is

empirical

is

an issue we

will visit

again

important because the possibility of sociology

it.

Many

sociologists

assume

that society exists

.

20

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

empirically in

PEOPLE

ITS

structures and institutions.

its

Blumer (1969) argues action

— not

Not so

for

symbolic interactionism:

of relations"

(p. 71). In

symbolic interactionism see sociology as empirical and

Blumer

discussion,

lists six

characteristics of

what way, then, does To begin our

scientific?

empirical, scientific inquiry:

Scientific inquiry uses theory. Scientific theory

1

ongoing process of

that "the essence of society lies in an

in a posited structure

is

a formal

argument explaining some empirical phenomenon

and

logically

sound

in general or abstract

terms. 2.

Theory

3.

Theory shapes what data

is

used to decide the kinds of questions that are asked. are relevant,

how

the data will be collected and

tested.

Propositions are born out of theory: Theory informs the kinds of relation-

4.

among and between

ships

The data

5.

are interpreted

the variables that are to be tested. to change, modify, or confirm

and brought back

theory. All theory

6.

and

scientific research

is

based on concepts. Concepts are the basic

building blocks of theory. They inform the

way questions

are asked; they are

the source of data categories (sought and grouped); they form the relationships

among and between

the data;

and they

way

are the chief

in

which the

data are interpreted.

Blumer's main point that are used,

world that

is

is

that each part of this procedure, particularly the concepts

must be scrutinized

make

to

certain

it

conforms

to the empirical

being studied. Blumer contends that this examination doesn't usually

occur in the social and psychological sciences. More often than not, what sociologists

and psychologists study

world

itself.

Here the word

or objective.

are reified concepts of the world rather than the social

reified

The problem of

means

to convert

reification

is

an idea into something concrete

rampant

in the social

and behavioral

sciences, according to Blumer. The two most notable examples are "attitudes" in

psychology and "structures or institutions" in sociology. Neither of these concepts has a "clear and fixed empirical reference" (Blumer, 1969, as having some causal force in determining

human

Obviously, the issue of most concern for us are not empirical.

Many sociologists see social

of positions that

form

a network.

The

is

connections that

the critique that social structures

patterns of

is

human

and norms. These

social

and manage the connections among people, and

form the

it

and

is

the

structure. Social structures are used to explain patterned

embedded mechanisms,

social structure

among sets

interrelated sets of positions in society are

behaviors. Patterned behavior in most other animals

or naturally

both are seen

structures as connections

generally defined in terms of status positions, roles, cultural elements create

p. 91), yet

behavior.

like

is

seen as the result of instincts

seasonal change.

On

the other hand, a

generally seen as that which "accounts for

experience and behavior" (Johnson, 2000,

p.

much

295).

of the

.

.

.

Symbols, Meaning, and the Social Self

Blumer

Yet

problem

says there's a

in attributing causal influence to social

structures: Social structures aren't empirical.

can point to are

human

which such

behavior, "the

objects.

And

if

most

social thing

to psychological or social structures as the

human

we

produce given actions"

and behavioral

social

scientists

most of what they are looking

do not

is

According

(p. 73).

investigate empirical

at isn't empirical,

doing science. Thus, focusing on the interaction

impetus

medium through

being becomes a mere

initiating factors operate to

to Blumer, then,

The only empirical

people interacting with one another. According to Blumer

we appeal

(1969), anytime

behind

real

then they aren't

the only possible

way

to create a

social or behavioral science.

There are First, to state

at least

four methodological ramifications of Blumer's argument.

the obvious, an empirical science needs to investigate empirical phe-

nomena. Blumer argues is

that

most of what passes

as social or behavioral science

not empirical because most "social scientists" have not critiqued the reified con-

cepts they are using to create theory, propose relationships, gather

and

interpret findings.

and not

in the

Second,

As Blumer ( 1969)

methods used

we need

to understand social interaction as a

conflict theory, structural functionalism, is

moving

sometimes be

Third, is

we need

a

is

moving

need

to see that

to understand social action in terms of the social actor.

modes through which

interactants.

concepts to understand social

and "organizations"

all fall

The person and the

life.

Here

interaction

is

expressed; rather, they are

we need

to be careful about using

social structure

the true acting units of society. And, fourth, reified

We

some-

process, not a static object.

emphasizing the agency of

are not simply

in conflict,

meaningful behavior and that humans can interpret meanings

is

in multiple ways: Society

Blumer

as

exchange theory, and so on. Blumer's

that real people in real interactions will

behavior

Many

process.

one central form, such

times be functional, or sometimes be engaged in exchange.

human

data,

world

to study that world" (p. 27).

sociological perspectives understand society in terms of

point

and analyze

says, "Reality exists in the empirical

The concepts of "institution," "structure,"

short of the direct examination of the empirical world.

Macro-level issues need to be understood in terms of the career or history of joint actions.

Notice the overall intent of Blumer's argument here: Be careful of using and attributing causation to reified concepts. tistical

data analysis; nor

is

Blumer

isn't

discrediting quantitative, sta-

he saying that sociologists can't analyze or think about

large-scale social processes. In fact,

one of Blumer's (1990)

last

analysis of industrialization as an agent of social change. For

industrialization

is

a causal factor, but for Blumer,

However, saying that industrialization doesn't exist

— Blumer

is

(p. 42).

it

is

He

is

an

sociologists,

neutral or indeterminate.

neutral doesn't imply that the process

simply making a question or problem out of what

way

many

most

soci-

would, but he then identifies nine "points of contact with group

life"

sociologists take for granted. ologists

is

publications

many

defines industrialization in a

Each of these points of contact constitutes a research

interactionist, because "it

not industrialization.

is

And

that

site for

the symbolic

the definition that determines the response" (p. 121), this definition

is

a quality that

emerges from what

people bring to the situation and the ongoing process of interaction.

21

22

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

Blumer actually

AND

isn't

PEOPLE

ITS

do away with quantitative

trying to

much more

powerful. Quantitative data and

to great benefit in sociology, but sociologists is

analysis either. His point

statistical analysis

and

salary.

the end of the study;

isn't

would then have

it's

Ulmer

human agency and

&

find a statistical associa-

you were the researcher, you

and

to look for the empirical actions, interactions,

doesn't have a specific methodology. Almost if

we

For the symbolic interactionist, that association

just the beginning. If

back of the association between variables. In

used

can be used

need to be careful about what we think

actually influencing or producing an effect. Let's say

tion between gender

is

this sense,

all

joint actions in

symbolic interactionism

methodological approaches can be

proper place. (See

social interaction are given their

Wilson, 2003, for a more complete introduction to

SI

and quantitative

analysis.)

However, Blumer does give us two methodological recommendations: exploration

and inspection. "Exploration

is

by definition a

flexible

the scholar shifts from one to another line of inquiry, adopts

vation as his study progresses, moves in

new direction

changes his recognition of what are relevant data

and

as

procedure

new

points of obser-

previously unthought

of,

and

he acquires more information

better understanding" (Blumer, 1969, p. 40). Exploration

daily

which

in

is

grounded

in the

of the real social group the investigator wants to study. Rarely does a

life

researcher have first-hand knowledge of the social world she wants to study. Thus, rather than entering another's world with preconceptions, as

much

as

is

possible

the researcher naively enters the other's world and searches for the social objects that the tions.

group regularly employs

The records of such

in

producing their meanings through interac-

social objects

and interactions become comprehensive

and intimate accounts of what takes place turn analyzed.

The

in the real world.

These accounts are

researcher seeks to sharpen the concepts she

is

in

using to describe

the social world, to discover generic relationships (those that appear to hold true in

various settings), and to form theoretical propositions.

Summary Human

beings survive because of meaning, and meaning

than the thing or experience ically oriented,

and

it

itself.

Meaning

emerges out of

is

is

something other

always symbolic and pragmat-

social interaction, a three-step interface

of action: sending a symbolic cue, responding to the cue, and responding to the response. Generally speaking, social interactions

point but continue on through many,

many

Because interactions are ongoing, meaning

The human world

is

made up of

to exist as they are indicated

The

self

is

selves,

is

constantly emerging.

by the interactants, and

come

as particular kinds of

may be

actual things,

or others.

a social object that

taking: the play,

at this

various social objects. Social objects

actions are intended toward the thing. Social objects

symbolic meanings,

do not stop

iterations of these three phases.

is

constructed through three stages of role-

game, and generalized other. By symbolically seeing the

self

Symbols, Meaning, and the Social Self

from the

role of the other, the

her or his to

own

behaviors.

A

person learns to divorce her- or himself from

perspective

view and attribute meaning to one's

referred to as the "Me,"

is

thus created

own



a place

from which

behaviors. This perspective

and the acting or impulsive

side

is

called the "I."

is

What

we mean by the self only exists in the conversation between the and the Me. The social object quality of the self allows people to consider and control their behavior. The self is what allows humans to act rather than react. A single act has four stages: impulse, perception, manipulation, and consumpI

tion. All

found

animals have impulses

—thus the

distinctly

elements are

in the final three stages.

Society thus does not determine our actions; action

ways

human

which society

in

exists

and has

is

two

a choice. There are

influence: through institutions

and

as

constructions of joint action. Institutions are potential sets of attitudes that interactants

may

role-take with; these sets of attitudes constitute the relevant

generalized others. Joint actions are various individual interactions that are laced together.

Blumer argues action,

that the only empirical

and acting part of society

and he cautions us against the danger of

institutions or social structures. In analyzing society, then,

on the

interaction, realizing that

it is

first is

researchers

the inter-

we need

two phases.

exploration: Because of the emergent nature of society

must

to focus

an ongoing and moving process wherein

individual actors exercise agency. This analysis should be in

The

is

reifying concepts such as

divest themselves as

much

as possible

and

self,

from preconceived

notions of what might be happening in any given situation. Theory ought to be grounded in the actual behaviors and negotiations in real interactions.

Second, as theoretical concepts suggest themselves from the experience of the researcher in the

field,

these should be inspected to see

if

they might hold in

other settings as well.

Building Your Theory Toolbox Learning More •

— Primary Sources

The foundational works for symbolic interaction are o

George Herbert Mead: Mind,

self,

and society: From the standpoint of

a social behaviorist, University of Chicago Press, 1934. o

Herbert Blumer: Symbolic interactionism: Perspective

and method,

University of California Press, 1969.

Learning More •

For a

— Secondary Sources

good introduction

to structural symbolic interactionism, look

in

the

following: o

Sheldon

Stryker,

Symbolic interactionism:

Blackburn Press, 2003.

A

social structural version,

23

24

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION



PEOPLE

ITS

Three important extensions of symbolic interactionism are o

Affect control theory: David Heise, Understanding social interaction with affect control theory, in

theory o

New

Expectation states theory: Expectation states theory:

Rowman & The

tural studies: •

Turner,

An

G.

H.,

J.

politics

A

theory of

contemporary sociological

Rowman &

Littlefield,

Wagner and Joseph

evolving research program, {I Berger

in

2002. Berger,

New direc-

and M. Zelditch

Jr.,

2002.

and

Denzin, Symbolic interactionism

K.

cul-

of interpretation, Blackwell, 1992.

and general theory of

For a synthesized o

Eds.),

David.

Littlefield,

Norman

Cultural studies:

o

Jr.,

contemporary sociological theory

tions in Eds.),

directions in

Berger and M. Zelditch

(1.

interaction, see

social interaction, Stanford University Press,

1988.

Check

Out

It





Web



The Society for the Study of Symbolic



The

Byte

ft.

Perinbanayagam and Dialogic Acts

5.

Self: For further reading,

I

Interaction: http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~sssi/

would suggest that you read

— Morris Rosenberg, Conceiving the more postmodern reading — James A. Holstein and Jaber

approach a

self

we

self,

live

a standard

Basic Books, 1979 F.

—and

Gubrium, The

postmodern world, Oxford, 2000.

by: Narrative identity in a

Seeing the World •

After reading and understanding this chapter, you should be able to

answer the following questions (remember to answer them o

What

How o

What

o

How

o

is

pragmatism and what

is

the importance of meaning and

What

mind and

are the

What

society?

How What

are the

in

how

is it

achieved?

How

are

and why are they functionally necessary

for

are social objects defined?

used

o

unique association with America?

does pragmatism inform symbolic interactionist theory?

social objects

o

is its

theoretically):

What can be

a social object?

interaction? self

kind of behaviors

mind and

self

do the mind and

self

in?

formed?

the generalized other and what role does

is

engage

it

play

in self

and

society? o

What

is

society

and how

is it

formed?

Engaging the World •

How would

symbolic mteractionists talk about and understand

racial

and

gender inequality? •

Knowing what you know now about how the self is constructed, how do you think sociological counseling would look? Using your favorite Internet search engine, enter "clinical sociology."

ogy? What

is

What

the current state of clinical sociology?

is

clinical sociol-

Symbols, Meaning, and the Social Self



SI

very clearly claims that our self

with which in

we

affiliate.

a disenfranchised

Using

SI

is

dependent upon the

theory, explain

how

the

social

groups

self of a

person

group might be different than one associated with a

majority position.

Weaving the Threads •

At

this point,

as

we work

all

our

I

can do

is

point out

way through

this

some

ideas for you to be

aware of

book. Begin thinking about the ideas

of structure, symbols, language, meaning,

self,

and

identity.

25

CHAPTER

2

Constructing Social Reality Peter Berger (1929-)

and

Thomas Luckmann (1927-)

Internat

Schutz ar

Photo: Courtesy of Peter Berger.

Photo: Waseda Schutz Archive, 2004. Reprinted with permission.

27

28

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

ITS

PEOPLE

Berger and Luckmann's Perspective: The

Phenomenon

29

of Reality

29

Defining Reality

The Phenomenological Approach

30

Concepts and Theory: The Social Construction of Reality Externalization: The Anthropological Necessity

31 31

Making Meaning Real 34 39 Internalization: Making Culture Feel Real Reality Changing and Preserving Concepts and Theory: Objectivation:

The Preservation of Reality

Summary

46

you remember

that part in

up the curtain and the wizard and the Scarecrow

really a

42

Life

45

Building Your Theory Toolbox

Do

Everyday

in

41

all

The Wizard ofOz where Dorothy's dog Dorothy, the Tin Man,

revealed?

is

They

got angry.

felt

ripped off because there wasn't

wizard and their wishes weren't going to be granted.

and years thinking the same thing

Dorothy and her

remember

I

—damn, no wizard! But were granted — granted by I

a fake.

He

for years

was wrong, and so were the very

friends. All their wishes

behind the curtain that they thought was

lifts

the Lion,

was

really

a

wizard

man



just not

lift

the veil

the kind of wizard they expected.

Berger and

Luckmann

on humanity and

and Luckmann want us it's

kind of scary, just

What

if

ask us to do something similar.

reality, just as

humanity

is

to consider the idea that reality

like

it

was

for

In

Chapter

thing-in-itself,

1,

our friends

utterly different

unnerving to find that our ideas of

way we thought they

in

Oz.

is

reality,

What

humanity, and

the idea of meaning.

if

our

it

On one level,

reality isn't real?

is?

It

can be

a bit

self aren't quite real the

whatever that might be. its

We

saw

meaning

how meaning emerges through

central concern:

cerned with

how we make meaning seem

this issue as well,

isn't

the

like reality.

1975, pp. 8-9).

On

For example, kill a

the other hand,

faced with important decisions to make, they pray to

interac-

but they are centrally con-

of Africa have important decisions to make, they ritually

& Wood,

that

This fundamental feature of meaning gives

and Luckmann focus on

(Mehan

constructed.

from what we think

tion. Berger

signs

to

were.

we considered

symbolic interaction

They ask us

Dorothy and company did with the wizard. Berger

their

when

the

Azande

chicken and look for

when

Christians are

Heavenly Father and

look for answers. These are two very different meanings, yet each culture believes their

meaning

to

be absolutely

realities that are so divergent?

changeable questions.

realities

real.

How

What

is it

seem unquestionably

can this be?

humans do real?

How that

can

humans

believe in

makes contingent and

These are Berger and luckmann's

Constructing Social Reality

The

29

and Luckmann

Essential Berger

Biography Peter

Ludwig Berger was born March

17,

1929,

attended Wagner College Ph.D. from the

New

Vienna, Austria. He immi-

in

War

grated to the United States shortly after World

II

Bachelor of Arts and

for his

School for Social Research

age of

at the

received his

New York. From 956

in

1

17.

He

M.A. and to

958,

1

was an assistant professor at the University of North Carolina; from 1958 to 1963, he was at Hartford Theological Seminary, and he has also held positions at the New School and Rutgers. He has been at Boston University since 1 981 and Berger

,

he

currently the director of the Institute for the Study of

is

Thomas Luckmann was born

in

Jesenice, Slovenia,

in

Economic Culture.

1927. Luckmann stud-

ied at the University of Vienna, at the University of Innsbruck,

Graduate Faculty at

Hobart College, the

professor emeritus since

Luckmann worked with into sociology,

volumes),

and with the

New School for Social Research. He has held New School, and the University of Frankfurt and

at the

1994

at the

University of

who

Alfred Schutz, the scholar

Constance

in

positions

has been

Germany.

brought phenomenology

and finished Schutz's work on the Structures of the Lifeworld (two

filling

out Schutz's notes after

his

Luckmann were

death. Berger and

both students of Schutz and conceived of the project that would become The Social Construction of Reality while hiking the Alps of western Austria

in

1962.

Passionate Curiosity Berger and Luckmann use Alfred Schutz's social phenomenology to understand

human

culture

and

reality as

to us so as to appear real? is

it

they

exist.

They

how

ask,

Another way to put

does culture present

their question

is

like this:

itself

How

possible that different groups of people can accept utterly different kinds

of reality?

Keys to Knowing phenomenology,

culture,

reality,

objectivation,

externalization,

legitimations,

internalization, legitimation, dialectic

Berger and Luckmann's Perspective:

The Phenomenon of Reality Defining Reality Berger and

nomena

that

(p. 2). Reality,

ing. Part

Luckmann (1966) define reality as "a quality appertaining to phewe recognize as having a being independent of our own volition" then,

is

that

which appears

of what this definition implies

exists outside

of our

own

will;

it is

as

is

there,

independent of our

objectivity.

Our

own

reality

is

will or

choos-

something that

outside of us, and available to everyone.

Berger and Luckmann's definition also implies that

we

don't choose this thing called

30

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

reality;

it is

becomes

see that the

fact, we'll

tion,

is

and

part of what

we

feel as

are

reality for us apart

way we

act of will. Notice that

from any intentional

it

act

makes culture seem objective and

real to us,

on our

part. In

own volihow to think

because

real.

We

learn

socialization into a culture. Culture then

it is

part

and parcel of the way we

and naturalness are extremely important,

ideas of objectivity

against our

isn't

are folded into a reality, independent of our

programmed through

appears natural and

The

PEOPLE

imposed upon us without an

culture

will;

ITS

as

exist.

we

shall see,

own realgive tests on Berger and Luckmann, ity. Whenever invariably get a number of answers that say something like, "Reality is constructed because we all have our own

but

want

I

to point

something

out here: individuals do not have their

else

I

reality."

We

I

need to be clear about

We

an individual opinion.

they are held as opinions, not or think their opinions are tect

our cultural

impose

mind

realities

is

up

front



reality

is

a social construction, not

many things, but do have their own realities,

People that really

reality.

real, are

put away in asylums or prisons. In order to pro-

from contradiction and doubt

social controls to

that reality

this

can have individual opinions about

keep them

how

safe. We'll see

objective precisely because

— they all

are quite fragile

this

is

— we

done, but keep in

social.

it is

The Phenomenological Approach Berger and Luckmann's approach to reality

German philosopher who formed edge comes from and Rationalism,

is

is

the philosophy that

is

posits that reason

and

through

two by focusing on human

cuts a middle road between the

things that can exist for

more than

is

humans

sense data. Husserl argued that the only

is

This

exist for us.

sounds. Think of it this way: The world of the frog world. Part of the difference

is

way

human

brain and

its

isn't

process of awareness

is,

only those things of

quite as esoteric as

very different from the

based on sense perceptions

can only see moving objects), but more importantly, cerns the

That

exist in consciousness.

which we are intentionally aware can

it

human

(like the fact that the frog

much

of the disparity con-

—we can be

intentionally aware

the frog cannot.

don't want us to get caught up in philosophical discussions. But notice what

Husserl

is

attempting to do:

He

is

trying to reduce

ness and intentionality. Social phenomenology,

most

if

not

all

human

experience of

lifeworld of everyday living

is

life

found

in

to their

human

phenomena

is

essentially social

and

thus the essential phenomenon. Social it

presents

apart from any formal theory or discipline.

most

conscious-

on the other hand, assumes

enologists, then, attempt to describe the lifeworld as

everyday

phenomena

all

basic elements. For Husserl, those elements are to be

The

logic are the tools

attained. In this perspective, reason can lay hold of truths

consciousness. Consciousness

I

knowl-

all

beyond the grasp of sense perception.

Phenomenology

in a

Husserl, a

by sense data gathered from the physical world.

tested

on the other hand,

which true knowledge

Edmund

the phenomenological approach in response to

both empiricism and rationalism. Empiricism

that lay

based on a philosophical tradi-

is

phenomenology. Phenomenology originated with

tion called

itself to

that

cultural.

phenompeople in

Constructing Social Reality

This

Luckmann

the cue that Berger and

is

and

perspective,

it's

pick up.

important for us to understand

Phenomenology

it

before

and Luckmann's theory. Phenomenology, whether philosophical or cerned with discovering exactly

how

phenomenon

the contours of a

a

phenomenon

presents

to Berger

social, is

con-

What

itself to us.

in its purest state? Philosophical

a unique

is

moving on

31

are

phenomenology,

of the kind espoused by Husserl, assumes that the primary presentation

is

con-

sciousness. In other words, since things only appear to us within consciousness,

then

it is

consciousness and not the thing that must be the subject of study. In this

approach, we are asked to shed

all

cultural information

we might

use to interpret

our conscious experience and to simply experience consciousness. Social

phenomenology, on the other hand, asks us

nomenon tion

presents

(Luckmann, 1973,

What

is it

about

understand Berger and tic:

itself to

In this case,

p. 183).

this presentation that

this issue

to notice

how

a social phe-

us apart from any scientific or philosophical interpreta-

how

does

reality present itself to us?

makes knowledge seem

real?

How

can we

of reality apart from philosophical or scientific languages?

Luckmann answer

these kinds of questions through a three-part dialec-

and

externalization, objectivation,

internalization.

Concepts and Theory:

The

The Anthropological Necessity

Externalization:

There are three phases objectivation,

and

to the construction of social reality: externalization,

internalization.

together in an ongoing dialectic

theory with a look

Social Construction of Reality

As

how humans

at

and Luckmann are trying

you'll see,

survive. In order to appreciate

to get at, let

me

live?

Lions and whales

where do whales

live in restricted

is

linked

start their

what Berger

ask you a couple of questions:

lions live (other than those put in zoos)? Okay,

Where do humans

each one of these steps

movement. Berger and Luckmann

live?

Where do

One more:

environments because

they depend on a specific relationship with that environment for their survival.

Humans, on

the other hand, can live any-

ods of time on the

moon and

lived for generations in the

basic plant

and animal

life.

at the

and everywhere.

We have lived short peri-

bottom of the ocean, and millions of us have

middle of deserts that barely support even the most

The reason

that

humans can

live

anywhere

is

that

we

have "no species-specific environment, no environment firmly structured by his

own

instinctual organization.

speak of a dog-world or create a

human

Berger and

a

There

is

horse-world" (Berger

in the sense that

& Luckmann,

one may

1966, p. 47).

We

thus

world.

Luckmann

ongoing outpouring of

call

human

this

world-building activity externalization: "the

being into the world, both

mental activity of men" (Berger, 1967, nalize this

no man-world

new world

is

p. 4).

The way

in

in

the physical

and the

which we create and exter-

through culture. Culture has two primary attributes:

transmitted through time, and

it

It is

produces meaning. Both elements are important,

32

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

PEOPLE

ITS

V* Brute Facts:

Social Facts:

Mountain,

hammer,

Chair,

ocean

rock,

Symbolic Facts:

Institutional Facts:

Money, marriage,

computer

God,

love,

freedom

private property

Levels of Abstraction, Imposed Order,

& Meaningfulness

Functional Dependency,

Figure 2.1

yet the latter denotes the

human text

quality

Reality

hallmark of culture. Culture produces the quintessential

— meaning.

It is

through culture that every

social or structural con-

given meaning and direction. Participants within a context are guided to

is

and

believe, value, think, use,

Human

Qualities of

and produce.

It is

feel in specific

ways; they are also guided in what to do,

thus culture that provides the clearest link between society

and the individual. In

our definition of culture, we can also distinguish between objective and

ficative culture.

Examples of objective culture include

technology both empirically

exist, yet

tools

more than simply their

they are

signi-

and technology. Tools and physical traits

hammer exists as a hammer only within its tool context [meaning] ), and they are obviously passed down from generation to generation. Significative culture refers to (a

those cultural elements that exist abstractly, such as language, images, and values.

Thus, humans use culture to create a Culture

is

the

way

and massive claws a

number of

first

are for the lion.

implications that

Human

is

live

figure. In using the

terms brute,

and symbols.

some of

first.

We've already talked about the

human

that naturally corresponds to

within a distinctly

order, functional dependency,

dependency and meaningfulness

tools

as defining for us as canine teeth

this fact.

no environment

beings create and

it is

Human beings are cultural animals, and there are

come from

Figure 2.1, I've diagramed

imposed

human world through

which we survive, and

implication: There

beings. In

in

human

world.

the other implications: abstraction,

and meaningfulness.

Notice that

I've

social, institutional,

Let's take functional

outlined a continuum in the

and symbolic

facts,

I

don't

mean to imply that there are clear breaks between these different kinds of "facts." The terms and examples are simply meant to give you a way of thinking about what is going on. Functional dependency and meaningfulness indicate that some tacts are more dependent upon and meaningful to human beings. As I said, we have to put meaning on something in order for us to relate to as

mountains and streams, must have some

level

it.

So, even brute facts, such

of meaning for

us.

However, the

mountains and oceans themselves are not dependent upon human beings

at all. If

humans had never

isn't tin-

case for chairs,

existed

on

this planet, they

hammers, and other

humans; thus they

are functionally

would

social facts.

still

be here. But that

None of them would

dependent upon us for

exist

their existence.

without

Constructing Social Reality

As we move up the continuum, the

facts

and more dependent upon human beings

more

has

physicality to

become

less tied to

for their existence.

than does money. Money, in

it

abstract, like with credit, but chairs are always physical

In other words,

icality.

things that

we can do with facts,

no

a chair

to

by that phys-

money

(even

and there are only certain

The

their existence.

are utterly

is

facts.

and com-

interesting thing

that as

is

become

us for their existence, they

same time. Freedom

increasingly meaningful at the

and they

physical features

become more dependent upon

objects or ideas

are limited

one. At the far end of this continuum are symbolic

there are

dependent upon humans for

pletely

is

example,

can be completely

fact,

and

the physical world chair, for

we can make almost anything correspond

the binary codes of computers), but a chair

With symbolic

A

much more meaningful

to us

than a chair or even money.

As we move up the continuum, things become

less concrete and more abstract. we order them more and more. For example, institutional facts such as marriage require more ordering work, mostly through law, than a hammer. What counts as marriage? When does marriage exist and when

As things become more

does

end? These are

it

Let

me

give

abstract,

all

questions of ordering.

you a more

significant example. If

we took

all

the people living in

Los Angeles and lined them up according to skin color, from the lightest to the darkest,

what would we

We would

see?

see a gradual

change

in color.

The people

we usu-

standing next to one another would hardly be distinguishable. But what do

when we look around

ally see

an order where one doesn't system around that order.

impose If

it

a

us?

We

see race, categories of distinction.

exist physically,

We do

the

meaningful order so that we can impose

hasn't occurred to

you

yet, these qualities

very big problem. Because meaning

dent upon

human

meaning and

beings,

reality

an entire meaning

sexuality,

can change

—they

it

We

is

the others through surgery and

hormones

scheme; we impose our cultural

reality

1993). Thus, because our reality

is

kill

or

more

or give their

itself to

some

societies

— male, —we simply

at least five sex categories

force

into our socially accepted categorical

on the

biological

constructed,

it is

one

(see Fausto-Sterling,

theoretically possible for us to

genders, or for us to never see or use race again, or for us to end

whim of history; yet people will willingly wisp of smoke. Why? Because meaning doesn't present

discrimination entirely. Meaning

itself to

why

neither male nor female (see Herdt,

And, biologically speaking, there are

five

is

have to create

any way we want. For example, we usu-

female, hermaphrodite, and two kinds of pseudo-hermaphrodites

have

We

and functionally depen-

think of gender as having two categories (male and female), but

1996).

forth.

of our culture present us with a

aren't tied to anything.

have a third category (the berdache) that

all

and so

a political order.

abstract, ordered,

is

create

impose

thoroughly contingent and precarious. This

it is

meaning, and theoretically we can create ally

and then we

same with gender,

We

lives for a

is

a

us as contingent, precarious, unstable, and changeable. Culture presents us as

reality.

Before we move on to see how culture is made to seem objectively real, want to mention the Web Byte for this chapter: Stuart Hall and Reading Culture Through I

Cultural Studies. Berger and critical

Luckmann

view of culture. This

is

take a fairly (though not completely) non-

principally

due

to their

primary question

— how

33

34

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

culture

m

is

way

.1

AND

taken as

that

PEOPLE

ITS

Their locus, then,

reality.

appears objective and

school of cultural studies, there self,

However, according

real.

some other

to Stuart

something more going on with

from where does most of our culture come? Does

groups to which we belong? Or to

is

on how culture presents

is

it

and the

lall

I

to us

itself

Ask your-

culture.

come from

the social

most of our culture created elsewhere, according

is

group's agenda? And,

Luckmann argue, culture How can we begin to look beneath Berger and

our culture

if is

our

reality,

is

created by others, and

we

then whose reality are

the surface of our culture to see

its

if,

as

living?

political

underpinnings? Cultural studies shows us a way through such ideas as hegemony, signs

and semiotics, representation and discourse, and meaning and

some time

to

check

Take

out.

it

Making Meaning Real

Objectivation:

With human beings, everything

possible but not

is

idea of the social construction of reality

is

all

made

it is

The

things are probable.

a provocative one.

not simply there for us to discover; rather,

is

struggle.

It

implies that reality

up, shaped, assembled, fash-

ioned, formed, produced, and constructed. As such, the idea implies that everything possible. If reality

is

like, right?

As

is

simply a construction, then we can construct anything we

said above,

I

meaning and

reality are

changeable because they aren't

tied to anything.

However, not that reality

is

all

things are probable.

believe your reality

is

method through which

to

reality

Luckmann

make something an

for

many

real for us,

is

we

do

work

it

our pleasure, and

felt

men

objectify

were

if

it's

offensive to many. However, objecti-

necessary. Try

is

and imagine

a scenario

would be

it is

(p. 103,

flat

structivisl point

and

is

(

Human

utterly impossible.

and taken

facts.

for granted as

At one time

that the earth

in

it

takes

human

made

to

appear

any other thing

on the history,

flat

isn't

as

it

in the

characteristics of it

was

a fact that

was the center of the universe. From

of view, the facticity of the

some ways

1966) apt

original).

a

con-

earth and the facticity of the round

globe are achieved in the exact same ways. Whether or not one of them doesn't matter and in

which

precarious. All soci-

emphasis

precarious and changeable, must be

— meanings become

a situation in

and believed was made up,

would, in Berger and Luckmann's

environment. Once meaning has been objectified,

the world was

means

she were a sexual object, just a thing that

in that context,

as stable, unquestionable,

facticity

must we work

The feminist critique of patriarchy has women. In that case, we treat a human

constructions in the face of chaos"

action and interaction

it

is

achieved. In

objectivation. Objectivation

that everything they thought

and imaginary. Such

Meaning, because

is

in a certain way.

description, lead to a nightmare of chaos: "A// social reality eties are

it

object that isn't one.

vation of contingent meanings

fake,

up;

attained. In other words, not only

call this reality

years argued that

everybody knew and

made

we must work collectively. Having others is more to reality construction. There is

also have to

being that has feelings and values as exists for

things aren't probable

important, but there

collectively to achieve reality,

Berger and

simply

socially constructed. Reality isn't

order for anything to become

a

The reason some

discernable.

Humans

in

every case

is

"true"

make

the

Constructing Social Reality

meanings they construct appear

and

real

become

objective. Ideas

not because

facts

they are, but because we make them appear as such through objectivation. There are four major ways in which we objectify culture: institutionalization, historicity, legitimation,

become

and through language. Institutionalization begins as behaviors

habitual. In every situation,

human beings need to

how to act. We

figure out

don't have instincts that direct our actions; our actions are meaningful and thus directed by culture.

of situation silly

it is

to act like a

When we enter a new situation, we need to determine what kind

and what kind of behaviors

are meaningfully relevant

we had

to figure out

be paralyzed.

It

how

from

to act in every situation

would take us

and contingencies actions

far

much

too

another.

That

we

is,

see

is

reciprocal,

Humans

is

means

make

also

that

as types.

studying for a

test."

habitualize their

"whenever there

it is

&

is

a reciprocal typifica-

Luckmann, 1966,

p. 34).

shared or things correspond to one

actions and people typical in every circumstance.

For example,

on the

we would soon

the necessary data

humans

bring. So,

and

rather than seeing an action as unique

them

see a student sitting

she

it

all

matter of routine.

a

tion of habitualized actions by types of actors" (Berger

something

would be

in the classroom.

scratch,

time to process

would

that each situation

—we make much of our behavior

Institutionalization of activities occurs

If

it

student while on a date; student behaviors such as rising your hand

and note taking do not have the same meanings on a date as they do If



when

walk

I

a

person as utterly individual,

down

the hall at

my

floor looking through a pile of 3x5 cards,

And

even

if

I

know

woman

that

I

school and think, "Ah,

Stephanie,

is

I

see

still

test. The behavior is typical for when Stephanie looks up at the person passing her, on his way to class. Thus, the habitual actions and person

her as a type of person: a student studying for a that type of person. Further,

she sees me, a professor

types are reciprocally held by both

me and

the United States in that type of situation.

Stephanie, and by everybody else across

They

are

what "everybody knows" about

school or any other situation. In other words, these reciprocal typifications and routines are there for us

all.

They present themselves

to us as objective

even

though they are constructed. Berger and ualize will

and

Luckmann argue that humans will always tend to reciprocally habitEven if we start with two people in a new situation, over time they

typify.

begin to expect typical behaviors from one another. To

Berger and

Luckmann

pretend that you and

I

have never met and that we hold no typifications. This

impossible situation because as soon as you see the sake of this thought experiment Let's say that

need

to.

we

me you'll

We've never

Each day we come together and work on tentative,

type

me as

a male;

because we don't

built a boat but

this boat.

know what

At

faster.

things you

do

What makes

in the process

out what kinds of things

I

do.

what types of actions the other boat behaviors.

things

an

but for

smooth out

is

that

I

we know we

first, all

to expect

our actions

from one another

or from this kind of work. But eventually things smooth out and

work much

and is

pretend that there are no typifications.

let's

are going to build a boat.

and reactions are

illustrate this point,

give us a thought experiment. Let's use their illustration

figure out

we

are able to

what kinds of

of building the boat and you reciprocally figure

We come is

likely to

to

know what

perform.

to expect because

we know

We type each other vis-a-vis our

35

36

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

imaginary world,

In this

that

I

PEOPLE

ITS

do around the

pretend that you're green and I'm blue. The things

and yours

boat, then, are green behaviors

are blue.

We are

able

one another's behaviors because our actions and interactions have

to predict

become

let's

habitual

becomes more

and

time and energy. The work

typical; this enables us to save

and we are then able

efficient,

to

come up with innovations

become

boat-building process, which subsequently

part of our routines

to

and

our

divi-

sion of labor.

Now we

need to add one more element: children.

children and two green children.

we won't

the kids? Chances are

What kind of boat start

we have two blue we expect from

Let's say

behaviors will

out with a blank

We

slate.

will expect

green

behaviors from the green children and blue behaviors from the blue children.

behaviors that are typical for that type of person. This cient than trying to

much easier and more effieach new person. is

come up with new meanings for new generation. You and

Notice what happens with this

We

beginning.

is

completely transparent to us

For the children, however, the boat world

no

it

subjective

and

ops,

a

is

—we can

memory of boat building;

see

very different place.

existed before they were born, along with

it

for

It isn't

typifications.

its

becomes

real in

A

world so regarded attains

an ever more massive way and

& Luckmann,

(Berger

ily"

They have

go, "the objectivity of the institutional

world 'thickens' and 'hardens,' not only for the children, but (by mirror the parents as well. ...

all it is.

transpar-

completely objective. Historicity devel-

it is

more generations come and

as

were there from the

I

have subjective memories of our boat-building experiences. The

world of boat building

ent to them;

We

go one step further. We'll teach the different types of children the

will, in fact,

it

effect) for

a firmness in consciousness;

it

can no longer be changed so read-

1966, p. 59). Thus, generally speaking, the longer the his-

tory attached to reciprocal relations, the greater the objectivity of the institution.

Something

we building work?

Why

happens here

else

and the children

will

want

I

as well.

know what

What does

this boat?

can't

to

As we've seen, humans demand meaning, all

the boat

children want to know: why?

mean?

Why am

play with Bobbie, just because he

is

I

Why

are

expected to do green

blue?

The

children and

memory of boat building, yet biographical memory of the world,

grandchildren and great-grandchildren don't have a they need to

know

its

meaning. Rather than

subsequent generations get

stories

a

about the boat world. These stories are legitima-

and power

relationships a cognitive

worlds need legitimation because

humans need meaning.

tions. Legitimations are stories that give social

and moral

And

basis. Social

as the history

ing stories.

and objectivation of an

institution increase, so

They become more robust and more complex

as

do the

legitimat-

time and generations

goby.

There are different Just

by the nature of

levels its

of legitimation.

Some

legitimations are self-evident:

existence, the behavior or social relation

is

legitimated.

Berger (1967) gives us a crude but effective example: '"You ought not to sleep with X, your sister'" (p. 30). sister.

We

Why

perceive that there

no further explanation:

It's

can't is

I

sleep with that

something inherent

obvious;

how

woman? Because

could you even think

imations are present in any statement of "that's the

she

is

in that relationship that

way things

it?

your needs

Self-evident legit-

are."

Constructing Social Reality

crude example through the different

Let's take this I

demand an

continue to

more

offer a

explanation for

theoretical legitimation.

the basic taboos of existence.

why I

levels

You might

"Sex between siblings

say,

We are genetically predisposed to

to sibling sex because the offspring of

of legitimation.

If

my sister, you might

can't sleep with

one of

is

react with revulsion

such a union would weaken the gene pool."

This legitimation moves beyond the self-evident and offers a cognitive, well-

reasoned argument about the prohibitions of the relationship.

There

is

more powerful level of legitimation. This is the legitimation The theoretical explanation that was given above is quite

yet a

of symbolic universes. specific.

It

is

a genetic theory concerning probable

might occur

that

chromosomal abnormalities

The theory

as the result of sibling sex.

says nothing about gay

make up our lives. are systems of mean-

marriage, or mass media, or the thousands of other things that

However, symbolic universes do ing that embrace

all

just that.

Symbolic universes

existence into a single

meaningful whole. These symbolic

tems offer explanations and legitimations for

human

affect

beings.

The

"Religion implies that ferently, religion

humanly

One

is

clearest

human

example of such

order

is

meaning

a system of

the audacious attempt to conceive of the entire universe as being

this as well as religion in all its

is

to

make

the socially constructed world

And no knowledge

system does

forms. There are four specific "gains" in reality con-

struction from using religion as legitimation. First,

human

institutions are seen as

Luckmann

manifestations of the underlying structure of the universe. Berger and

—the nomos being

an equation between the nomos and cosmos

refer to this as

order and the cosmos being the order of the universe. Religion

humanly produced

institutions totally out of their contingency

ultimately valid ontological status, that

and cosmic frame of references" Let's take the

institution that

is

able to

by locating them within a sacred

is,

(Berger, 1967, p. 33).

question of gay marriage as an example.

was constructed during the Middle Ages

weak. The historical model makes marriage a specific social goals.

However,

if

marriage

human

If

marriage

is

is

a

human

in part to assure the patriis

rather

institution created to achieve

Thus, not allowing gays to marry

doesn't want to extend certain

it

is

merely society deciding

civil rights to

particular groups of people.

God

to be a reflection of the rela-

an institution created by

tionship between Christ and his bride, the church, then marriage between a

and

a

woman

change

it.

is

lift

and bestow "upon

archic control of property, then the case for not allowing gay marriage

that

religion.

significant" (Berger, 1967, p. 28).

of the functions of legitimations

them an

is

projected into the totality of being. Put dif-

appear natural and not the result of human agency.

human

sys-

the things and experiences that

all

part of the eternal

man

scheme of the universe and humankind cannot

This justification function appears

in all religions

throughout history and

across societies, from the justification of the Crusades to the justification of the caste system (social position as the result of reincarnation). Religion

tingency of the

human

situation

The second gain from

seem ultimately

religious legitimation

As we've seen, humans create order. state

We

makes the con-

real. is

that

it

defines disorder as

evil.

impose order on geography by creating

and national boundaries; we impose order on the endless variety of human

37

38

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

PEOPLE

ITS

we impose order on

behaviors by classifying them as male or female; and

the

rainbow diversity of skin colors and features by categorizing them

as race. This

created order, one that varies across time and societies, but

one upon which

we

depend

all

also

it is

our existence. Defining disorder or deviance

for

simply an alternative

lifestyle

on the planet and people

most severe and powerful way

in the

allows us to

It

as evil, rather than

or perspective, allows us to control the order imposed possible.

Using

reli-

damnation

to control

do any- and everything necessary

to preserve

gion as legitimation allows us to use the threat of eternal deviance and disorder.

a

is

the order that preserves us.

The

from

third gain

religious legitimation

the other side of the coin of

is

Religion permits individuals to feel an ultimate sense of Tightness.

and

feelings that

come with our

our sense of Tightness Should

will always

is

upon which

a firm base

least for

those

who

believe.

I

to stand.

Whether

World Trade Center

in the

Am

be tainted with doubt: saw? Should

money? The scrutiny of our behaviors and there

the behaviors

social position are only social constructions, then

have told Cynthia about what

I

If all

evil.

feelings

And

for the

there

is

I

I

being a good father?

have given that street person

can be almost endless, unless

no base firmer than

Kamikaze

pilots in

WWII,

religion, at

the terrorists

incident, or a father in the Promise Keepers, religion

allows a person to feel ultimately right in her or his behaviors and attitudes.

Fourth, religion provides integration for marginal situations. There

is

no circum-

stance or experience for which religion doesn't provide a framework of meaning.

brought under

The

umbrella.

Everything

is

situation

death. "Death radically challenges

reality

is

—of the world, of

The meaningful Such

if

a death

death and define as the

it

as

final

way

archetypical example of a marginal objectivated definitions of

all socially

and of self" (Berger, 1967,

the death

seems

life.

mystery of God's

The

others,

orderliness of the world

loved one, particularly children.

its

is

that of a

intrinsically

Religion

is

p. 43,

young

child or a parent with

wrong. Yet religion

as

).

it

young

embrace bearable

will.

The obvious function of language Language functions

able to

is

and render

able to take confusion

which we make culture appear objective

in

emphasis original

seriously questioned with the loss of a

is

is

to

communicate, but

through language.

is

does more than

it

an index for our subjective meanings.

When we

that.

want

to

understand something that we experience, we search through our language looking for the

words and symbols

to talk to ourselves

One

that

seem

to

match the experience.

about the experience and we can

of the interesting things about language

is

we could think or understand

use language

talk to others as well.

that

it is

the repository of social

We

experiences. Language doesn't exist for us as individuals.

so that

We can

didn't create language

subjective experiences.

Humans

use lan-

guage to express social and cultural events, experiences, and pragmatic meanings. Language, therefore, objective. Therefore,

those experiences

exists outside

when we

become

of the individual;

it is

a social entity

use language to understand our

social. Let

me

explain this a

bit.

own

and

is

thus

experiences,

Have you ever had an

experience that you couldn't grasp or understand? For me, one such experience was

watching afterward,

my I

son being born.

tried telling

my experience.

I

my

It

was amazing.

friends about

was speechless.

it

but

was

I

I

literally

couldn't.

awestruck. For days

Words

failed to

convey

Constructing Social Reality

That

to others because

tell it

I

extremely important.

last line is

I

I

couldn't grasp

lacked a language for

it.

others about them.

tell

through language. But notice but also to our

own

We

this:

Of

We

aren't like that.

course, the

can usually

way we do

that

is

explain our experiences not only to others

through language. Because language

self

nor could

So that experience remains mine

and mine alone. However, most of our experiences understand them and

my experience,

is

a social thing,

ren-

it

ders those understandable experiences social as well.

Another feature of language guage

the only

is

way

stuck in the present;

we can

guage,

in it

is

that

it

transcends the here and now. Symbolic lan-

which the past and future

exist for

humans. Language

isn't

can go outside of the right here/right now. Because of lan-

talk to others

and ourselves about the past and we can symbolically

plan for a future that does not yet actually

exist.

Due

to this quality of language,

we

can construct symbolic worlds and meanings, such as the idea of freedom or the

world of

religion.

And, because language transcends time and space, we can use

and make them appear

to bridge different zones of experience

Internalization:

Making Culture

as

Feel Real

Another implication of culture being our survival strategy

human

beings are born instinctually deprived. Obviously,

we have .

.

.

as a species

we have some

that

is

instincts:

the instinct to eat, for example. But our instincts are "underdeveloped

unspecialized and undirected" (Berger

for this

it

one whole.

underdevelopment

underdeveloped

would be



if

that

at birth so that

can be culturally informed.

we produce

is

we were

just as limited.

We

we

&

Luckmann,

1966, p. 48).

our every thought,

The reason

We

are instinctually

feeling, action,

and relationship

are cultural creatures.

have to be as instinctually

instinctually determined, then

flexible as the

world that

our world-building

activity

But because we can become almost anything we want, we

can also build almost anything we want. Generally speaking, the word socialization means the internalization of a society's culture. Berger

and Luckmann explain two forms of socialization, primary and

sec-

ondary. In Berger and Luckmann's scheme, primary socialization establishes an individual's

"home world." Primary socialization occurs during the child's formative humans are born incomplete at birth, babies are born with a predispo-

years; because sition

and need

for socialization.

The

child internalizes culture almost as readily as

mother's milk. This kind of socialization First,

is

parents. All that the child needs to survive if

the most powerful for at least four reasons.

during these beginning years, a child

is

utterly

dependent upon her or

comes from the primary

caregivers.

the parents don't give the child a healthy environment, the child

ference and the needs that are

met

still

come from

his

Even

knows no

dif-

the parents. Because of this utter

dependency, the child internalizes the cultural world that the parents provide, without question. Second, this period of time

is

the most emotionally charged that an

individual will experience. Because our strongest

memories

are the ones that are

emotionally charged, events, explanations, and language are imprinted securely

upon

the brain and are most readily recalled.

Third, the self is produced through primary socialization. As

humans

aren't

born with

a self;

we

acquire

it

we saw in Chapter

1,

through language acquisition and

39

40

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

Our home base for understanding ourselves is produced during we come to know the crucial roles, status positions, values,

role-taking.

primary

socialization;

beliefs, interpretive

instinct

PEOPLE

ITS

during

schemes, ideas, concepts, and

this time. In

other words,

culture that serves as instinct for us hearts

and minds. Each of us

it is

—our

that functions in the place of

all

during primary socialization that the

cultural instinct



is

embossed on our and

socialized to be a specific person

is

to inhabit

a specific world. "Internalization, then, implies that the objective facticity of the social

world becomes a subjective

up by society

set

facticity as well.

.

.

The

.

institutional

as attitudes, motives and

are subjectively real

programs

projects" (Berger,

life

1967, p. 17).

Fourth and worlds. There

during primary socialization, there are no competing

finally,

is

no problem of

identification because there are

nificant others or the worlds that they give us.

and

we

realities

hood on,

all

are given; there are

other voices,

We

in sig-

don't have a choice in the truths

no competing

voices,

and options

realities,

no choices

will

no options. From

be compared

child-

to this one.

Together, then, "primary socialization thus accomplishes what (in hindsight of

course)

may be

seen as the most important confidence trick that society plays

on the individual



to

and thus

tingencies,

Luckmann, 1966,

make appear

make meaningful

to

what

is

bundle of con-

in fact a

&

the accident of his birth" (Berger

p. 135).

Luckmann

Berger and

as necessity

define secondary socialization as the acquisition of sub-

worlds that are generally related to the division of labor. These sub-worlds must agree with the

enough not

home world

created through primary socialization or be flexible

to seriously threaten

It

it.

cantly alter our primary worlds, but

takes severe biographical shocks to signifi-

it is

relatively easy to set aside the realities

of

secondary socialization. In secondary socialization, we acquire role-specific vocabularies.

For example, right

now you

are gaining language that

is

specific to being a

student of sociology. These role-specific vocabularies divide the physical and social

worlds into semantic

fields that structure routine interpretations

and conduct.

Semantic fields are different kinds of languages that are specific to a roles or regional identities. For

ideas that set identities.

it

example, sociology has a specific

apart from psychology.

The same

Being a Southerner carries with

it

a

is

set

set

of social

of terms and

true for things like regional

semantic

field that is different

from

the one associated with being a Northerner. Semantic fields contain tacit understandings, evaluations, and affective colorations. Tacit understandings are ways of interpreting the world that are implicit and taken for granted; evaluations are stan-

dards of differentiated worth or importance. So, for example, sociologists and psychologists not only have different languages, they also have different interpretive

schemes through which they create sociological or psychological meanings. talking with another sociologist, cally the

same manner.

I

also

I

can simply assume that we see the world

know

that

if

upon

for

meaning. According

how to

am

in basi-

while as a sociologist

I

place impor-

external, social factors.

Affective coloration refers to

twists of

I

I'm talking to a psychologist, she or he

will value processes internal to the individual,

tance

If

ways

in

to Berger

feel in certain situations,

which our

feelings are colored or given

and Luckmann, we

how

to

new

are given the guidelines

respond emotionally to

specific people,

Constructing Social Reality

and how

express those feelings

to

guidelines are subtly changed in

and

into different roles

form those

identities,

primary

in

our

and

also begin to think

into" the semantic fields will determine

how

we not only

life,

socially per-

Of

feel like that social category.

course, the strength of secondary socialization varies.

mance and

Those primary

socialization.

secondary socialization. Thus, as we are socialized

status positions during

we

41

real

The degree

which we "buy

to

and authentic our

role perfor-

identities will feel.

Concepts and Theory:

Changing and Preserving Reality These three phases of internalization cesses

prominent

fairly

is

construction

reality

—work together

— externalization,

in a dialectical fashion.

The

objectivation,

idea of dialectical pro-

book, we will see the concept play an

in sociology. In this

important role in the theories of Pierre Bourdieu, Anthony Giddens, Dorothy Smith, and Immanuel Wallerstein. Because of

about

to think

this idea.

The word

meaning discourse or discussion;

dialectic

its

importance,

let's

take a

comes from the Greek word

dialectical

The

dialektikos,

arguments were an important feature

of ancient Greek philosophy and are specifically related to the Socratic critical

Method

of

questioning. idea

is

an important element in Georg Wilhelm Hegel's philosophy. For

also

Hegel, the dialectic

is

a

dynamic process that drives the human history of ideas. Hegel

sees ideas as locked in a dialectic or tension

example, to understand "good," you must

between at the

their thesis

and

same time understand "bad." To

tinual dialogue. Hegel argued that these kinds of conflicts

new element

For

antithesis.

comprehend one, you must understand the other: Good and bad are locked into a

moment

would

or synthesis, which in turn would set up a

con-

in a

resolve themselves

new

dialectic.

Thus,

every synthesis contains a thesis that by definition has conflicting elements. So, in our

example, dialectic

if

you

truly understand that

becomes

active for

you

changes. After such an insight,



it

good

is

defined by the presence of bad



if

the

then your comprehension of the good/bad issue

can never be the case that good triumphs over

because they are mutually dependent.

A new

ethic

would be required

evil,

as a result of

perceiving the dialectic between good and bad.

The

idea of dialecticism

dialectic

came

to sociology

through Karl Marx,

from ideas to production. For Marx, then, history

working out of the

dialectical

is

who

shifted the

an account of the

elements of each succeeding economic system. In

capitalism, for example, there are things that capitalists

must do (such

as

expand-

ing markets) that naturally create pressures within capitalism (such as overproduction) that will eventually lead to

its

downfall. According to Marx,

within every economic system that structurally

The want (

1 )

specifics of

to pull out

Marx and Hegel

it is

the dialectics

societies change.

important for us right now. But we

from our discussion three important and interrelated elements:

a dialectic contains different

some kind of

aren't

make

elements that are necessarily locked together in

tension; (2) a dialectic implies a

inevitably brings change that

dynamic

comes out of and

is

process;

and

(3) a dialectic

related to the initial tensions.

42

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

When we come now,

let's

ITS

PEOPLE

across the idea of a dialectic again, keep these elements in mind. For

consider them in light of Berger and Luckmann's theory.

Externali/ation, objectivation, necessitated by

need

species'

demands

one

The

another.

Once

to survive.

objectivation because

ity), abstract,

and internalization are

creatively linked to

and

dialectic of reality construction begins with

our

externalized, culture it is

objectified. Culture

terms of physical

intrinsically arbitrary (in

and change with every whim of humanity. Such

that

our survival be negotiated and recreated

curity

must be

real-

and contingent. Apart from objectivation, culture would undoubtedly

shift

human

all

psyche beyond endurance, and

and uncertainty. And

it

at

would

objectified culture

a shifting base

every turn,

would demand

would burden the

it

result in a constant sense

must

of inse-

also be internalized; otherwise

every social encounter would require the use of an instruction booklet, an external

Humans

reference guide. is

are able to act

and

and

react quickly

in a

manner

that

been internalized. Internalization also

culturally consistent because culture has

makes culture appear natural. When we look inside ourselves, we find cultural meanings

and

as if

we were born with them.

scripts;

because they have been there as long as

Each phase of

this process

is

influenced by the effects that

ous one. In other words, externalized culture changes For example,

tion.

spear

it.

that language to other tool languages

context.

We

its

and

me

creators,

as

its

We

in

the previ-

of objectiva-

create a language of the spear

we might

place

is

our

in

collective.

Once

the

and

link

have, thus creating the spear's tool

why

it

exists,

We determine who can

what ways. The spear thus gains

the spear

they appear

come from

in the process

create legitimating stories about the spear,

about, and what

recall,

say that our tribe created a spear to help us hunt.

let's

produced, we then objectify

is

we can

its

own

how

it

came

and cannot use

history apart from you and

and reciprocal types of habitualized actions by

typified actors are

produced and expected. The simply produced (externalized) spear thus takes on an entire

world of existence in objectivation. with

Yet the externalized spear ized, is

all its

objectifying culture

and during internalization the spear and

always a precarious process in

quite a bit

from region

its

to region

own

its

The way

right.

and family

must

also be internal-

culture change again. Socialization internalization occurs varies

to family. Socialization in a

working-

class alcoholic family, for instance, results in different subjective realities for the

child than being raised

by an upper-middle-class, functionally healthy family.

Finally,

socialized individuals re-externalize the culture they have received. Re-externalization is

of course not exact. The socialization process

and children don't

fully listen

isn't

precise

— and individuals can put

ture they use. Thus, the dialectical relationships

among

—parents make mistakes

a creative spin

that results in

human

an ever-widening

circle

cul-

the three phases of reality

construction are dynamic at each turn. Reality construction

ment

on the

is

an ongoing achieve-

of culture creating and reforming the

world.

The Preservation of Since socialization place that preserve as

is

Reality in Everyday Life

never complete or perfect, society must have safeguards in

much

as possible the relationship

between subjective and

Constructing Social Reality

and

objective realities. Each of us experiences social reality as individuals,

the objective culture gets modified inside of us. is

talking about creativity. Yet creativity isn't

human

each of us holds the

each of us

creative. Creativity

is

externalization,

something that we only do

potential for originality. However,

for the collective or the person to have a

mechanisms

there are control

And

When we talk about

one of the basic features of humanity.

unique

isn't

it

we

are

as a collective;

functional

So within each

reality.

such

as

collective

that assure reality conformity, at least to

some

functional level. In addition to creativity

maintained because of

which we

Since culture

live.

what unstable, even

and imperfect

socialization, reality needs to be actively

precarious nature and because of the kind of society in

its

is

arbitrary, abstract,

of

in the face

and contingent,

it is

always some-

objectivation. Further, the kind of society

its

we live in increases the work that we need to do to maintain reality. Berger and Luckmann point out that in societies with a minimum division of labor and mini-

mum

distribution of knowledge,

maximum

had

occur. Prior to modernity, people

little

success in socialization

access to alternative

and knowledge changed slowly; people had few and manage and were strongly

and

roles

tied to local groups.

likely to

is

knowledge systems

status positions to learn

Modernity, on the other hand,

overturns knowledge at a rapid pace, makes alternative points of view available

through mass media, communication, and education; ing people through

more

and

sophisticated

and through perpetual revision and

it is

also constantly uproot-

readily available transportation systems

diversification of the

economic system and

its

job market.

Luckmann argue

Berger and

that reality

preserved through the willful suspen-

is

sion of doubt, routine, talk, biographical experience, therapy, basic

way

which we maintain

in

reality

is

time or another have wondered about what's life.

And most

In fact,

human

all

social

1960, four black

change

men

sat

is

sit at

(now

at the

coffee.

the counter until closing.

the lunch counter.

if

culture

is

real

and

we must not doubt

life is

this.

The

precariousness multiplies exponentially.

Woolworth's lunch counter

They were refused

The next

The day after

service.

in

1,

Greensboro,

They continued

to

men and women sat down at women from the Women's College

day, 25 black

white

that, three

the University of North Carolina at Greensboro) joined the protest. By

February third, protesting students occupied 63 of the 65 seats lunch counter. By the 2

The

some

preceded by such doubt. For example, on February

down

North Carolina, and ordered

its

at

to consider the idea that real-

reality to continue,

seriously doubt reality,

"nihilation."

or doubted the meaningfulness of

come

But in every case, we proceed as

meaningful. In order for

moment we

real

of you reading this book will

ity isn't really real.

and

by suspending doubt. Most of us

months of

the

fifth

Woolworth's

of February, over 300 students were protesting. Within

initial sit-in,

sit-ins for civil rights.

at the

And on

54

cities in

nine states were experiencing student

July 26, 1960,

Woolworth's was desegregated. That

incident, along with the Civil Rights Act of 1968,

all

began because someone, some-

where, doubted the reality of racial inequality.

Routine gives our

life

and

its

meanings

a clear sense

of taken-for-grantedness.

With routine, we are faced with fewer new situations and we seldom need think through

new

ideas or possibilities. Routine also implies that

we

to

interact with

43

44

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

basically the

ITS

PEOPLE

same people

anonymous (such

in the

same circumstances. Our routine

as clerks, mailpersons, police)

background of taken-for-grantedness



and

talk presents a

everything were real and thus unquestionable. Talk,

consciousness the objectivity of social

world that

it

is

something

like

granted" (Berger

silently taken for

simple propositions

make

The way we

of our

we

don't

life,

and

link

we

tell

people;

I

also

I

tell

tell

my

is

significant in

is

is

selective:

into a meaningful whole.

tell

I

It

What mean by "my

don't

my

is

tell

in the

life" is

I

only

My

biographical

story to others

and myself.

and temporal sequence.

we

We

pick and choose parts of our day, or

constructed.

my

the story in terms of

use already objectified language to

is

social identities.

the continuing use of the

tell

"Thus the fundamental

same language

to objectify

(p. 154).

mechanisms

there are formal social control

toward maintaining

knowledge

Saying

p. 152).

story in terms of typical situations involving social types of

unfolding biographical experience"

to Berger

We

them together

meaning

point out that

reality-maintaining fact

Finally,

about our day

meaningfully constructed as

Luckmann

these stories.

a

one another, "How was your

generally ask

sequentially.

tell it

lives that the

is

Berger and

Luckmann, 1966,

a routine conversation that

We

tangentially related to the actual events

experience

background of

about our day or week helps construct our biographical

talk

experience. Notice that the story

telling

keeps before the

sense" (p. 153, emphasis original).

constructing biographical experience.

week, year, or

as if

"implies an entire world within which these apparently

It

The end of our day provides us with

everything and

spoken of

"I'm off to school" and being answered with "Okay, have a great day"

does the following:

day?"

&

both

an object of inten-

tional consideration. All conversation takes place "against the

world that

is

like ritual, also

thus making

reality,

talk with

significant others provides a

socially constructed reality: therapy

and

specifically

nihilation.

oriented

According

and Luckmann, therapy involves the use of legitimated concepts and

Through

in individual cases.

pastoral care, psychoanalysis,

and personal

counseling programs, people are persuaded to accept the legitimated definition of reality.

Such therapy requires

a

known body

of knowledge that includes a theory

of deviance, a method of diagnosing deviance, and a theory of cure. Berger and

Luckmann's (1966) example read the example,

is

remember

so entertaining that

that this

I

offer

it

As you

in its entirety.

was written while homosexuality was

still

defined as an illness by the American Psychological Association.

For example, in a collectivity that has institutionalized military homosexuality

the stubbornly heterosexual individual

is

a sure

candidate for therapy, not

only because his sexual interests constitute an obvious threat to the combat efficiency of his unit of warrior-lovers, but also because his deviance

chologically subversive to the others' spontaneous

virility.

After

them, perhaps "subconsciously," might be tempted to follow a

more fundamental

ity as

level,

his

all,

is

psy-

some of

example.

such, putting in question

its

taken-for-granted cognitive ("virile

by nature love one another") and normative

("virile

men

men

should love one

another") operating procedures. Indeed, the deviant probably stands as a ing insult to the gods,

who

On

the deviant's conduct challenges the societal real-

love

one another

in the

liv-

heavens as their devotees

Constructing Social Reality

do on

Such

earth.

grounded

(say, a

must be

demonic possession). There must be

symptomatology, with appropriate

ordeal),

theory of deviance

a

accounts for this shocking condition

(a "pathology," that is) that

positing

soundly

radical deviance requires therapeutic practice

therapeutic theory. There

in

a

body

skills for

45

(say,

by

of diagnostic concepts applying

in trials

it

by

which optimally not only permits precise specification of acute con-

ditions, but also detection of "latent heterosexuality"

and the prompt adop-

must be conceptualization of the

tion of preventive measures. Finally, there

curative process itself (say, a catalogue of exorcising techniques, each with an

adequate theoretical foundation),

Therapy lation

is

is

113)

(p.

used to control counter-definitions of reality within a

used to conceptually do away with everything outside a

Thus, nihilation

is

used with those

who cannot

collective; nihi-

collective's culture.

qualify for therapy because of their

outsider status. In nihilation, the competing culture and reality are given a negative ontological status, which

For example,

titious.

all

means

to categorize

religions perceive

deluded or sincerely wrong

ers as

defined:

all

as less than real, as

imaginary or

other religions as false and

Contrary

at best.

During the Cold War, Americans

it

its

fic-

believ-

systems are likewise

political

typically categorized

communism

as

an

oppressive ideology and the Soviets categorized American democracy as expansionist

and

colonial.

Summary Berger and

Luckmann

human

are concerned with the study of

reality,

nology. affect

The sociology of knowledge

and

posits that society

and

phenome-

they approach this study through the sociology of knowledge and

social position

what we know. Generally speaking, the sociology of knowledge

is

con-

cerned with the epistemological foundations of knowledge, the history of

knowledge production, and the uses lar,

this

the history of science

to

which knowledge

and the ideology of the ruling

approach, Berger and

Luckmann

focus

is

put



class. In

in particu-

contrast to

on everyday knowledge, those

things that "everybody knows."

A

defining quality of cultural reality

animals,

human

is

that

it

is

constructed. Unlike other

beings construct the world in which they

have a natural environment in which they belong, and

underdeveloped

instincts.

World building, or

Humans

live.

externalization,

defining feature of

human

culture. Culture

meaningful, which by definition means

is

other than the thing

itself.

nature.

Culture and the

Humans

humans

are

is

don't

born with

the primary

construct their world through

human

it

is

something

world, then, are precari-

ous and contingent. In order to address the precarious

culture

Culture

is is

objectified.

That

is, it is

and contingent nature of human

made

to appear as

if

it

exists as

reality,

an object

objectified through institutionalization (reciprocal typification of

habitualized actions), historicity, language, and legitimation (stories that give

46

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

moral basis

a

PEOPLE

ITS

to reality).

and human

The

appear natural

reality

— not

constructed by

Thus, the most powerful form of legitimation equates

human

provides meaning for every

human

human

hands.

religion. Religion effectively

is

and

status positions

roles,

Through

we then

internalize

we

childhood.

achieves

It

its

particular

power because

it

ditions of utter dependency, extreme emotionality,

and

definitions of reality

power because the

build

and something

socialization occurs during infancy

Primary

are born.

we

through socialization.

it

internalization, culture appears to be natural, real,

with which

and

event.

reality also presents itself to us as internally present. After

objectify our culture,

and

culture

institutions with eternal truths, defines disorder as evil, gives

an ultimate sense of Tightness to

Human

make

human

strongest types of legitimations

and

takes place under con-

and

lack of

competing

morality. Primary socialization also achieves

individual's self

its

formed during the time she or he

is

is

internalizing a society's cultural reality. Socialization occurs throughout an individual's

an echo of

life;

but subsequent secondary socialization generally has to have

reality



must seem

it

an individual to internalize

The processes of

as if

fits

with primary socialization



for

and internalization work

externalization, objectivation,

Each ongoing process

dialectically.

it

it.

is

linked to and necessitated by the previ-

ous phase, with each iteration producing changes.

and

In addition to objectivation

through the

willful

ence, therapy,

and

internalization,

human

suspension of doubt, routine,

talk,

reality

is

preserved

biographical experi-

nihilation.

Building Your Theory Toolbox Learning More •

— Primary Sources

Berger and Luckmann's primary work

o The social construction of reality:

is

A

treatise in the sociology

of knowl-

edge, Anchor, 1966. •

Each of them has also written on religion and

reality.

Berger: The sacred canopy: Elements of a sociological theory of

o

reli-

gion, Anchor, 1967.

o Luckmann: The society,

Check

It

invisible religion:

The problem of

religion in

modern

Macmillan, 1967.

Out

—Stuart



Web



For additional information

Byte

Hall

and Reading on

Culture Through Cultural Studies

cultural studies,

I

recommend

Chris Barker's

and practice, Sage, 2000. recommend the chapters in this book on

Cultural studies: Theory •

Culture:

I

also

Baudrillard, Derrida, in

Bourdieu,

and Foucault. They are each concerned with culture

different ways. For a

good overview

of the study of culture

in

sociology,

Constructing Social Reality

see John

and Mary Jo

Hall

Prentice Hall,

1993; for a

Contemporary

Cambridge •

Culture: Sociological perspectives,

Neitz,

more in-depth

and

reader, see Culture

debates, edited by Jeffrey

society:

Alexander and Steven Seidman,

University Press, 1990.

Phenomenology: Alfred Schutz's work

is

the primary source for social

phenomenology: The phenomenology of the Luckmann), Northwestern University

mendations for readings under

Press,

Northwestern

social world,

1967, and The structures of the

University Press,

1973

& my recom-

world (Schutz

life

(also,

see

Garfinkel).

Seeing the World •

After reading and understanding this chapter, you should be able to

answer the following questions (remember to answer them o Explain the phenomenological approach to studying this perspective

theorizing?

compare

How

does

it

theoretically):

society.

How

does

what you know of conflict or functional compare to symbolic interaction's pragmatic to

approach?

o

Why

do humans need to create meaning?

other words,

In

why

is

culture an anthropological necessity?

o Define culture.

o Explain the three phases of tivation,

made

and

internalization

reality

construction

— being



externalization, objec-

necessary by the previous phase. For example,

ized culture

need to be objectified? And, then,

o What are the "gains" of o Explain

how

how is

it

objectified?

religious legitimation?

using language to understand your

your experiences

how each one is why does external-

certain to explain

own

experiences renders

social.

o Berger and Luckmann have an

micro-macro

implicit

link theory.

What

is it?

o

How

is

reality

preserved

in

everyday

life?

Engaging the World •

Use Berger and Luckmann's theory to explain inequality are produced, such as class, race,

answer to the one you gave dramaturgy, and interaction •

Read the quote from

(or

how

cultural

ritual theory.

Humberto Maturana

what Maturana means by putting

how we

this

could give) based on symbolic interaction,

at

http://www.oikos.org/

maten.htm and use Berger and Luckmann's theory to explain

systems of

and gender. Compare

first

understand

"objectivity in parenthesis"

and then to

could create a system of social equality using their theory.

Weaving the Threads •

Compare and

contrast Mead's notion of institution with Berger and

Luckmann's theory of together? •

How

If

so,

what

institutionalization.

theoretical

Can these two

ideas be brought

power would we gain by doing so?

does Berger and Luckmann's theory of internalization complement

Mead's theory of the

self?

What more

could

we

explain using both theories?

47

CHAPTER

3

Organizing Ordinary Life Harold Garfinkel (191 7-)

Photo: Reprinted with permission of Bernard Leach, Manchester Metropolitan

University.

49

50

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

ITS

PEOPLE

Methods

Garfinkel's Perspective: Everyday

51

Everyday Social Order as an Accomplishment

Seen But Unnoticed

55

Concepts and Theory: Doing Society

and

Reflexivity

Accounting

52

58

58

Indexicality

63

Documentary Method 65 Ad Hoeing 67 Radical Reflexivity 68

Summary

69

Building Your Theory Toolbox

J

70

used the term "ethnomethodology"

to refer to the investigation

rational properties of indexical expressions

and other

of the

practical actions

as contingent ongoing accomplishments of organized artful practices of

everyday

life.

(Garfinkel, 1967, p. 11)

M the

name

y

initial

in

exposure to Garfinkel's work, called ethnomethodology, came

my first

semester of graduate school.

introduction to sociology

of Eric Livingston. As

is

class.

The

I

He

we were going

tell

us one thing that struck us

to read

it,

an

class the professor

we were taking an nobody knew what

as odd:

We had

but not in the usual fashion. You know,

textbooks to understand the topic.

Math books

all

day of

first

told us that

nomethodological approach to sociology. At the time, meant, but he did

assistant in

teacher was a visiting professor by

customary, on the

explained what the course was about.

was a teaching

eththat

a textbook

we

and

usually read

We approach the text as an authoritative source:

teach us math, history textbooks

sociology texts teach us about society.

It

not in this case. Dr. Livingston told us that

example of how sociology organizes

us the history of a people, and

we were going

itself to

not to learn about society, but, rather,

tell

sounds pretty straightforward,

be sociology.

we were

right? Well,

to use the textbook as

We were to

read the

to study the text to see

an

book

how mem-

bers of sociology render situations knowable as sociology.

My

second exposure to ethnomethodology came

Harold Garfinkel was scheduled to lead sional conferences usually go like this:

a

at a professional conference.

paper session. Paper sessions

Someone

at profes-

organizes the session and gathers

Organizing Ordinary

a

leads a question-and-answer session. For



and discussant

comments on

this panel, Garfinkel

a fairly standard approach. Pretty straightforward, right?

the papers were presented

session

is

the papers and

was both organizer

Not

in

Everything went as usual until Garfinkel led the discussion. Rather than

happened

discussing the papers, Garfinkel analyzed what had

way

51

to six researchers to present reports of their current studies; after

group of four

the researchers present their material, a discussant

this case.

Life

organized

in just this

and our responses

way



in the session

an instance of

as

how



the

a paper

so as to give the sense of being a professional

paper session.

The

Essential Garfinkel

Biography Harold Garfinkel

was born on October

29, 1917,

in

Newark,

New

Jersey.

grew up during the depression and was discouraged from attending the versity.

While attending business classes

at a local school, Garfinkel

to the idea of "accounting practices," which he later

saw

He uni-

was exposed

as the primary feature

of interaction, as well as a group of sociology students. Those experiences, along

with a

summer spent

at a

work camp

building a

dam, prompted Garfinkel to

hitchhike to the University of North Carolina, Chapel

was admitted

to graduate school.

He completed

Hill

(UNCCH), where he

his master's at

UNCCH,

after

which he was drafted into the army during WWII. After the war, Garfinkel went to Harvard to study for his Ph.D. under Talcott Parsons.

In

1

954, Garfinkel joined

the faculty at the University of California, Los Angeles, where he stayed retirement

in

until his

1987.

Passionate Curiosity

and meaning are age-old questions

Social order

for sociologists. But Garfinkel's

gaze penetrates beneath the usual sociological answers. For one, he interested

in

interested

in

whether or not

social

isn't

so

much

order and meaning are actually present; he's

how we achieve a sense that there is order and meaning. He is also how quickly sociologists explain order and meaning by referring forces, like social structures. Garfinkel wants to know how a sense of

disturbed by to outside

social order

and meaning are produced

in just this

way and

at just this time.

Keys to Knowing seen but unnoticed, accountability,

indexicality,

documentary method,

reflexivity

Garfinkel's Perspective: Everyday As noted

in the

biography above, Garfinkel studied with Talcott Parsons. In many

ways, Parsons was the most influential theorist of the 20th century. His power

began to diminish

as a result

of the social upheavals of the 1960s:

It

didn't appear

Methods

.

52

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

PEOPLE

ITS

had

that structural functionalism

man

Parsons became the

many

theorists

good explanation

a

to argue against,

coming up

and so

for the unrest. But even then,

his stature held.

Garfmkel held

in the sixties,

However, unlike

to Parsons's quest to under-

stand social order. But Garfmkel took an entirely different tack than his mentor:

He

looked for the cause of social order in the very behaviors that Parsons sought to explain.

In our

two chapters, we considered the importance of meaning

first

beings. In Chapter

1,

we saw

meaning

that

meaning continually emerges out of the idea that the

human world

is

happens

is

Chapter

2,

we considered

utterly meaningful. This simple feature implies

is

appears to us as objectively

it

real.

How

the subject of Berger and Luckmann's social constructivism. Garfmkel

our attention away from meaning

shifts

human

symbolic and pragmatic. As such,

interactions. In

that our social world isn't objectively real. Yet that

for

and asks how people

to social order,

are

remember from the last we impose order on nature, events, people, and so on. But notice that Garfmkel isn't so interested in how this order is imposed or made real (as with Berger and Luckmann); rather, his concern is how we in face-toable to achieve

and maintain

chapter, social order

is

a sense of social order. If you'll

not natural;

face encounters achieve a sense of social order.

To be able

Garfmkel draws on the philosophy of phenom-

to address this issue,

enology. To remind ourselves from Chapter

ology takes from phenomenology

is

the

2,

the idea that

most important point

that soci-

phenomena should be

taken as

they present themselves, without reference to any other source. For Garfmkel, what

means

this

is

that

if

an interaction or event

order will be found in the

phenomenon

structures or norms. Stop. I'm sure again.

It is

get lost in

deceptively simple, but

it

you

to explain

to this simple idea

phenomenon

a

not in some outside force

like social

just read that last sentence, but please

holds the key to ethnomethodology.

our discussion, come back

Everything we need

ordered, then the explanation for that

is

itself,

is

in the

If

do

it

you ever

from phenomenology:

phenomenon

itself.

Everyday Social Order as an Accomplishment Explaining ethnomethodology

ethnomethodology uses what we do

that

social order. calls

Rather than looking

One

isn't easy.

at

in

of the primary reasons for this

unremarkable interactions to explain

big issues like

norms and

structures,

our attention to such small things as saying "y° u know."

grantedness of these behaviors ological account.

It's

is

The

Garfmkel taken-for-

both the power and problem of the ethnomethod-

powerful because

it

lets

us see

how we

ordinary actions; getting us to see these powerful insights

do these things without thinking. Ethnomethodology learned in your intro textbook.

is

It

might help

ology the way Garfmkel does, by comparing

is

not

us, then, to it

is

create society through a

problem because we

like the

sociology you

approach ethnomethod-

to standard sociology.

To do

so,

Garfmkel (1967) makes three points:

1

.

Every reference to the biological events,

is

'real world,'

even where the reference

a reference to the

is

to physical or

organized activities of everyday

lite.

.

.

.

Organizing Ordinary

of Durkheim that teach that the objective

in contrast to certain versions

2.

reality

of social facts

sociology's fundamental principle

is

.

.

the objective reality of social facts as an ongoing accomplishment of the con-

3.

certed activities of daily

life,

with the ordinary, artful ways of that accom-

plishment being by members known, used, and taken for granted,

members doing Let's start

is

and

institutions are social facts

comparable to empirical

facts.

"determining cause" of any social 110). This kind of argument

(p.

phenomenon,

in general. Garfinkel's point

is

fact

is

other social

when most

we

a facticity

refer to as

about them

also argues that the

not individual people

facts,

typical of a structuralist

that

is

— they have

Durkheim (1895/1938)

for

(p. vii)

with the second point. Durkheim argues that the things

social structures

that

sociology, a fundamental

is,

approach and sociology

sociologists

come

into a situation,

they search for variables outside the immediate situation to explain what's happening inside

they look for the social facts that strongly influence the observed

it;

phenomenon. Consider the following quote from John

J.

Macionis's (2005) introduction to

sociology textbook (one of the best-selling introductory texts ever):

Why

do

industrial societies keep castelike qualities (such as letting wealth

pass from generation to generation) rather than racies?

The reason and other

families

Turn

is

Ethnicity,

That heading

Gender and Family

He

doing two things here: societies,

that in is

that a pure meritocracy diminishes the importance of

social groupings, (p. 251)

a few pages in Macionis's

THE POOR?"

and he

is

become complete meritoc-

is

is

you'll find the heading,

"WHO ARE

followed by a series of subheadings: Age, Race,

Patterns,

and Urban and Rural Poverty. Macionis

is

offering an explanation of poverty in industrialized

listing the

good Durkheimian

book and

standard variables that describe poverty. Notice

sociological fashion, the cause of structural inequality

explained in terms of other social facts or structures: In Macionis's statement

above, structural inequality persists because of the family structure. Also notice that the structure

is

differentiated

by variables that are themselves seen

as social facts:

the structure of inequality varies by age, race, ethnicity, gender, family,

and urban

versus rural settings.

Garfinkel wouldn't challenge whether family influences the continuation of structured inequality; nor age, race, gender,

would he question whether or not inequality

and so on. And he wouldn't provide

a

varies by

competing theory to explain

structural inequality. Garfinkel leaves the question of the theoretical explanation

untouched

—because

tions of the

to ask such questions or to provide different theoretical explana-

same thing

requires an ethnomethodologist to take the perspective of a

structural sociologist. In other words,

you can only give structural explanations

in

response to questions posed from a structuralist point of view. In this sense, the institutional order

ogy

is

sociology's achievement, without question,

can't claim to

know

better. (See Garfinkel, 1996, p. 6n.)

and ethnomethodol-

Life

53

54

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

me

Let

order

is

PEOPLE

ITS

you an example of why Garfinkel would say

give

when

Generally speaking,

ter.

personality and self

and ethnomethodology

sociology's achievement

when

and personality

that the institutional

can't claim to

know

a psychologist looks at an individual, she or he sees

a sociologist looks at the person she or he sees the

are

two

bet-

different ideas

and thus two

self.

The

However,

different entities.

the self and personality don't exist within the individual waiting to be discovered;

they are produced by the differing perspectives of sociology and psychology. So in a very real way, the self

is

sociology's achievement

and the personality

ogy's achievement. Sociology can't really claim to

because the existence of personality of psychology.

It is

wrapped up

is

a psychological entity; that

know

is

better about personality

in the language, values,

is, it is

psychol-

and ideas

an entity created from the

point of view of psychology.

Thus, ethnomethodology can't say anything about Durkheimian social structures.

The claim

that

ethnomethodology does want

Ethnomethodology

third statement:

to

make

is

found

in Garfinkel's

accomplishment of

sees social facts as an

people within social situations. In this case, ethnomethodology

is

interested in dis-

make what they do appear as What does the textbook actually

covering the methods through which sociologists sociology. Let's use the Macionis

do? According to Garfinkel, ple of

it

example again.

doesn't teach us about society; rather,

how sociologists make what

Garfinkel's focus

is

it is

an exam-

they do appear as sociology.

more profound than

it

might

first

what do

so-called "rules of sociological explanation,"

appear. In adhering to the

sociologists do? Sociologists

simultaneously create an explanation that appears to be a sociological one and they create sociology

one of only

a

itself.

This issue

is

why

Eric Livingston

(whom

I

later

found out

is

handful of people that have ever published with Harold Garfinkel)

asked the intro class to take the textbook as an example of

how members

sociology field render situations knowable as sociology. But, you might sociology discover and explain what

is

really

happening

in society?

say,

Maybe

of the

doesn't it

does,

how would you know? How can you tell if sociology is really explaining the real world? What proof is given that sociology's explanation is correct? How is that proof produced and who produces it? The only people who ever try to substantiate but

sociology are sociologists using sociological methodologies. Sounds odd, doesn't

Odd, but

a

powerful insight, which

Garfinkel's interest, then,

is

we

in the

account for their behaviors. In

fact,

will return to in a

it?

few moments.

everyday procedures or methods people use to the term

ethnomethodology means the study

of folk methods. Garfinkel (1974) began using the term as a result of a study he did

on jury

deliberations.

He

noticed that there were distinct methods used to render

the conversations, deliberations, decisions, and judgments "jury-like," rather than

sounding

like

"becoming

the

mundane opinions

a juror," these people

of the person on the

drew on multiple sources

people themselves did not change much. In

person

is

fact,

a juror didn't

acquired knowledge and

for information, but the

according to Garfinkel (1967), "a

95 percent juror before he comes near the court"

becoming

the process of

street. In

(p.

1

10).

The process of

change the people that Garfinkel observed. They basically

made

decisions in the

same way they always

change was the way people accounted for their decisions as jurors.

did.

What

did

Organizing Ordinary

This kind of accounting takes place constantly. Let's go back to the the Garfinkel quote above: "Every reference to the

erence

to physical or biological events,

is

everyday

is

make whatever

it is

appear

most ethnomethodology anything

—sometimes

is

it's

refer to

anything in "the real world,"

methods

activates or

on every

the emphasis in

reference. Ethnomethodologists will study

and "important"

as formal

that are used to

And

or ordered in just such a way.

real

ref-

a reference to the organized activities of

According to Garfinkel, when we

life."

what we are actually referencing are the

part of

first

even where the

'real world,'

how a line or queue is formed. Remember Professor Livingston? He

as science; other times

it's

simply

didn't use the textbook to teach the class

about society: The textbook told them about the academic discipline of sociology. Rather, he used everyday occurrences to instruct the class about society.

the students' assignments was to learn

standing in a

minutes

One

of

to dance; another assignment involved

On one occasion, he didn't come He had me come in and set a

another was going out to lunch.

line;

to class until 15

how

period started.

after the

boom box on a stool in the center of the stage. I had been instructed to turn the tape player on at the beginning of class. I didn't know what was on the tape and wasn't I



to give

any sort of preamble

lecture;

what

you

But,

sociology!

walk over and turn

got was a ringing telephone.

I

phone

ringing

just

I

expected a taped

The boom box played the sound of

dancing, lunch, lining up, and a ringing phone are no

It is, if

use in everyday

on.

a

300 students for 15 minutes.

to

say,

it

what you mean by sociology

life

is

the study of the

way

to teach

methods people

to render situations accountably organized as specific kinds of

How is that we organize our behaviors in just such a way as to make them a dance? How do we in just this way and at just this time organize our behavsocial events.

it

make

iors to

the situation appear as "lunch"?

What

are the

produce a queue? Livingston's point, and Garfinkel's too,

—the methods used by the

methodology found

methods we use is

to

that this kind of

actual people in the actual situation



is

in every setting, large or small.

Seen But Unnoticed There

is

something unusual about the

nomethodologists study: They are sense.

One

assumed

all

common

moral

reciprocity of perspectives.

what happens

him

mundane

situations that eth-

knowable and observable

of the things that allows us to successfully relate to one another It

seems true that humans

ence the world from another's point of view.

or

or

affairs in a

to pass

at a it

party

when you

We

all

"know"

start a secret story

on; or, "everybody knows" that

an

can't actually experi-

this: Just

ask anybody

with one person and

if five

is

tell

her

people witness an accident,

there will be five different stories about the accident. Yet,

even though we

act as if

all

know this, we don't act like it.

In fact, in every situation

we

everybody knows exactly (or close enough) what we are talking about and

doing. In order to successfully accomplish an interaction,

we have to assume that our

perspectives are reciprocal, despite whatever evidence there might be to the contrary.

We assume that our standpoints are interchangeable with those of others. We assume

Life

55

56

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

that the

AND

ITS

PEOPLE

world that has meaning for is

ferences,

believe that

and had

I

me also

our particular relationship

difference

you would

my experiences. We

has the same meaning for you; the only

to the world.

Thus, while there

interpret the world as

assume

also

I

do

if

may

you stood

that whatever differences

may

in

be

dif-

my place

exist in

our

positions in the lifeworld are irrelevant for the purposes at hand. In order to point out this assumption, Garfinkel (1967)

form breaching demonstrations

had

order to discover "the socially standardized

in

and standardizing, 'seen but unnoticed,' expected, background scenes"

his students per-

features of everyday

other words, Garfinkel wanted his students to notice the always

(p. 36). In

seen but never noticed scaffolding around which daily

life is

attained. Let

we can get a sense of what Garfinkel (1967) dialogue, S = Subject and E = Experimenter):

a couple of the cases so (in the following

CASE

is

me

quote

talking about

2

How is your girlfriend

(S)

Hi, Ray.

(E)

What do you mean, "How

is

feeling?

your girlfriend feeling?"

Do you mean

physical or mental? (S)

I

mean how

is

she feeling? What's the matter with you? (He looked

peeved.) (E) Nothing. lust explain a

little

How are your Med

clearer

what do you mean?

School applications coming?

(S)

Skip

(E)

What do you mean, "How

(S)

You know what

(E)

I

(S)

What's the matter with you? Are you sick?

CASE

it.

I

are they?"

mean.

really don't.

3

"On

Friday night

my husband

remarked that he was

tired.

I

and

asked,

I

were watching

'How

are

you

television.

My husband

tired? Physically, mentally,

or just bored?'" don't know,

(S)

I

(E)

You mean

(S)

I

(After

guess

so.

I

guess physically, mainly.

that your muscles ache or your bones?

Don't be so technical.

more watching) movies have the same kind of old iron bedstead

(S)

All these old

(E)

What do you mean? Do you mean just the

ones you have seen?

all

old movies, or

in

them.

some of them, or

.

Organizing Ordinary

(S)

What's the matter with you? You

(E)

I

(S)

You know what

CASE

wish you would be more

know what

mean.

I

specific.

mean! Drop dead!

I

4

During

a conversation (with E's fiancee) the

various words used by the subject.

For the

.

minute and a half the subject responded

first

they were legitimate inquiries.

me those questions?" and

two or three times

and covered her

When

engrossed.

mouth and

I

"Stop

it."

.

.

.

The

are

I

you asking

each question. .

.

.

uncon-

was making her ner-

subject picked

up

a

magazine

face.

She put down the magazine and pretended

asked

why

to

be

she was looking at the magazine she closed her

refused any further remarks, (pp. 42-43)

There are a few things that we can pick up from such deal of "seen but unnoticed"

many

after

movements

her face and hand

jittery,

She appeared bewildered and complained that

vous and demanded that

to the questions as if

Then she responded with "Why

repeated this

She became nervous and trolled.

.

E questioned the meaning of

work

that goes

on

tests. First,

conversations are organized around the denial of

In a rational discussion, asking for clarification

there

in organizing a setting.

is

a great

Second,

strict rational discourse.

would be permitted and expected

(though, in the end, such clarifications too are glossed-over assumptions of shared worlds). ted

1971

ically

)

On

my truck, for example, the salesperson and manager expecwith my questions that were designed to extract specific infor-

bought

I

and cooperated

mation. (

When

the other hand, conversations organized around what

called "sociability," the kind of conversations that

Georg Simmel

we mostly have, are

specif-

not organized around the sharing of specific information.

we must not push for additional information, we must "wait for may never come), we must suspend any doubt that might come to mind as the conversation takes shape, and we must understand all statements as being of the indexical kind (referencing unseen worlds or understandings that may never materialize) all done to give us the sense that what we are having is a "normal conversation." When we see the work that goes into making a dialogue appear to everybody as a simple conversation, we can appreciate why Garfinkel sees everything we do as an "achievement." Taken-for-granted, everyday conversations don't In sociability,

clarification" (that



simply happen; they are achieved.

The

third thing

properties of

we can

common

glean from these stories

discourse" (Garfinkel, 1967,

is

that there are "sanctioned

p. 41).

As you probably know

from your other sociology courses, sanctions are positive or negative behavioral reinforcements. For example,

a

if in

crowded elevator you

looking straight ahead, you will be sanctioned. People "excuse tor,"

me"

or they

in

such a way as to convey "turn around,

may simply

get out of

sanctions with norms, and

norms

your

field

face the rear instead of

may idiot,"

roll their eyes,

or say

or "get off the eleva-

of vision. Sociologists generally link

are part of the moral fabric of society.

Life

57

58

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

So,

AND

we can

PEOPLE

ITS

see that there are

some

conversations and surmise that there

pretty strong a

is

norms

moral order

at

point of view of ethnomethodology, the moral basis structure that exists outside the situation.

strong

norms

work.

at

What do we

We

see?



No

in

mundane

some

part of

isn't

in fact,

work

at

work. However, from the

we can

cultural

see that there are

see sanctioning behavior. This

is

a very

important point for understanding ethnomethodology. Such things as sanctions,

norms, values, and

beliefs are

not preexisting social facts that

us

tell

how

to behave;

"they are rather constitutive of the 'sense' of the circumstances, of 'what the

circumstances

are' in the first place" (Heritage, 1984, p. 98).

Garfinkel wants us to see that each and every social occasion and object

is

members make the We use methods that we all

accomplished. They are accomplished through the very ways situation accountable as a certain kind of gathering.

know and that we can all see but

never pay attention

to.

Garfinkel wants us to notice

"How is (fill in the blank) made to seem as organized and blank)?" We could put sociology in those blanks, or gender, or

those methods by asking, real as

(fill

in the

even your classroom. These methods are well-known and people are held account-

We

able to them.

can see the accountability in the

it

to

moral systems. These methods are observable

tures or abstract

of the members.

activities

Garfinkel wants us to see that accountability and not attribute

normative struc-

in the activities

of

members.

the

The Web Byte

for this chapter

is

taken-for-granted as accomplished.

work on gender

socially produced).

real

when

How

illustration of this idea

The Web Byte

more than two

last

features

chapter,

I

of seeing the

West and Zimmerman's

pointed out research that

sexes or genders (both sex

and gender being

My point there was to disrupt our normal and normative assump-

and gender and

get us to think

they aren't as clear-cut as

at this issue

good

an achievement. In the

as

indicates there are

tions about sex

a

we

think.

about

how we make them

objectively

West and Zimmerman, however, look

of gender and sex boundaries and ask a very different kind of question:

are sex

encounters?

and gender made

What

is

the

work

to

seem naturally and normally ordered

in social

that goes into that achievement?

Concepts and Theory: Doing Society Reflexivity

and

The notion of ogy

in general.

Indexicality

reflexivity

is

are created through reflexive

and the circle.

line that

The word

of the mind.

on

is

it

of Garfinkel's work and ethnomethodol-

can turn back on

itself.

Remember

A

is

The mind

For example, circles

movement: the beginning and end points

also

sometimes used

is

are the

same

contained within the

to describe the introspective action

that symbolic interaction defines the

mind

as

an internal-

conversation always entails at least two interactants; so, with

your mind speaking?

its self.

if

connects them constitutes everything that reflexive

ized conversation.

whom

at the heart

Something is reflexive

is

Itself,

of course. The mind turns

reflexive; the self

is

its

part of the reflexive act.

own

abilities

back

Organizing Ordinary

Garfinkel situation,

isn't really

concerned with these

and everything within the

he

issues;

situation,

nized in just such a

The answer

ity?

is

recommendation

way as

making those

the

Remember, Garfinkel and

is

social facts orga-

and

to be accountable as a socially organized setting

real-

Ethnomethodology's "central

whereby members produce and manage

that the activities

is

how

ongoing accomplishment of

are situations

that they are organized reflexively.

settings of organized everyday

for

how

So,

life."

concerned with

organized.

is

interested in "the objective reality of social facts as an

the concerted activities of daily

is

identical with

affairs are

The

settings 'account-able.'

'reflexive,'

members' procedures

or 'incarnate' character

of accounting practices and accounts makes up the crux of that recommendation" (Garfinkel, 1967, p.

One

1).

of the primary ways in which scenes are reflexively organized

indexical expressions.

Think of your index

To index something

finger:

it's

entry in a book:

it

is

points to

to

make

reference to

it

all

the important issues that

The only way

through

is

like

in

an index

book index makes any sense

a

it.

book has an

may be found

very important. An indexical expression

itself.

is

or to point to

the finger you use to point with. This

index. In this case, the index points to

the book. This last example

is

at all

is within the context of the book. Sometime try using the index from one book to find

important items in a different book;

it

situated verbal utterances that point to

This ing

is

many

a very different notion than

and

are understood within the situation.

what

is

commonly

I

say "tree," then

I

am

using that

word

of the difficulties associated with this idea

very well. This problem

human

is

is

rep-

to point to the physical object.

that language doesn't represent

is

exemplified by color (Heritage, 1984, pp. 144-145):

(English) only has 4,500

words, just 8 are It's

Most of us, includ-

The

eye can distinguish about 7,500,000 colors. Yet the language with the most

names

color

held.

social scientists, believe that language, including verbal language,

resentative. If

One

won't work. Indexical expressions, then, are

commonly

plain, then, that in

words

that denote color,

and of those 4,500

used.

our everyday language we are not very concerned with

representation. We've actually already alluded to this issue in the chapter covering

symbolic interaction verbal expressions;

it

(SI): SI

argues that meaning

is

similar to SI, except

the emergent quality of meaning;

a novice,"

it

is

meanings of such phrases

and "what's up?"

in the

tiate the

as "how's

aren't negotiated

if

I

is

it

found

am showing

we both assume

be contextually given, as

you the new guitar the

meaning

is

I

isn't

in the context itself. In fact, as

examples of breaching demonstrations,

to

talking

going?" "that's a nice one," "he's

if

you

try to explicitly nego-

meanings of indexical expressions, the chances are good that

assumed

is

what Garfinkel notes

through interaction. The meanings of

sanctioned or the setting will break up. The "one

one"

in words, language, or

the reflexive character of meaning. For

indexical expressions don't emerge; they are

we saw

found

emerges out of interaction. Part of what Garfinkel

about with indexical expressions

Garfinkel, the

isn't

just

is

the

among many"

you'll

be

in "that's a nice

meaning of "nice." For example,

bought and you say

"that's a nice one,"

given in the context or situation. Thus, indexical

expressions are reflexive because they appear in and reference the unique context in

which they occur.

Life

59

60

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

ITS

PEOPLE

However, indexical expressions are appear

in

and reference the

Mehan and Wood a social situation

diately

drew

another reason. They not only

situation; they also bring the situation into existence.

me

(1975) give us the example of "hello." Let's say you see

You

hall at school.

reflexive for

say, "Hello."

What have you done? You have

through the use of

a circle

a greeting.

around the two of

from the other people around

said "hello,"

you imme-

group

us, identifying us as a social

That

us.

When you

distinct

which we can

social situation,

in the

initiated or created

an

call

encounter, interaction, or situated activity system, didn't exist until you said "hello."

But notice something very important about "hello": greeting within social situations. Every time "hello" ated. Yet "hello" (like

and finds meaning within the

It isn't

It

is

can only

exist as a social

used, a social situation

only found in social situations, either

with our example). Thus, "hello"

exists,

Its

is

is

simultaneously creates,

It

social situation.

just "hello" that exists reflexively. Let's take the phase, "you're beautiful."

meaning

is

obviously contextual. You might say "you're beautiful" to a queen, to

your partner

after

comment, or

to

making

love, to

your friend

your friend dressed up to go

who

to a

just

made

Halloween

a particularly ironic

But notice also

party.

that saying "you're beautiful" also creates the situation wherein beautiful

stood.

cre-

ones or imaginary ones

real

utterly reflexive:

is

The beauty of the

ironic

comment

didn't exist until

can be understood within the context that

you

said

it;

is

under-

once

said,

it

created.

it

Further, indexical expressions aren't limited to these sorts of catch phrases. At

one point, Garfinkel asked

his students to

go

home and

record a conversation.

were to also report on the complete meaning of what was

They

The following

said.

is

a

small snippet of one such report (Garfinkel, 1967, pp. 25-26):

What was Husband:

Dana succeeded a

penny

in

What was meant:

said:

in

putting

a parking meter

This afternoon as

I

was

bringing

Dana, our four-year-old son,

today without being

from the nursery school, he

picked up.

succeeded

enough

in

reaching high

to put a

parking meter a

home

penny

in

a

when we parked

in

metered parking zone, whereas

before he has always had to be picked up to reach that high.

Wife:

Did you take him to the

Since he put a penny

record store?

that

means

he was with you. stopped

in

a meter,

that you stopped while I

know

that you

at the record store either

on the way to get him or on the

way

back.

so that he

Was

it

on the way back,

was with

you, or did

you stop there on the way to get him and somewhere

way back?

else

on the

Organizing Ordinary

The

thing to point out, of course,

first

that

is

what was actually said

members could assume

prehensible apart from what the

incom-

is

the other knew. There

an entire world of experience that the husband and wife share

in the first

is

statement

about Dana that gives the statement a meaning that any observer would not be able to access. So, the

first

point

apparent: Vocal utterances reference or index

is

presumed shared worlds.

The second point may not be filling

out the far right column.

quite so obvious. It

was hard

to put

being said and indexically understood. However, Garfinkel asked

them

to indexically explain

them

Garfinkel wanted

it

The students had

down

column.

said in the far right

to explain the explanation because the explanation itself

with the complaint that the task was impossible" is

time

actually

became a whole lot tougher when

what was

assumed indexical worlds of meaning. Garfinkel (1967) reports

explanation

a difficult

what was

in print

impossible because

all

our talk

(p. 26). is

that "they gave

up

The task of explaining every

Many

indexical.

come up

of us

against this issue in the course of raising a 2-year-old. All 2-year-olds are infa-

mous once

same

for asking the

started, that line

reason to ask why.

It

really

is.

"Why?" And every parent knows

—every answer

never ends because our culture

Mehan and Wood world

insistent question:

of questioning never ends

(1975) further point out just

Every social world

is

is

indexical

and

just

is

that

another

reflexive.

how fundamentally reflexive our

founded upon incorrigible assumptions and

ondary elaborations of belief. Incorrigible assumptions are things

sec-

we believe

that

to

be true but never question. These assumptions are incorrigible because they are incapable of being changed or amended. social world.

And

these assumptions

form the base of our

Secondary elaborations of belief are prescribed legitimating accounts

that function to protect the incorrigible assumptions. In other words, secondary

elaborations of belief are ready-made stories that ical

thing about incorrigible assumptions

up with the pen

is

create

our

reality.



pen was

really interesting

Our search

first

know you

searched before. Although the evidence indi-

absent and then present, that conclusion

is

not reached"

To do so would challenge the incorrigible assumption upon which

system

is

based

for the

physical objects main-

through time and space. "Say, for example, you find your

missing pen in a place you

(p. 12).

and

based on the assumption of object consistency

cates that the

The

that the empirical world doesn't always line

(1975) give us the illustration of a lost pen.

tain their consistency

ity

is

cultural assumptions that guide

Mehan and Wood lost

we use to explain why some empir-

finding doesn't line up with our incorrigible assumptions.

—we never consider the

that real-

possibility that a poltergeist took the

pen

Our assumption of object consistency is protected through secondary elaborations of belief. When we find the pen where we had already looked, we say, "I must have missed it."

or that a black hole swallowed

In Figure 3.1, I've pictured

it

up.

two models of sociology. These models obviously are

not theoretical or causal but are simply pictures of assumptions and first

model

assume

is

what most

that there

is

sociologists see themselves as doing.

activities.

Most

The

sociologists

an empirical, social world that sociological methods can be

used to study. These methods produce a particular kind of inquiry ology. This kind of inquiry leads to insights into

known

as soci-

and discoveries about the

social

Life

61

62

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

PEOPLE

ITS

Generally Accepted Model of Sociology

Sociological Insights

Sociological

Social World

and

Sociological

Discoveries

Methods

Inquiry

About the Social World

Ethnomethodological Model

of

Sociology

The Sociological

Sociological

Methods

Inquiry

Social

World

of

Sociology

T Figure 3.1

Garfinkel's

Concept of

Reflexivity

world. However, the idea of reflexivity makes us look at things differently. notice that there

isn't

a social world preceding sociological

methods themselves produce

sociological inquiry

In other words, the world that sociologists see ologies. In

or

may I

inquiry.

The

world of sociology.

own methodproduce sociology, which may

produced by

adhering to those methods, sociologists

want us

reflexively

to take

one further step into

provided as

What would you no

and protected, evidence

Most of us would

may well be

defined as "God's

it

call

it

their

we make assumptions about

Not only

reflexivity.

any

reality

system

is

are

always

of two automobiles colliding.

an "accident." But what exist if

is

implied

humans assume if

that

one of the drivers

the episode, from the point of view of that will."

first:

anything

isn't

of

back of events. But what

Then

ask the obvious question

ethnomethodology,

for

an accident? Accidents can only

other, outside forces in

a fundamentalist Christian?

Let's

this issue

well. Let us take the incident

call it?

in calling this collision

there are

driver,

methods or

social

not have anything to do with any other social world.

cultures reflexively created

is

is

and the

First,

What

really;

it

the world and

is

the incident really? According to

becomes something meaningfully as

how

it

works. But once

we make

our assumptions, what can happen to the events around us? Think about the two cars colliding. In this example, the event will.

Then, through

defined

it

a neat little

in the first place.

in her belief that "shit

confirmed lision

tion

is

is

in her belief in

either an accident or God's

The person who has had an "accident"

happens." The person

who

is

confirmed

has experienced "God's will"

an omnipotent and merciful God. Either way, the

used to legitimate an existing reality system

— proof of the

provided by the self-same meaning system. The same

(and sociology): science.

becomes

trick, the event becomes proof of the system that

What counts

as

is

is

col-

event's defini-

true for science

"proof" for the validity of science

is

defined by

Organizing Ordinary

Accounting The notion of accounts Garfinkel

reflexivity.

central

is

made

and

central to Garfinkel's project

a discovery

explicitly tied to

is

is

one of the

human

beings are

about social order. Social order

problems of humanity and thus for

much

of sociology:

how can social order be achieved? about this. Some approaches argue that

If

self-motivated,

Sociology has entertained several

notions

social order

achieved through

is

formal social-control mechanisms (structures) or groups that have the power to sanction behaviors (like the police). Sociologists have also considered exchange

approaches that see social order as the result of individuals pursuing lines of greatest profit

and

least loss (see

Chapter

And, of course, the

6).

approach argues that cultural norms, values, and

classic

Durkheimian

beliefs exist as social facts

and

have the ability to impose themselves on individual behaviors. Talcott Parsons

proposed an answer

problem of

to the

bines features of other approaches and, whether

much

approach for

for achieving those goals.

scribed by cultural

social order that

and

and

a college education

and they make choices among

situational constraints. For example,

goal

and means

is

com-

or not, forms the basic

it

come

several possible

However, both the goals and means are circum-

you are attending? Your goal

the college

realize

of sociology. His theory of the unit act argues that people

into situations with explicit goals

means

we

is

why

did you choose

probably to achieve the best job possible,

one of the approved means of achieving

are both culturally specific, and, importantly,

that goal.

The

you have internalized

through socialization the cultural value of a good job and the accepted means of achieving (for

it.

I

because of the regional value placed on family

far to college

ponent has

why this school? Part of the answer may come back to socialization many of the students in the area where live aren't willing to travel

But

example,

to

do with

situational constraints

Ivy League school because you can't afford



it

ties),

you

for instance,

or your family

but another com-

are not going to an

isn't

well placed.

In his concern for social order, Garfinkel sees himself as involved with the

However, Garfinkel sees

issues as his dissertation chair, Talcott Parsons. as the result of members

making

settings "account-able." Garfinkel

"account" in the sense of to regard or

is

same

social order

using the term

such as "she was accounted to be a

classify,

powerful senator." To make something account-able, then,

is

make

to

it

capable of

being regarded or classified as a certain kind of object or event. This notion of

accounting

we render

is

central to Garfinkel's

work and

a situation accountable,

reality. Social

is

explicitly tied in with reflexivity.

we simultaneously produce

For example, a few years ago

street musicians, art exhibits,

my

sister said,

what was happening

I

was

visiting

my sister

as a

and so

forth.

"Oh, look,

San Diego and we went

in

museums,

fountains, restaurants,

While we were walking through some of

a wedding."

wedding? That sounds

How

could

like a

my

sister

We were

ognize the event before us as a wedding because the people

who

it

in

such a way that

specifically to themselves.

it

would appear

as a

recognize

simple and maybe

question, but the implications are important for Garfinkel.

ting did

and

order and reality are in the accounting.

to Balboa Park, a gorgeous recreational area with

the gardens,

social order

As

all

silly

able to rec-

organized the

set-

wedding, not only to others but

Life

63

64

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

When we a

ITS

PEOPLE

group organize ourselves

as a

do something, whether

to

forming

is

it

queue or waging war, there are "requirements of recognizability" (Rawls, 2003,

p.

must be met.

129) that

In

meeting those requirements, the situation

is

rendered

accountable as a recognizable social achievement. This work of accounting

primary job of the members. For example,

wedding

is

the

to the people at the

any time during the event (while preparing, setting up, performing, or

at

and asked them, "What

celebrating)

something

we had gone up

if

like,

you doing?" Their response would be

are

"We're having a wedding." This

Garfinkel's point:

is

of any situation are cognitively aware of what they are doing organizing their actions in just such a ding). Because

members

because answerability

primary force behind

is

are

way as

— they

The members knowingly

are

to create a sense of social order (a

knowingly producing

the simplest explanation,

wed-

social order within a scene, it

follows that accounting

is

and the

social organization.

Garfinkel thus sees social order as the result of members' practical actions that are oriented result

toward making the setting accountable. Notice that

— not the

of members' practical actions

norms, values, and

nal

social structures

who

actors

beliefs that

result

social order

in

result of self-centered

cooperate only to obtain gain in a battle of profit and

We

loss.

making did change

can see

Though

which they actually made decisions didn't change much, the way

the jurors accounted for their decision

in

the

which

—the accounting prac-

rendered them jurors doing the business of the jury.

tices

Garfinkel (1967, pp. 18-24)

UCLA

tells a

story of a research project he

clinic files.

sheet

worked on

at

the

Outpatient Clinic. The research was to determine the criteria by which

Two

applicants were selected for treatment.

As

is

and instructions

for

its

And,

use.

tests,

as

is

usually the case, the findings were

which are used

which the coders agree with one another. statistic,

graduate students examined 1,582

usually the case, the student coders were provided with a coding

subjected to inter-coder reliability

It's

I

have

five different

their inter-coder reliability

is

to

determine the extent to

generally thought that the higher the

the greater the reliability. In other words,

commercials and

and

the

guide and guard behaviors; and not the result of

determining people's behaviors; and not the

accountability practices in the story of jury selection mentioned earlier.

way

is

of people conforming to exter-

if

I'm doing a study of television

coders working from the same coding sheet

85%, then

I

can be

fairly certain that

what they

are coding actually exists in the commercials.

However, Garfinkel found that

in

order to code the contents of the folders, the

coders actually assumed knowledge of the way in which the clinic was organized.

This assumed knowledge base "was most deliberately consulted whenever, for

whatever reasons, the coders needed to be really

happened'" (Garfinkel, 1967,

coders were to find out

how

p. 20).

satisfied that they

the clinic was organized, yet in order to

coding sheet, the coders assumed knowledge about the way the nized. Thus, the coders' reliability rate wasn't

coding sheet to document what happened to

had coded 'what

Notice something important here: The

due

clinic

fill

out the

was orga-

to their reliable use of the

in the clinic; the reliability rate

was due

something the coders themselves were doing, apart from the coding sheet or

the folders.

Organizing Ordinary

Most

would regard such

researchers in Garfinkel's position

problems

issues as

with the measurement instrument and as threats to the research. Garfinkel (1967) likens these responses to

gotten out of the Garfinkel

is

"complaining that

way one could

saying that

most

if

social scientists

in

chology" rather than seeing the social world as students' task as they

saw

was

it

to "follow the

(p. 22).

miss the boat: they don't see what's

going on because they are preoccupied

really

the walls of a building were only

what was keeping the roof on"

see better

producing "sociology" or "psy-

it is.

For Garfinkel, the graduate

coding instructions." What the grad-

uate students produced, then, was just that: a setting or scene that could be under-

stood and accountable as "following the coding instructions." Garfinkel's (1967)

ethnomethodological question in

this case

became, "What actual

activities

made up

those coders' practices called 'following coding instruction'?" (p. 20).

This change in Garfinkel's question implies that tical,

planned actions right here, right now,

we must attend

in just this way.

to the prac-

Members

continually

demonstrate their accountability to the social scene. Their practical actions are

When

intended to be seen and reported.

looked for precisely how, in just

Garfinkel went back to the coders, he

this way, at just this time, the coders' practices

simultaneously (reflexively) produced and

made accountable

the action of "follow-

ing the coding instructions."

Documentary Method How do we make sense

of or attribute meaning to an object or situation? Most

sociological explanations explicitly or implicitly use the notion of

Being raised in the same society, we

all

share a

common

common culture:

culture that

we

use to

understand and create meaning. Hopefully, we are getting to the point where we can begin to see what Garfinkel's concern would be here.

common all

culture,"

we

are picturing culture as

use a shovel to dig a hole.

to use. ally

The shovel

is

if it

When we

were a tool that we

there for us

all

"we use

say that all

use, like

to grab ahold of

we

and put

But Garfinkel would say that such an approach "glosses" over what

is

actu-

going on. Again, just as we saw in the introduction to Garfinkel's perspective,

such an explanation not there

is

such

a

is

itself

common

an achievement. Garfinkel doesn't question whether or culture; his interest

is

in

how we, including professional

sociologists, are able to create for ourselves a sense that such a culture or institution exists

and plays

standing

a role in

common

our interpretations of meanings. This approach

culture or

commonsense meanings

ods people use to describe society that to

manage and communicate

is itself

decisions of meaning,

preter

and interpretation

as

is

fact,

The

to,'

important and what qualifies both the inter-

to

be competent inter-

Mannheim's idea of the documentary method:

consists of treating an actual appearance as 'the

as 'standing

tex-

surrounding the

competent.

preters, Garfinkel (1967) uses Karl

'pointing

method, and causal

activities

To understand the practices through which we claim

"The method

under-

to

concerned with the meth-

a "condition of their enforceable rights

ture without interference" (Garfinkel, 1967, p. 77).

description or accounting are what

is

on behalf of

a

document

presupposed underlying pattern"

of,'

as

(p. 78).

Life

65

66

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

Anytime we that."

PEOPLE

ITS

we make

interpret something,

We do

this

when we

kind of identity statement

a

interpret conversations or

when we



"this

standing outside our door as the mail carrier. Thus, the documentary method

work we do when we

take an object or event

and

structure of meaning.

We do

but

In order to put the

He brought

iment.

experiment

this all the time,

documentary method

in

set

it

how do we do

sharp

relief,

is

the

correspondence with

in

is

recognize the person

a

it?

Garfinkel did an exper-

in 10

undergraduates and told them that they were part of an

to explore a

new, alternative method of psychotherapy. The students

were given the opportunity to ask the "therapist" about anything they desired. students needed to

first

The

provide the background to the problem and then phrase

such a way that they could be answered yes or no. The therapist

their questions in

and students were

in different

rooms and communicated

via

an intercom. The

students were instructed to give the background to the problem, ask their question, listen to the therapist's

answer (yes or no), and then turn the intercom off and give

their reactions.

The procedure was repeated

wanted

Of

to ask.

for as

many

questions as the students

no new

course, the hitch in the experiment was that there was

therapy and the "therapist's" answers were given randomly. Thus, there was no "sense" to the answers; the issue then

students

made

as "standing

sense out of the answers

on behalf of

a

— how the students understood the answers

presupposed underlying pattern."

Garfinkel (1967) gleaned several insights from this experiment;

The students perceived



real

was exactly how (using what methods) the

the

experimenter's

I'll list

responses

as

but a few:

"answers-

to-questions." •

After the

question, the questions the students asked were motivated by

first

the experimenter's response tions

by looking back

When



the

at



in other

words, the students framed their ques-

"answers" and anticipated future "helpful answers."

meaning of the experimenter's response wasn't apparent, the

student "waited for clarification" or engaged in an "active search" for the

meaning. Incongruent answers were interpreted by imputing knowledge and motiva-



tion to the therapist. •

Contradictory answers prompted an "active search" for meaning



There was



The

rid the

in

order to

answer of disagreement or meaninglessness. a constant search for a pattern.

made

subjects

tures that

specific references to normatively valued social struc-

were treated

meaningful decisions

as



if

shared by both and as setting the conditions of

for example,

what "everyone knows" about family

(pp. 89-94).

Garfinkel's point not.

is

that the students rendered meaningful

The work of documenting

formed by us

much

all

in

—searching

every situation.

A common

shared as the sense of commonality

give us a clear case

for

in

something that was

and assigning

a pattern

culture or cognitive

documenting

is



scheme

achieved.

is

per-

isn't

so

The students

where there were no cultures or cognitive schemes shared.

Organizing Ordinary

Nonetheless, in most cases a correspondence was achieved between the event and a

meaningful structure. The students' descriptions of the events were given in such a

way

as to assure their "rights to

manage and communicate

(Garfinkel, 1967, p. 77). Further, notice that even

were doing

all

the work,

it

decisions of meaning"

though the individual students

was perceived and reported by the students

as

group

work, as work between the student and therapist.

Ad Hoeing Garfinkel (1967) says something that on the surface sounds pretty amazing: "For the purposes of conducting their everyday affairs persons refuse to permit each other

way"

to understand 'what they are really talking about' in this

How

original).

about? At

first,

can people refuse to

let

others

make much

that doesn't

know what

you remember

sense, until

emphasis

(p. 41,

they are really talking Garfinkel's

it going?" "What do you mean? How's what going?" when we break the assumed patterns of conversation,

breaching experiments: "How's People tend to get very upset

even in what we might think of as important, strategic conversations. Most people in

most

what

is

situations have very

being

little

are really saying.

Of

course, the

tolerance

when someone wants

to know exactly know what they

they refuse to allow someone to

said. In that sense,

main reason

for this refusal

is

that lying beneath

every conversation are endlessly indexical worlds, and our conversations depend on a sense of shared worlds.

Yet

most conversations go on without a

hitch.

we engage

Ad

Garfinkel says that

means

literally

this

"for this."

We

in

ad hoeing.

say something

is

How

that done? In general,

is

hoc comes from

ad hoc when

it

New

is

Latin

made

and

for just

occasion or with a particular end or purpose in mind. Garfinkel uses the

term

to talk

about the minute ways in which we gloss over potential problems

in conversations.

We

can think of ad hoeing, then, as the practices or methods

used by members to sustain a sense and appearance of social organization and shared worlds.

We can apist.

see

some of these ad hoc measures

in the story of the students

and ther-

This was a situation where the students were deliberately kept in the dark

about the meanings of what was being

said. In the face

of such ignorance and with

an assumed context (psychotherapy experiment), students "ad hoced": They used

methods

that allowed the conversation

and

social order to

continue in the face of

contrary or ambiguous dialogue. Read this carefully: They used their retrospectiveprospective sense to place past

and

seemed

what was

said in an

future; they waited for clarification

senseless;

index. Notice that

ongoing context with

when

they

and they continually performed an all

this

was done without

first

a biographical

heard something that

active search for a

meaning

calling anything into question

and

for

the purpose of not interrupting the flow of events.

Ad hoeing occurs anytime we assume the position of "a socially competent member of the arrangement." Socially competent members are compelled to present

and maintain an accountable event, whether

a conversation,

wedding, funeral,

the construction of a building, the teaching of a class, and so on. As such,

we must

Life

67

:

68

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

PEOPLE

ITS

refuse to permit each other to understand that

we

ity lie

are being intentionally deceitful;

it

what we are

we

endless fields of indexical worlds. So

We

sense of shared social worlds.

ments

And we

that never comes.

what we

all

"know" never

Isn't

It

activ-

use ad hoc measures to preserve a

things pass and wait for clarification of state-

let

know" known

say things like "you

we could

principle) to indicate that

really talking about.

simply that behind every social

is

explain

if

(

as the et cetera

need be, but "you know" (even though

appears).

Radical Reflexivity I'd like to offer

one

last

word about

ethnomethodology and the idea

Garfinkel's

of the reflexivity of social worlds. You might have noticed that ethnomethodology

seems to challenge almost every authoritative or legitimated perspective or way of seeing the world. As

we

talked about earlier,

incorrigible assumptions that are protected

And

we saw

as

of

in the story

my

social world. This ity refers to

1

sociologists

99 1

,

do

they are looking

ity

is

372 ) This

p.

.

make

to

in, to, is

their

reflexivity:

and about

"Endogenous

reflexiv-

social reality constitutes social

what we were talking about above

work appear

belief.

itself is

produced way of seeing the

as a reflexively

termed endogenous

how what members do

reality" ( Pollner,

What

method

by secondary elaborations of

teaching assistantship, sociology

first

understood by ethnomethodologists

knowledge systems are based on

all

Figure

in

3.

1

sociological creates the very real-

at.

Pollner (1991) points out that there are two other levels of reflexivity in eth-

nomethodological analysis,

system

is

reflexively

reflexively

own

Every analysis and knowledge

is

to see one's

self

own way

of understanding the social

produced. Referential reflexivity

researcher not only understands her also sees her

radical reflexivity. In referential reflexiv-

own methods:

produced, including ethnomethodology. Part of the ethno-

methodological stance, then,

world as being

If,

and

referential

the researcher turns her gaze to her

ity,

way of knowing

is

knowledge and

the

produced but

or identity within that system as being reflexively produced.

for example, I'm an ethnomethodologist, in radical reflexivity

my

when

radical i/cd

as reflexively

my

I

would

see both

identity as an ethnomethodologist as being reflex iveh

produced.

Why would ethnomethodology want to when everything

can be gained

"Intrinsic to radical reflexivity

basic assumptions, discourse

1991, p. 370).

One

thing

want us

One and

him

if

is

this idea

an

'unsettling,'

of reflexivity so

tar?

see

in describing reality"

and learn

making everything

(

Pollner,

everything were unsettled.

if

unsettled, ethnomethodologists

how

final

word about ethnomethodology and my experiences with

I

it is

done

in just this

way

at just this time.

About midway through the semester,

1

felt

I

was beginning

was intrigued. One day while we were walking together

we could

What

an insecurity regarding the

i.e.,

and practices used

wonder what we could

for certain: In

push

cut loose from any empirical reality? lust this:

to see

Livingston. out,

is

I

is

get together for a couple o\ sessions.

nomethodology. And Eric very much wanted

me

to

I

wanted him

Eric-

to figure

to lunch, to teach

I

it

asked

me

eth-

learn ethnomethodology. But,

Organizing Ordinary

he told me,

wasn't something that could be taught through reading or talking.

it

would need

to

spend many hours simply watching people

up

malls, crossing streets, lining

—watching them

movies, attending

at the

classes,

Life

69

We

at the

and doing the

thousand-and-one things that people do each and every day. I

was

a

little

ing Herbert

pointed.

I

just didn't

surprised.

Blumer

was carrying

schedule for

It

thought

I

had asked

heavy academic load

a

a regular question, kind of like ask-

symbolic interactionism to me. in school

And

and was

I

was disap-

a single parent;

I

have the time to invest in that kind of learning process. Plus, Eric was

only going to be

versations

I

to explain

at the university for

some other

on the

time.

subject, but

me

didn't really strike

spend much more time

more caught than

It all

year, so

1

then, but

I

can see

taught. Probably

We

—and they

Ethnomethodology watch people.

And

now why

we needed

Eric said

to

learning this theoretical perspective: Ethnomethodology

is

more than any other perspective in this book, think to be known. As I mentioned before, I

the chief difficulty with this perspective

commonplace

we could

added up to our just having a few more con-

no people watching.

ethnomethodology must be applied

seen but unnoticed.

wasn't something that

it

is

that

deals with those things that are

it

miss the power of ethnomethods because they are so are powerful precisely because they are ordinary.

really

more caught than

is

taught. So quit reading

ask yourself one simple question:

of a conversation doing? Don't ask what

it

What

is

this

and go

behavior or part

means; ask, rather, what does

this

do?

Begin to think about interactional elements as mechanisms that achieve something in the social encounter. If

begin to

you continually ask yourself

this question, you'll

become aware of the seen but unnoticed foundations of social

soon

order.

Summary Garfinkel's perspective

meaning

as

social order

interactions

is

unique among

sociologists.

achievements that are produced

and meaning

as achieved within

—and not through such things

He

in situ. its

sees social order

That

is,

and

Garfinkel sees

— face-to-face

natural setting

as institutions that exist outside

the natural setting.

The

principal

way

this is

every social setting

is

done

that

it

is

through accounting.

A

basic requirement of

be recognizable or accountable as a specific kind

of setting. Thus, the practical behaviors that create a setting just as

it is

are

seen but not noticed for what they are; they are the very behaviors that achieve the setting in the All settings selves.

The

and

first place.

talk are therefore indexical; they

actions that create the situation of a

index or reference them-

wedding or

a class are simul-

taneously understood as meaningful, social activities within the situation.

Human

activity always references itself;

it is

thoroughly

incorrigible assumptions, discovered through the

reflexive,

based upon

documentary method, pro-

ven through indexical methods, and protected by secondary elaborations of belief.

70

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

PEOPLE

ITS

Building Your Theory Toolbox Learning More •

— Primary Sources

someone who has founded a school in sociology, Garfinkel has little. However, his two primary works are essential reading:

For

written very

ethnomethodology, Prentice

1967.

o

Studies

o

Ethnomethodology's program: Working out Durkheim's aphorism,

in

Anne

edited and introduced by

Hall,

Warfield Rawls,

Rowman &

Littlefield,

2002. •

However, one of the interesting things about ethnomethodology there are a

number

of primary works.

Among them

is

that

are

Harvey Sacks, Sociological description, Berkeley Journal of Sociology,

o

8,

1-16, 1963.

Don H. Zimmerman and Melvin Pollner, The everyday world as a phenomenon, in Jack Douglas (Ed.), Understanding everyday life: Toward

o

the reconstruction of sociological knowledge, Aldine, 1970.

Mundane

Melvin Pollner,

o

4,

reasoning, Philosophy of the Social Sciences,

35-54, 1974.

Hugh Mehan and Houston Wood, The

o

reality

of ethnomethodology,

Wiley, 1975.

Learning More •

good review of

For a

Rawls,



— Secondary Sources

in

George

theorists, Blackwell,

The standard

text for

I

life,

see "Harold Garfinkel," by

2003, pp. 131-136.

ethnomethodology

Polity Press,

would, of course, be remiss

is

John Heritage's Garfinkel and

1984. if

I

didn't

recommend

books. His Making sense of ethnomethodology introduction to the field (Routledge

& Kegan

is

Eric

& Kegan

Conversation

is

and short

Paul Books, 1987), is

and

his

an interesting

look at the social order foundations of the most abstract of

(Routledge

Livingston's

a good, clear,

The ethnomethodological foundations of mathematics



Anne

The Blackwell companion to major contem-

porary social

ethnomethodology, •

Garfinkel's

Ritzer (Ed.),

all

languages

Paul Books, 1986).

one of the more important areas of ethnomethodological

research. See Deidre

Boden and Don

social structure: Studies in

H.

Zimmerman

(Eds),

Talk

ethnomethodology and conversation

and

analysis,

University of California Press, 1991. •

Another important area Scientific practice

studies of science,

Check

It

is

the study of science. See Michael Lynch,

and ordinary action: Ethnomethodology and Cambridge University Press, 1997.

Out

— Candace West and Don



Web



Phenomenology: This philosophical

Byte

H.

it

again).

I

would suggest

Zimmerman: Doing Gender is one of the roots of etha number of other theories (we'll

tradition

nomethodological thinking, as well as see

Social

starting slowly with the article

found on

Organizing Ordinary

A good

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenomenology).

book

accessible

fairly

Introduction

is

phenomenology,

to

and

by Robert

Sokolowski, Cambridge University Press, 1999. •

Social order: This

duction order: •

is

A

a

is

fundamental issue for sociology. An excellent

intro-

Michael Hechter and Christine Home's (Eds.) Theories of social

2003.

reader, Stanford Social Sciences,

Accounts: Once you begin to grasp the idea of start to see

social

accounting, you

everywhere. Read Scott and Lyman's 1968

it

will

article titled

"Accounts," American Sociological Review, 33, 46-62.

Seeing the World •

After reading and understanding this chapter, you should be able to

answer the following guestions (remember to answer them o

it

about o

How ively

and

social structures?

indexicality,

how do

account-

and the documentary method function to

reflex-

organize social events?

What belief?

ple

social order

are situations reflexively organized? Specifically,

ability,

o

theoretically):

What does mean that Garfinkel is interesting in analyzing events "in just this way and at just this time"? What does his approach imply

are

incorrigible

How do

assumptions and secondary elaborations of

they work to produce a sense of reality? Use an exam-

from the newspaper to

illustrate

your answer.

Engaging the World •

Asking you to engage your world using ethnomethodology easy and

difficult.

It's

easy because almost everything

saying hello, to science, to relations

between

methodologically. The difficult part

is

that

nations, is

it

me

o

Describe

how

the textbook you have

of reflexively constructing sociology.

descriptions o



it,

"in just this

way and

in

is

both

life,

from

organized ethno-

is

not to see

difficult

it's

you two tasks to get you

give

your

hard to observe seen but

unnoticed reflexive behaviors. But once you get

ethnomethods. Let

in

started:

your hands

Remember, get

an example

is

specific in

your

at just this time."

Write an ethnomethodological description of the social organization of grocery store check-out lines.

Weaving the Threads •

How would

symbolic interactionism, social constructivism, and ethno-

methodology each account •

dom •

for social order or patterned behaviors?

Evaluate each of the perspectives that we've looked at so far of action.

In

which perspective

Ethnomethodology

is

the

first

is

perspective that we've

didn't have a specific kind of actor.

What

tivism)

and what

of the types of actor

is

gained or

lost

terms of free-

come

kind of self or actor

each of the other theories (symbolic interactionism and

Which

in

the actor the most free? Least free? across that is

present

in

social construc-

by Garfinkel not including such an actor?

would

fit

best

in

Garfinkel's theory

and why?

Life

71

CHAPTER 4

Performing the Self Erving

Goffman (1922-1982)

Photo: Courtesy of the University of Pennsylvania Department of Sociology.

73

74

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

PEOPLE

ITS

Goffman's Perspective:

All the

World

The Interaction Order

76

a Stage

Is

Dramaturgy: Performing the Self

7b

76

Concepts and Theory: Impression Management 79

Performing the Self

82

Relating to Roles

Sacred and Stigmatized Selves

83

Concepts and Theory: The Encounter

84

and Face-Work

Interaction Ritual

Frames and Keys

Summary

78

78

Different Kinds of Selves

84

87

90

Building Your Theory Toolbox

92

What's going on?

Dateline:

(CNN)

Friday,

May

ABOARD USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN

2003.

2,

— President Bush made

a landing

aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln

Thursday, arriving in the co-pilot's seat of a Navy S-3B Viking after making

two

fly-bys of the carrier.

It

was the

carrier

first

time

by plane. The

plane, traveling about

the flight deck and

Moments

a sitting president has arrived

jet

made what

is

known

50 mph, hooking onto the

1

coming

to a

on the deck of an

complete stop

after the landing, the president,

last

in less

of four

steel

than 400

wires across

feet.

wearing a green

holding a white helmet, got off the plane, saluted those on the

flight suit

flight

shook hands with them. Above him, the tower was adorned with that read,

aircraft

as a "tailhook" landing, with the

and

deck and

a big sign

"Mission Accomplished." (CNN, 2003)

What's going on?

One day in

most

while driving to a lunch appointment,

people going to lunch. In front of

windows

I

stopped

at a

stop

light.

Like

cities at that hour, the majority of cars were filled with business

rolled

down. While

and he put on cologne

(I

I

me was

a

man

in a black

watched, he changed his

could smell

it

after

BMW

shirt, coat,

he sprayed).

He

with his

and

hat,

also switched

radio stations, from a news station to a hip-hop station.

w

hat's

son

going on in these scenarios

is

working

at

a certain kind of

may seem

clear. In

presenting a specific image that self.

I

chose the two examples

in

each case, the peris

meant

to

convey

order to highlight

Performing the Self

the fact that this kind of impression

informal settings.

than might In

meet the

first

Chapter

1,

own

object, as perceived

emergent. SI

is

it

behaviors, which

by others,

becomes

also quite

both formal and

in

there's actually

more going on

eye.

about symbolic interaction

for controlling one's

interaction. If

management occurs

However, Erving Goffman says

secondary;

is

a focus,

its

(SI),

is

we saw

that the self

vital for society. it

may

or

may

But the

important

is

self as a social

not become part of the

meaning and substance

and

are negotiated

concerned about the internalization process:

it's

a social

psychological perspective that sees internalization occurring as the individual roletakes. Successive role-taking experiences

Goffman the

from

sees the self differently

communication between the

internal reflexivity to the

Goffman, the

self isn't

"I"

produce the "Me" component of the this. First,

Goffman

isn't

self.

concerned about

and the "Me." He changes the focus from

demands made by

one of many possible

the encounter. Second, according to

social objects; the self is the central orga-

nizing feature of all social encounters. Further, we'll see that this presentation of self is

more complex than we might

BMW, may want ifications of

Third,

think.

We,

like

the president or the

how we do

to give off a certain impression, but

doing

it

Goffman

are vast

that

man

in the

and the ram-

and generally unseen.

on the

doesn't focus

internalization process.

He probably

wouldn't argue with symbolic interaction about this issue, but Goffman's analytic focus

is

the interaction order. Everything about the

of seeing the encounter. Thus,

then,

self,

together out of the dramatic realization of the interaction. these things

become

related to this

we have

way

are put

Goffman argues

that

internalized not because of role-taking, but because of situa-

tional factors directly related to the presentation of

The

is

the selves and identities that

all

self.

Goffman

Essential

Biography

Goffman was born on June

11, 1922, in Alberta,

from the University of Chicago. For of the Scottish islands (Unst).

In

University of Pennsylvania

Goffman

Association

in

Life,

this

which

is

study

now

his

life

became

available

in

Ph.D.

on one his first

10

dif-

1958, Herbert Blumer invited Goffman to teach at the

University of California, Berkeley.

career.

he studied daily

The dissertation from

book, The Presentation of Self in Everyday ferent languages.

Canada. He earned

his dissertation,

also

in

He stayed there

for

10 years, moving to the

1968, where he taught for the remainder of

served

as

president

of

the

his

American Sociological

1981 and 1982.

Passionate Curiosity

Goffman was

inquisitive

about everything people did

in

face-to-face inter-

He watched them continually. The face-to-face encounter so enthralled Goffman that he was driven to probe the interaction itself: What are the require-

actions.

ments of an encounter? people do

when

How do

they meet?

these requirements influence everything that

75

76

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

PEOPLE

ITS

Keys to Knowing interaction order,

back stages,

impression management, front, teams, setting, front and

deference and demeanor, face-work, focused and

role distance,

unfocused encounters, frames

Goffman's Perspective:

the World

All

Is

a Stage

Dramaturgy: Performing the Self Goffman's perspective has become known

as

dramaturgy. Dramaturgy

is

a

way

of understanding social encounters using the analogy of the dramatic stage. In this perspective, people are seen as performers

who

presentation of their character (the

an audience. There are three major

premises to dramaturgy.

person shows people.

The

us.

self is

this limitation,

The

self) to

are vitally concerned with the

we can know about a person's self is what the something that we can literally take out and show

First, all

self isn't

perceived indirectly through the cues

we

offer others.

Because of

people are constantly and actively involved in the second premise of

dramaturgy: impression management. Impression management refers to the manipulation of cues in order to organize and control the impression

We

situation,

and they do the same

give to others.

for us.

Taken alone, impression management sounds deceitful. If self, is

we

use staging, fronts, props, and so on to communicate to others our "self" in the

then

that

everybody around us

how can we believe that

is

at best strategic

manipulating cues

it is

and

their "true self" that

we

see?

we can never be sure that we see an authentic self; we always have we see is real. But notice something here: For the interaction, if the self

communicated

we

is

—whether authentic or

genuine or false

in the exact

inadvertently given

The

see

same way, through

assume

does not

fake, all selves are

signs that are specifically given or

dramaturgy

is

that there are particular features of face-to-

face encounters that tend to bring order to interactions.

places moral imperatives

truth. Selves

to it

off.

third premise of

discredited. If

worst

The short answer

that the self

matter

at

in order to present a specific

on

The presentation of

interactions. Selves are delicate things

you have ever

felt

embarrassed, you

depend upon not only our

skill in

know

and are

self

easily

the painful reality of this

presenting and maintaining cues,

but also the willingness and support of others. Thus, the simple act of presenting a self creates a

cooperative order.

The Interaction Order In is

many ways, Goffman

in the order that

is

is

not so

demanded by

meanings and motivations,

isn't

much

interested in the interaction per se, as he

interaction.

The content of

Goffman's concern. For us

the interaction,

its

to interact, there are

Performing the Self

and ways of behaving

certain rules little if

demanded. These ways of behaving have

that are

anything to do with our personal motives, but have significant power over

the effects of the interaction. For example,

when we

we

enter an interaction,

find

out what people are talking about, what kinds of roles are important, what statuses

how involved people are in the interaction, and so on. Then, once we've

are claimed,

checked out the terrain, we gradually introduce our talk and

The motive behind such

interaction.

embarrassment. The preserved: "His aim

effect, is

Goffman

care,

however,

self into the

to save

tells us, is

our

flow of

self

from

that the organization of the interaction

is

to save face; his effect

is

us that he

is

is

(Goffman,

to save the situation"

1967, p. 39).

Goffman, however,

is

quick to

tell

tionism, where the only thing that exists talk in

face-to-face interactions.

terms of structures or institutions, but he names of the immediate interaction.

exist outside

The

ition of the situation.

what kind of ing,

is

not proposing a situational reduc-

and so

selves to present,

forth.

First, settings

definition of the situation

what

For example, the

to expect

selves,

is

Goffman doesn't

at least three things that

strongly inform the defin-

important because

from others, how

it

tells

us

mean-

to interpret

meanings, and others available in a uni-

versity classroom are different than at a local bar.

Another element that

exists outside the

into interactions with biographies. stories

we

about our

self

use, individual

previously, then

As we

story.

and

Yet,

When

others.

come

biographies. People

is

There are two kinds of biographical

categoric. If

we have an

will see, these

agement.

and

encounter

These biographies are previously established

we

see

someone with

stories that

whom we have interacted

individual biography of that person and she or he of us.

man-

biographies or story lines are the result of impression

once established, you and

a personal

biography

I

are both

committed

isn't available, as

then categoric biographies are used



stories that

you are meeting. For example, when you

first

when you

to

maintaining that

first

meet someone,

go along with the type of person

meet

a professor, there's a categoric

biography that you access, a story about that person even though you've never met before.

The is

Both individual and categoric biographies structure the encounter.

Goffman (1983)

third extra-interactional element that

cognitive relations: "At the very center of interaction

we have with

those present before us"

(p. 4).

explicitly talks

about

the cognitive relation

life is

As members of categoric groups, each

of us has identifiable knowledge bases, and these islands of knowledge are related to other specific categoric groups. For example,

let's

you've just stopped by a local bar to unwind. As you next to you strikes up a conversation.

The small

say

sit

it's

Then one of you mentions music and you

at

find out that

bits

work and

the bar, the person

talk continues as

work, the poker tournament on the television, and other life.

Friday after

down

you chat about

and pieces of

social

one plays guitar and the

other drums. Suddenly an entire horizon of shared knowledge opens up. You can

almost

feel

the expansion from a narrow sliver of shared reality to a world of cog-

nitive relations.

Thus, Goffman they are any

less

notice that the

isn't

way he

most structural

arguing that more macro-level entities don't

exist,

or that

an abstraction than the interaction order (though you might talks

about such large-scale things

sociologists).

It's

is

distinctly different

Goffman's (1983) perspective that "in

all

from these

77

78

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

PEOPLE

ITS

cases [of both the

macro and micro phenomena] what we

edited summaries" (p. 9). Vet in that they,

use.

Goffman

more than any other

is

get

somebody's crudely

is

also arguing that interactions are

social site, are

People interact more in face-to-face encounters than they do

units,

other social

in

such as formal organizations (for example, Wal-Mart and Target) or nations

United States and England). The interaction order achieved through

(like the

encounters, then,

open

unique

"worn smooth" through constant

our most stable and routine

is

social entity,

and

workings of many

to systematic analysis than are the internal or external

macroscopic

(Goffman, 1983,

entities"

seems "more

it

p. 9).

Concepts and Theory: Impression Management Different Kinds of Selves One

of the biggest issues concerning the

what does the

self

belong?

It is

Many

theorists argue that the self

scheme of

roles that

a quality

is

is

self:

—a

other side of the coin

also

self

is

like a structure that lives inside the indi-

of the individual that consists of a hierarchical is

by the

stable

and consistently informs everything the individual thinks

self that

is

or to is

the core self versus the situational

(see Stryker, 1980, for this perspective).

transituational self

whom

To

lives:

developed through childhood socialization,

is

late teens/early twenties,

and does

it

This notion of a social versus individual

related to another central issue about the self.

where

clearly linked to the individual, but the self

just as obviously a social entity.

vidual. This structure

self is

We

can think of this as the core,

remains the same across diverse situations.

the situated

self.

Here the

more

seen as located

self is

On

the

in the

interaction than the individual. Rather than an internalized, hierarchical scheme,

the self is an idea that

The

self

is

used to organize the behaviors of individuals in an encounter.

thus changes and emerges with the flow of interaction.

as the situated,

emergent

This situated

self

We can

Goffman's (1959) main concern: "The

is

self.

organic thing that has a specific location, whose fundamental fate

mature, and to

die:

it is

a

think of this

self.

dramatic

sented" (pp. 252-253). However,

have a concept of the core

self.

it

effect arising diffusely

would be incorrect

from

is

to

.

is

not an

be born, to

a scene that

is

pre-

to conclude that he doesn't

Goffman (1963a) proposes

In Stigma,

.

a three-fold

typology of self identity: the social identity, the personal identity, and the ego identity.

Each of these

identity

is

is

like a story that

is

up through

built

the story that distant others can

students hold a social identity of me.

The

tell

about

social encounters. us; for

social identity

is

category has a complement of attributes

to be ordinary

felt

The category and

my

social cat-

defined situations. Each

and others

bers of a particular category.

social

example, most of

composed of

egories imputed to the individual by the self

in

The

and natural

tor

mem-

the attributes form anticipations in

given social settings. People in an encounter lean on these anticipations, transform

them

into normative expectations

That

last

things about

bit

about demands

humans

is

and righteously presented demands. is

very important.

One

of the most interesting

that they are capable of anything.

Our

behaviors aren't

Performing the

predetermined by

instincts,

and we have freedom of choice. However, the only way

humans is by having some way to predict their behaviors. According to Goffman, we use social categories and their accompanying attitudes to accomplish this. We use the category to presume something about how the

we can

function around other

person works inside. Further, our expectations come to have a moral or righteous to

them. Again, the reason for

this

feel

comes back to the unpredictability of humans.

we have are cultural expectations, then we must make sure that people live up to them. So, when someone doesn't live up to those expectations like a profeswe become morally offended. sor dating a student or not caring about education Since

all





is held by people who are close to us. These are the people known us the longest, have interacted with us in multiple situations, and to whom we have cued more of our idea of who we see ourselves to be. Personal identities have more or less abiding characteristics that are a combination of life

A

personal identity

that have

The personal

history events that are unique to the person.

identity plays a "struc-

tured, routine, standardized role in social organization just because of

kind quality" (Goffman, 1963a,

know about me

(the

I

long periods of time), the old way.

Thus it

is

I

am

of

am

you

a subjective, reflexive

all

is

who we are

to

jective sense

at issue"

which we

my

presentation of self in any

have presented.

I

at

The

else.

matter that necessarily must be

(Goffman, 1963a,

own

something

construction;

p. 106,

The ego

get emotionally attached.

Goffman, the ego identity

something that comes from inside

us,

is

by the individ-

felt

we

tell

identity

ourselves about is

thus "the sub-

continuity and character that an indi-

is

made out

we

see

Note

of the same materials that

Our ego

from innate personality

construct the story through which

and categorical expectations

self;

ego identity

emphasis added). This iden-

the story

it is

others use to construct our personal and social identities.

we

one-of-a-

more you

to obtain as a result of his various social experiences" (p. 105).

that according to

Rather,

its

that the

in different kinds of situations over

to organize

own situation and his own

of his

comes

is

we've talked about are within the range of the situational

of the individual's

vidual

a self to I

ego identity that Goffman hints

ual whose identity tity is

less free

held accountable to the self image that

far the selves

in the

"first

p. 57).

more present

What Goffman means

our

self

identity isn't

characteristics.

using the same cues

that others use.

Performing the Self The

basic concept

a front.

A

front

is

Goffman

uses to explain the presentation of self

the expression of a particular self or identity that

the individual and read by others.

Webster's (2002) front:

that

is

A

facade

is

first

The

front

definition of facade

is

is

like a

on

is

that of

formed by

building facade. Merriam-

remarkably

"a face (as a flank or rear facing

is

like

Goffman's idea of a

a street or court) of a building

given emphasis by special architectural treatment." Like a facade, a front

is

constructed by emphasizing and deemphasizing certain sign vehicles. In every interaction, that

we hold

things back, things that aren't appropriate for the situation or

we don't want those

in the situation to attribute to

our

self;

we accentuate

other

aspects in order to present a particular kind of self with respect to the social role.

Self

79

80

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

A

social front

is

ITS

PEOPLE

constructed using three main elements: the setting, appearance,

and manner.

The

idea of the setting

physical scenery

taken directly from the theater:

is

and props

we

that

which we present our performance. The classroom.

The chalkboard,

the

room

media equipment, and so on are of teacher. All this

all

It

consists of

example

clearest

layout with

all

for us

probably the

is

the desks facing the front, the

used by the professor to make claim to the role

obvious, but notice that the way the setting

is

the

all

use to create the stage and background within

ferent kinds of professorial performances.

may choose

I

used cues

is

dif-

to "de-center" the role of

teacher and instead claim the role of facilitator by simply rearranging the desks in a circle

and using multiple, mobile chalkboards placed ground

Settings tend to

For example,

room

it

would be more

There

are in a

is

around the room.

difficult (but

not impossible) for

roles, identities,

me to

use the class-

"groundedness" of settings

is

part

and selves are consistent across time and

a taken-for-grantedness about the definition of the situation

when we

geographic location that becomes more pronounced the more "institution-

alized" the location

is.

When

say that a location

I

use of a specific place appears restricted: students are restricted, yet Microsoft, there

all

by making definitions of the situations consistent.

as a setting for the definition of "bar." This

of what makes us think that space.

roles

it is

available to

The

is

institutionalized,

many professors; the office

on the other hand, is even more institutionalized and

is still

a great deal of flexibility

and

I

mean

that the

front of the classroom looks as

of the

restricted.

if

CEO of

However,

creativity available to those that use the

space.

However, there

is

one

specific setting

wherein there

is little

institutions. Total institutions are organizations that control

behaviors, from the time the person gets

up

until she or

he

or no all

flexibility: total

of an individual's

is fast

asleep (and even

then, behaviors are regulated). Clear examples of these institutional settings include

and military boot camps. Goffman (1961a) uses the idea of

psychiatric hospitals

the total institution to demonstrate the clear association between the setting and

the

self:

much support

"This special kind of institutional arrangement does not so

the self as constitute

it" (p.

168).

In addition to the physical setting, a front

is

produced by using appearance and

manner. Appearance cues consist of clothing, hair

style,

backpacks, attache cases, piercings, tattoos, and so on



makeup,

jewelry, cologne,

in short,

anything that

can place upon our bodies. While appearance refers to those things that

our bodies, manner

refers to

what we do with our bodies. Manner

way we walk, our posture, our voice with our hands, what ically

inflection,

we do with our arms, our stride,

way we

to

consists ol the

use our eyes, what

the

we

sit,

how we

we do phys-

respond to stimuli, and so on. Both appearance and manner function to

signify the performer's social statuses

by

how we

we do

social statuses

statuses,

should be

and they dress

and temporary

fairly clear.

differently.

ritual state.

What we mean

Bankers and bikers have different social

They don't

dress differently because they have

dissimilar tastes; they dress differently because different appearance cues are associated with different status positions.

Ritual states refer to at least

associated with different

life

two

phases.

things.

We

The most apparent

is

the ritual state

have fewer of these than do traditional

Performing the

societies,

but we

when

ularly

mark some

still

notion of ritual state conveys

appearance

transitions with rituals, like birthdays (partic-

promotions, and retirement. The second idea that the

States), graduations,

United

life

they signify a change in social standing, like the 21st birthday in the

tells

others

is

our readiness to perform a particular

how serious we

you see two people riding

are about the role

and

bicycles

cycling shoes

and helmet, then you can surmise

As

is

in

if

normal

one

that

is

about

really serious

is less so.

in the theater, fronts are

Most of what

one

matching nylon/lycra jersey and shorts along with

and the other

riding and the other

Our

role.

claim. For example,

they are dressed differently,

street clothes

in

we

prepared backstage and presented on the front stage.

implied in these concepts

For example, every day

fairly intuitive.

is

before you go to school you prepare your student-self in the backstage. You pick clothes, shower,

the self that you

school

do your

different

is

put on makeup, or whatever

hair,

want others

to see

from your work

and respond

to.

it is

that corresponds to

Your work

in the backstage for

dating will see your performance at school). You you've prepared in the front stages of

then present the student-self that

lunchroom, hallway, and so

class,

the backstage of school extends further back than your

students will study, read,

too

is

and write

But

forth.

morning preparations.

All

to a certain degree in preparation for class. This

part of the backstage for class. Even

if

you don't read or

ing to perform as a certain kind of student. As

However, we need to

someone you're

in the backstage of a date (unless

I

said,

study,

most of

realize that there are multiple front-

you

are prepar-

this is intuitive.

and backstages and

that

they can occur at almost any time and place.

Often

it is

performance teams that

move from

most performances are carried

theater,

by

off

course, such things as one-person shows, but by

another to present a show to the audience. ters.

We

can think of teamwork as being

front- to backstage. Just as in the a troupe of actors.

and

And

are, of

large actors cooperate with

the

same

is

or contrived.

tacit

There

one

true in social encoun-

Members of

like social

categories generally, though not always, assume that others within the category will

cooperate in preserving the group to the friend,

beach for the weekend.

who

don't think

feels I

face.

she didn't do well

did well on the

For example, perhaps you and a friend went

Monday you on

test this

are both talking to a professor.

Your

that morning's test, tells the professor, "I

morning.

I

was

sick

all

weekend and

didn't

have a chance to study." You say nothing. You're a team.

Performance teams can also be

much more

and are having another couple over asks

you

deliberate. Let's say

for dinner. In the

to help her in the kitchen. In the kitchen

your help with

the food, but, rather, the

isn't

you are married

middle of dinner, your spouse

you find out that what she wants

team performance. She

tells

you, in no

uncertain terms, that you are not to talk about the fact that she, your wife, ing for a

new

job.

It

friends with her current boss

both go back to the

The Web Byte for

and she

table, then,

hasn't told her boss that she

and smoothly change the

this chapter, the

work of Arlie

is

occasionally have students

one or simply want

look-

leaving.

to

tell

come

me

into

about

my office

how

this

is

You

topic.

Russell Hochschild, takes us into

an area of impression management that Goffman rarely considered. As I

is

turns out that the couple you are having over for dinner

crying.

They may have

a professor, lost a

loved

has been the week from hell and they

Self

81

— 82

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

can't get their

that

know

I

ITS

paper

PEOPLE

on time. The thing

in

walk across campus crying

emotions

his impression, but the

And

play.

moment

backstage to

in

about

dorm room

this

way

my

the elevator and

is

managed her or

was suitable

that

experience

or classroom and

the student not only

as well, in a

somewhere between

then,

They

the way.

all

me

that strikes

the student didn't start out at her or his

for public dis-

student had a

office, the

which she or he accessed those emotions and allowed crying

be part of the front. This story about crying implies something important about

impression management: Part of takes impression

management

us to consider the

managed

involves emotion.

it

Our Web

Byte for this chapter

and

inside the very center of the individual

invites

heart.

Relating to Roles Every definition of a social situation contains roles that are normal and regularly

Goffman considers

expected.

roles as

bundles of

Some

together into a situated activity system.

be pleased to perform and others we perhaps

from a

selves

role or

we can

embrace

fully

it.

activities that are effectively laced

of these role-specific activities will not.

We

Role distancing

a

is

is

so

much more

than the

will

way of enacting and

role that simultaneously allows the actor to lay claim to the role

or he

we

can thus distance ourthe

to say that she

of student, for example.

role. Let's take the role

There are certain kinds of behaviors that are expected of students: They should read the material through several times before class, they should diligently take notes, they should ask questions in class

sit

row and

in the front

and consistently make eye

contact with the professor, they should systematize and rewrite their notes at least

every week, they should

and stop by during

know

the

But It isn't

listed

list,

make

office

a point to introduce themselves to the professor

though you probably haven't taken the time

how many

of you actually perform the role in

a matter of ignorance or ability;

and more.

you want

So,

why

taneously perform another

convey

to others that

to write

entirety?

You don't perform the

don't you?

When

its

forth. it

You already

out.

Why

don't you?

you know and can perform everything we've role to

your peers, that there

to express to people, mostly

simply being a student.

to

it

hours to go over the material, and so

presenting the role of student,

role. In this situation

you are

you might be more than

its fullest

more

is

it is

because

you than

difficult to

a student.

a student,

to

Thus,

simul-

in

you leave gaps

order in the

minds of others

presentation. These gaps leave possibilities

and questions

who

the gaps with hints of other selves

else

is

this

person? Sometimes we

fill

in the

"athletic female" or "sensitive male") that aren't necessarily part

I

like

of the definition of

the situation.

Contained within the idea of

menu we adhere role;

the role

We tend to

to

to

all

that the role

becomes our

embrace

role distance

a role

self.

We

be institutional representatives

a role like this,

we

demands.

see

when we

is

are

role

We

embracement. In

effectively

and judge our

new to

(like a

idealize the situation

embrace-

become one with

mainly through

the

this role.

when we feel ourselves teacher). When we do embrace

a situation or

parent or

and

self

role

its roles.

That

is,

we "incorporate and

exemplify the officially accredited values of the society" (Goffman, 1959,

p. 35).

— Performing the Self

When we manage

our front

in

to recognize the self that

first,

the audience

and

most of

it is

as to represent society as well.

personal, but

is

You

to as "liminal space" (Turner, 1969).

are

under the demands of your parents, nor are you working

demands your

do become

society,

embodies

time between highly institutionalized spaces. This kind of

a

It's

sometimes referred

child fully fully

that

example, we expect university students to experiment and try out

different things. is

one

of the decision to distance or embrace a role

situational. For

time

way

upon

place claims

are presenting as

second, to present our self in such a

Some

we

such a way,

we

a full

a

job that

and impression management. However, when you

time, effort,

member

no longer

at a

of the economy, you won't have the time or occasion to

experience different situations and the selves they entail. Your daily rounds will be

more

and managed by

restricted

embrace the

we have

to

self that

work

work harder

at

others.

Of course,

requires.

it

and

And you

it is

be expected to more

will

role distancing

is still

fully

possible, but

circumscribed by our situations.

Sacred and Stigmatized Selves Charles Horton Cooley recognized as early as 1902 that society rests on

and shame

(see Cooley, 1998, pp. 155-178).

social in origin,

and shame

work

at

Both are emotions that are

and both help monitor human behaviors. Goffman in social interactions. In every interaction,

and every time we present a

front,

we put

the self at

risk.

behaviors.

We

distinctly

also sees pride

present a front

People read our cues, cat-

up

egorize us, attribute attitudes, and then expect us to live

we

pride

felt

to the

normal

and

traits

are held accountable to the role.

Often we are unaware that we are making moral demands of someone's role

performance

These demands constitute the individual's

until they are violated.

virtual self in the situation. Participants

the actual role-related behaviors. selves

—and

The

compare the

virtual self to the actual

differences between the virtual

there are always differences



self,

and actual

create the possibility of stigma.

The word

stigma comes from the Greek and originally meant a brand or tattoo. Today, stigma is

used to denote

a

mark of shame or

discredit.

There are well-known and apparent stigmas, though ically correct,

we

don't talk usually about

Goffman mentions

mas

are disabilities

are discredited by those that

obvious stigma creates tension tion,"

them

if

we

as such today.

are going to be polit-

Among

the ones that

and deformities. People with such apparent

Goffman

calls

"normals." Having

in encounters.

and the discredited use various devices

stig-

someone with an

Normals

practice careful "disatten-

manage

the tension, such as joking

to

or downplaying.

There are also well-known but not so apparent stigmas. People are discreditable:

stigmatized.

One

They

live daily

and

such category that

of homosexuals. Being homosexual

homosexual

is

viewed

as

being a sexual person.

compared

to tension

having

in every situation is

prominent today

in this society is a

failed to live

Many homosexuals

up

in the

United States

is

stigmatized identity

that

— the

to the expectations associated with

practice information

management); they work

in this category

with the potential of being

to pass as a

management

normal. Passing

(as is

a

83

84

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

PEOPLE

ITS

concerted and well-organized effort to appear normal based on the knowledge of possible discrediting; this impression

management

entails a directedness that isn't

usual for normals. All of us pass.

We

engage

cues associated with the perfect student? Well,

poor student.

nals associated with being a

tance,

we can

enough cues

If

we could

we

just as easily record the sig-

think back to the issue of role dis-

see that role distancing requires a delicate balance to

student. Since issue

We know what cues to Remember when we listed the

information management:

in

avoid in order to successfully pull off a performance.

still

we

all

we

pass,

becomes not whether

because he has, but rather

(Goffman, 1963a,

The reason

between claiming

be considered a student without being discredited as a poor

"The

are constantly in danger of being stigmatized:

person has experience with a stigma of his own,

a

how many varieties

he has had his

own

experience with"

p. 129).

that stigmas can exist

tive representations" in the true

and

are an issue

is

that identities are "collec-

Durkheimian sense of the word

(see

Durkheim,

1912/1995, pp. 436-440). Identities belong to and represent society's values and beliefs.

we

The

representational, symbolic character of identities

and the way

around those

and

interact

objects.

and

identities indicate that identities

Durkheim (1912/1995)

isolated

by prohibitions

.

.

.

in

which

selves are sacred

defines sacred things as those objects "protected

things set apart

and forbidden"

things, then, represent society, are reserved for special use,

misuse by clear symbolic boundaries. The sacred

and

self, like all

(pp. 38, 44). Sacred

from

are protected

sacred objects, has

boundaries that are guarded against encroachment. The sacred quality of identities

and

selves

is

the source of shame: "As sacred objects,

profanation" (Goffman, 1967,

p. 31).

The

flip

men

are subject to slights

side of stigma

and shame

is

related to this collective feature of identities: a sense of pride in the sacred

Goffman

uses the idea of face to express the dynamics of the sacred

refers to the positive social value that a

seen,

when we

identity

and

we can

ing

present cues and

lay

negotiate

self,

person claims in an interaction. As we've

it,

identified.

tity,

to risk. a

every time

We

risk

we

role distanc-

Every established identity has

we experience these emotions as our ego we expose our face, our ego iden-

present an identity

embarrassment, but the

strong sense of

Through

and over time we can become emotionally

involved with those values. As individuals,

and

Face

these attributions, but in order to make an effective we must keep our performance within a given set of

— otherwise we could not be

And

self.

some of

positive social values attached to

identity.

equally self.

claim to a social identity, others grant us the

attribute to us a host of internal characteristics.

claim on the situated

parameters

we

and

risk

is

necessary in order to

feel

pride

self.

Concepts and Theory: The Encounter Interaction Ritual

and Face-Work

This idea of putting our face a ritual order.

Goffman

at risk implies that the

encounter or interaction

is

(1967) argues that interactions are ritualized insofar as they

Performing the

way in which

represent "a

immediate presence of an object that has

around the

around respect Deference

a special

(p. 57). Encounters are highly ritualized social interactions, particu-

value to him" larly

must guard and design the symbolic impli-

the individual

cations of his acts while in the

issues of self

amount of

the

is

and

Goffman

respect.

and demeanor

as deference

we

respect

refers to the behaviors oriented

rituals.

We may

give others.

defer to or prefer

another's wishes or opinions. Deference also refers to courteous, polite, or formal behavior. All of this deference

is

tions.

When

him by

the

on known

to give others based

introduced to our physician for the

first

time,

status posi-

most of us

call

a function of the status structure

—we're

just reflecting

her or

seems

that normally goes along with the position: Doctor. This

title

we can

granted in different ways. For example,

know how much or what kind of respect

what the structure

like

says.

However, according to Goffman's way of seeing the world, acts of deference are

prompted by someone's demeanor.

Demeanor manner. But

refers

most

also entails

it

present a front. As such,

it is

see

the

between you and the

doctor comes

into the

(like a stethoscope),

hand,

the office

rooms have jeans

the structure that

and

has examination rooms

staff,

room wearing

us to

tells

call

college diplomas

a white

on the

full

room with of medical

and the

walls,

uniform and other appearance cues

then the entire atmosphere surrounding the situation screams

to grant respect, not only in if

much

the doctor presents herself. If the physician

equipment and decorated with framed

you

so

isn't

it

way

has her office in a professional building, has the usual waiting

visit

glass dividers

to

her- or himself, as in

the entire spectrum of expressive equipment we use to

we can

our physician "Doctor," as

you

way someone holds

directly to the

in a

is

and comfortable

pictures

a tee-shirt,

but in

title,

all

remodeled home with no

and

if

chairs,

and

if

your behaviors. glass dividers,

On

and

if

the other

the

exam

the physician comes in wearing

she introduces herself as "Samantha Stevens" (rather

than "Doctor Stevens"), then you will

feel less

concerned about exhibiting such

ostentatious signs of respect.

Much

of Goffman's concern with ritual has to do with face-wort actions ori-

ented toward maintaining or modifying face.

because

we

are emotionally attached to

our face

also because ple, if

we

I

see

interact

is

bound up with

a regular basis, then

tend to preserve our face not only

the face of others in the situation. For exam-

you once and only once, then

on

We

(we can experience pride or shame), but

it

I

can present any

we tend

to

my

maintain consistency of behaviors. You tend to rely on tently present

your

face.

self

I

desire.

become attached

Roles and faces do not

come

However,

to faces

if

and we

face in order to consis-

individually prepackaged;

come in sets: My being a teacher would be impossible without the role of student. And my face as a good teacher would be equally impossible without your face as a good student. Once we present an identity, we and others build later responses on it so that our faces are intrinsically bound up one with another. We they

thus sustain a ritualized equilibrium in interactions through accommodating one another's lines.

The most

basic kind of face-work

where threats are where the two

likely to occur.

women

he

is

is

avoidance:

We

avoid contacts and requests

For example, a student might avoid encounters

dating might meet, or where he might see the professor

Self

85

86

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

to

whom

other

PEOPLE

ITS

he owes

conversation because

when

ened. Or,

you

Let's say

This kind of avoidance

a paper.

obvious avoidance procedures.

less

me

see

getting too near a place

it is

make

I

my

claim about

a

my

walking from

me

I

also

opens up the

doing

as exceptional for

play average

it

move not

possibility of

will

so.

seem

like

my

am

I

it

my

level

might be threat-

face

with belittling modesty.

The

First

you ask

do,

I

say, "Sure,

am

simultaneously

of expectations. I

I

and creating space where

only allows

me

guitar cues the

I

might

to see

fail

make mistakes

performance expectations low so that when

and

maintain our

self,

from making

identity,

it

I

playing well.

or not meet the expectations of the identity and

disqualify us

the

embarrassment,

to avoid

All of these avoidance procedures create a safe space within the interaction:

are able to

but

meeting the normal expectations but being seen

set the

I

where

can do

With such an account,

laying claim to the identity of musician a

I

to play something. But before

haven't practiced for a long time."

normal expectations. Such

self,

truck carrying a guitar.

identity of musician and creates a certain

the guitar and then you ask

rather obvious, but there are

is

might, for example, change the topic of

I

face.

We still

Sometimes, however, things happen that would

When

this

and we normally engage

in a

and

positive claims to identity, face,

occurs, the encounter suffers "ritual disequilibrium"

self.

— participants take on respon— the offender renders the problem

corrective process that has four moves: the challenge sibility

of pointing out action; the offering

either

understandable by redefining the action or encounter

thought we were

he offers compensations or penance; the acceptance

ing.") or



believe the offering; the appreciation

interaction All

("I

—the

teas-

interactants

the offender expresses gratitude and the

repaired.

is

of this necessary face-work implies the possibility of aggressive face-work. In

we depend on Knowing the

aggressive face-work,

threat to equilibrium:

own

others' reactions

by intentionally introducing

rules of ritualized interaction,

a

we can manipu-

we know that others will respond to selfwe can "fish for compliments." If we know that they will accept our account or apology for an offense, then we can safely offend them. And if we are particularly good at face-work, then we can arrange for late

the encounter to our

effacing

comments by

benefit. If

praising us, then

others to offend us so that they will be emotionally indebted to us. All of ters.

what

I've

Focused encounters occur

"a special

communication

can exclude others last

been describing

who

is

part of what

when two

license

or

more

and sustain

Goffman

focused encoun-

calls

individuals extend to one another

a special type

of mutual activity that

are present in the situation" (Goffman, 1963b,

part of the definition

is

a clue to

understanding what Goffman

is

p. 83).

talking about.

Focused encounters can obviously happen when the group engaged activity

is

alone, but

its

particular qualities stand out

others. All focused encounters have a

excludes others. social beings

It's

an

membrane

invisible line that

in

when we consider

that includes

marks the gathering

The

it

mutual

around

some people and

as

an encounter of

belonging to just those people.

The most defining one another's

faces

feature of a focused encounter

through

a single visual

is

face engagement.

We engage

and cognitive focus of attention,

a sense

of mutual relevance in our actions, and by granting preferential communication rights.

This

is

easy to illustrate. Picture yourself walking

down

the hallway at school.

Performing the

You

someone you know and speak

see

opening

a ritualized

—"Hi, Tom." Once Tom

responds, you visually and cognitively focus on one another to the exclusion of others in the

hall.

You

Tom's subsequent behaviors as mutually relevant to yours

see

way those of the others

in a

Tom

rights to

you don't

that

Tom

And you

in the hall are not.

grant communication

give to those surrounding you.

emergent "we" feeling (versus everybody rounding you and

all

Out of

The

else in the hall).

comes an

this

invisible wall sur-

also apparent in the use of ritualized openings, closings,

is

entrances, exits, transformations, and so on.

of the main values of Goffman's conceptualization of focused encounters

One is

that he can call

our attention

how we manage

to

We

unfocused encounters.

we are required to keep the encounter when we are walking down the hall at school, or that shows us unfocused. Goffman through the mall, or any other public place, we are working hard to maintain the encounter people

all

the time, but often

unfocused nature of our encounters. While attention to the self

call

ters that prohibit

we

bringing attention to our

repair the encounter. For example, bles,

is

it

common

trip occurred.

our job

it is

when

self. If

for

a person

in focused interactions to

norms

are presenting, there are

some

in

this

we

do,

we must

walking in public and stum-

is

practice for the person to look back at the

Whatever

unfocused encoun-

reason

walkway where the

action does for us personally, socially

it

conveys to

everyone around us that we are in control of our actions and we were tripped by

some

object in our path.

Another benefit from using Goffman's idea of focused encounters of rounds.

We

moves from one area of the

her patients, the

lab,

tend to like

is

the notion

can think about rounds in terms of a doctor making her rounds

the hospital: She

analogy

is

that there

the nurses' stations, and so on. is

a route that

make our rounds

as well.

is

The important thing

in this

habitually covered. In our everyday lives,

we

There are given places that we habitually frequent,

home, school, work, and the gym. These rounds of focused interactions tend

give us a sense of

at

on

hospital to the next, checking in

permanence about the

to

self.

Frames and Keys In

one of

his last works,

Goffman took on the

with a twist. Generally, concern has focused on

Goffman begins with

real?"

As such, Goffman (1974)

organization of individual experience: "I

am

means

ontological status of the world

that

itself,

In

taking this perspective,

ethnomethodology

"Under what conditions

Goffman

at

is

any

moment

of their social

not interested in the reality or

but, rather, in the process through

Goffman as well as

is

but

interested in the internal

individual might experience a portion of the world as being

Garfinkel's

reality,

not addressing the structure of social

but the structure of experience individuals have

lives" (p. 13). Specifically, this

is

of

reality itself. In contrast,

the individual and asks the question,

do we think things are

life

social construction

human

more

real

which an

than another.

intentionally distancing himself

from

Berger and Luckmann's brand of sociol-

ogy of knowledge. Berger and Luckmann are concerned with how the human world can present right; rather,

itself to it

is

us as an objective reality

cultural

and

when

arbitrary. Garfinkel

is

it

is

not objective in

its

own

similarly concerned with the

Self

87

88

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

ITS

PEOPLE

of the world, but he approaches

reality status

methods people use

more

it

a shared reality. In other words, Garfinkel

is

terms of the rules and

in

of taken-for-grantedness about

in interactions to create a sense

interested in the folk

methods people

use in social interaction to gloss over the subjective and reflexive nature of

reality;

how more macroour human worlds.

Berger and Luckmann, on the other hand, are concerned with level factors,

such as language, convey a sense of objectivity to

To present

his

answer

to the reality question,

focus and changes his analogy.

Up

Goffman

Goffman

encounter. However, to analyze the reality experience, individual, not the situation.

Goffman

also changes his analogy

photography. Goffman uses the notion of a film strip

photography) to

about the stream of

talk

gories, or in this case, frames, that is

we

shifts his analytical

Goffman has been focused on

to this point,

human

the

on the

from the stage

was before

(this

activity:

focuses

to

digital

Apart from the cate-

our experience of the world through time

use,

an undifferentiated stream of intimately linked events



it's

like a film strip that

never ends. If

we look

activity

closely at a strip of film,

what we

see are individual frames wherein

stopped or freeze-framed. This notion of "frame"

is

cept for understanding

how

people have

or

real

principles of organization that govern social events

We

is

Goffman's chief con-

Frames are

experiences.

less real

and our subjective involvement

use frames to pick out certain elements of a situation to pay attention

in

them.

to

and others

to ignore. Just like literal picture or film-strip frames, frames of orga-

nization include and exclude certain things from the picture. For example, picture

frames

tell

One

us where art ends and the

mundane

wall begins.

of the things that Goffman does with his notion of frames

idea of the definition of the situation.

The various

is

to

expand the

definitions that a situation

may

have are built up from the principles of organization that are found in frames.

Frames thus tell us not only what tionally in

any occasion. Notice that we are

situation rather than the definition. in

any

They can be

setting.

human

how to be involved actively and emonow talking about many definitions of a

to see but also

built

Goffman argues that multiple frames can be used

up and layered

in

experience can be complex and layered.

attached to definitions of the situation,

we can

almost endless ways. Thus, the

And

since roles

and

selves are

play multiple roles in any location.

Structuring the experience of multiple realities are two primary frames. Primary

frames are seen by the people using them as not based upon or requiring a previous

primary frames

interpretation;

initially

organize activity into something that

is

meaningful. Primary frames divide the world into two spheres: natural and

social.

some

inten-

A

natural frame

tional act or is

people that whatever

tells

human

agency;

it is

is

occurring

is

generally understood as a natural event. Social frames,

that a

human

agent or willful intention

ical activities are

two

is

cally the

in

it

a strip

Economic or

polit-

clear examples. in

one key may be transposed into

same, but

through which

on the other hand, imply

involved or necessary.

Primary frames can be keyed. Goffman has

music written

not due to

simply and purely physical. The rising of the sun

sounds

different.

mind

the keying of music, where

a different key:

The music

is

basi-

Keying thus refers to sets of conventions

of activity that has already been given meaning by a primary

Performing the Self

frame

is

experienced by the participants as something

pretty academic, but

we key things. Goffman lists

think

I

become

will

it

clear

else.

That definition sounds

once we consider the various ways

keys employed in our society: make-believe, contests,

five basic

ceremonies, technical redoings, and regroupings. Make-believe

finds interesting about make-believe

Goffman

and we tend

to

become engrossed

edges that what

is

happening

is

when we

"joke around."

that

in the process,

it

The very

some behaviors from

One

label

reality

use

requires our full attention

and dramatic scripting

of the most

we

—joking around—

and key them

seen as

real,

but the territory

itself

We can maintain

designed to

is

into a different meaning.

use of computers and the Internet. Obviously, a lot of what

to the fantastic:

are

common examples of play

common today, particularly with the widespread

Make-believe fantasy keys are very

is

of the things that

even though everyone acknowl-

isn't real. Play, fantasy,

three examples of make-believe keying.

bracket off

is

activity that looks

is

One

but the participants don't expect any real outcomes.

real

—virtual

reality



we do with computers

leads us to key action strips

multiple virtual identities associated with a vari-

ety of avatars (or incarnations) interacting with manifold groups in imaginary

rooms of our choosing. In addition to make-believe,

we

also use the contest key. For example, the

regularly participates in war games. These are contests that looks

and

that

demand

ners. Sports are

full

attention, yet aren't really wars,

violence.

and

especially the

like

boxing, football and

Olympic Games can be seen

Another interesting type of keying

A

ceremonial.

is

army

the real thing

though there are always win-

another example of contest keying. Sports

soccer, lacrosse, hockey,

like

as ritualized

ceremonial key refer-

ences an event, such as the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games, wherein the event and people represent

some

significant social

events and social positions and idealize that transcends the activity strip

them and

meaning. Ceremonies thus take

link

them

to a

symbolic meaning

itself.

We have two more kinds of keys to consider: technical redoings and regroupings. Regroupings are, as Goffman (1974) notes,"the most troublesome of the lot"

(p. 74).

—some motives

in per-

The

idea of regrouping references the participants' motives

forming

a strip

of activity are in keeping with those that are normally expected and

others are outside the normal expectations. class

woman working as a salesperson

at a

An example

church yard

take ordinary activities out of their context pletely different

from those

ple, practice different

rehearse the

pickup

show they

carpet at the local ings or talk to a

that are

will

lines

an upper-

A male

for reasons

we

com-

might, for exam-

with a close female friend; a music group might

therapy

we watch demonstrations of laying we might be asked to act out our feel-

Goffman notes

that people can conceptualize (key)

perform

father.

is

sale. In technical redoings,

and perform them

normally understood.

Home Depot; or in dead

of regrouping

in a

week;

almost anything as an experiment.

By now is

it

should be clear that our experience of

life

can be pretty complex. That

part of Goffman's point. People are playing with and moving in and out of keys

almost continually. To top things

off,

keys and frames can be fabricated. There

assumption of authenticity with any of the keyings that we've looked

at.

is

an

Even with

89

90

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

ITS

PEOPLE

such things as make-believe, there

under

that

else

Under

keyed frame,

a

keyed frame that

a

one she result

the

who

girl is

fantasy. But

sometimes there

going on and the keyed frame that we are asked to accept

is

same point of

the participants have the

all

is

view. But

dramatic example might be

less

a

joins the school production of a play in order to be close to

interested in. At rehearsal, the play

of a keying), and everybody

is

keyed (note that the play

at rehearsal

young woman. However, she has

is

a fabri-

con

fabricated, there are different perspectives. All

games work using fabricated frames. A school

authentically make-believe, that

is

it

no other hidden agenda behind the play or

is

something cation.

we assume

high

some-

itself is

the

understands the key, including

a different perspective than the rest: For her,

the key enables her to meet and interact with her love interest.

game

This multi-contextual

advanced

societies,

probably more prominent today, in technically

is

than in previous ages. The reasons for

and complex, but they are not our concern in

Chapters 12-1 5). Our cultural

more

so.

Goffman's point

life is

that

is

the

at

moment

(

this

these issues are addressed

extremely complex and

no matter how complex

change are extensive

will

probably become

the keys

and fabrications

might become, they are generally built up from two primary frames. We can think of

our experience, particularly in the beginnings of the

most

like hyperreality,

like a

most

basic to the

abstract.

2 1st century, as layered

but the scaffolding of keys and fabrications can and

house of cards when

from the

We might play with virtual selves and abstract

reality asserts itself, as

it

ideas

will fall apart

tends to do.

Summary Goffman understands Dramaturgy assumes

interactions through

that

all

we can know about

the analogy of the stage. a person's self

is

what we can

pick up by reading cues. Individuals manipulate cues through impression

management,

in order to claim a certain

kind of

people use dramaturgy, then the encounter

itself

self in the interaction. If

may be

seen as an activity

system, like a particular kind of stage or background that places

demands upon

the performers. Goffman's entire analysis, then,

is

its

own

focused on

the presentation of self that organizes the interaction order.

One way

of understanding impression management

notion of

social, personal,

and ego

is

to see

it

through the

identities. Social identities are biogra-

phies held by distant others, personal identities are stories that intimate

others hold, and the ego identity

about the of the

self.

way

Each of these

the individual

is

the biography that the individual holds

stories,

manages

a

even the ego

known, and

it is

is

an audience on the front stage. in life as

on

setting.

The

self

stage,

prepared

And

in the

to

be

cues. Typically,

backstage and presented to

while there are undoubtedly soliloquies

most of the presentations of

or troupes of actors.

created out

must be seen

only seen through impression management

impression management

is

dramatic front using the expressive

equipment of appearance, manner, and

this

identity,

self are

managed by teams

Performing the

In an interaction, participants

and

its

depend upon cues

The

attendant attitudes to the individual.

to attribute an identity

identity

and

its

attitudinal

and behavioral expectations form righteously imputed expectations. Sensing

most people

this,

give others. This

way they manage

are careful in the

work can be seen

on

to vary

a

the impression they

continuum from

role dis-

tance to role embracement. In role distance, one manages impression in

such a way as to simultaneously lay effective claim to the

and

self, is

unseen

a yet

self.

The purpose of such work

is

role, its virtual

to claim a self that

the role communicates. In role embracement, the individual

more than

disappears within the virtual

self.

Such work

and

idealizes the situation

its

roles.

The longer we perform

a particular role or the closer

embracement, the greater refers to this

emotional attachment to roles as

sents a risk to

self:

We

avoidance procedures. For our

we

self,

we

Every interaction repre-

face.

Most face-work

As such, most

is

inter-

performed through

avoid settings and topics that repre-

present a front of diffidence and composure, and

initially

make claims about

face.

can either lose or maintain

actions are ritualized around face-work.

sent threat,

we come to role Goffman

the possibility of embarrassment.

is

self

with belittling modesty. For others,

things as leaving unstated "facts" that

may

we

we do such

discredit them, deliberately turn-

ing a blind eye to behaviors that might discredit them, providing accounts for

them when needed, and when making

a joking

Face

is

"belittling

demands" we may use

manner.

closely linked to the ideas of ego identity

the sacred self points out the facts that the self

is

and sacred

self.

a social entity

The

and

idea of

that the

sacredness of the self as well as our emotional attachment to the self are pro-

duced through ritualized interactions.

We

experience a sacred self with a

sense of emotional attachment to an ego identity as a result of the nature

and structure of our

interactions.

ing self because (a) identities

and

We

experience a sense of a core, unchang-

selves are

grounded

in

geographic settings;

(b)

we

(c)

focused interactions within those settings are ritually oriented toward

regularly frequent a daily, weekly, or

maintaining Settings

monthly round of

and

settings;

face.

and encounters obtain meaning through the use of frames. Frames schemes that individuals use

are interpretive less

stream of

and

social.

activities

The

and

events.

to section off parts of the

end-

There are two primary frames: natural

natural frame sections off elements from the stream of

and interprets them

as

normal and natural

— rather than due

to

some

life

inten-

human agency. The social frame interprets activities and events in terms of a human agent or willful intention. The use of these two primary frames is how individuals experience things as real. The frames, however, may tional act or

be keyed through make-believe, contests, ceremonies, technical redoings, and regroupings, and those keys

may be

authentic or fabricated. Keys and fabri-

cations allow for the possibility of multiple and abstract levels of meaning, yet they are

all

tied to

one of the two primary frames.

Self

91

92

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

PEOPLE

ITS

Building Your Theory Toolbox Learning More •

I

— Primary Sources

would suggest that you begin with Goffman's

interaction order" (1983),

move is

good

reader: Charles Lemert

life

(1959). There

and Ann Branaman

The

(Eds.),

— Secondary Sources

Gary Alan Fine and

companion Goffman's

Philip

Manning's chapter on Goffman

major contemporary social

to

Ritzer (Blackwell,

2000)

legacy,

is

a

theorists,

in

The Blackwell

edited by George

good beginning.

edited by A. Javier Treviho

(Rowman &

good chapters on Goffman's impact on with other ideas and schools of thought. 2003), contains

Check

"The

reader, Blackwell, 1997.

Learning More



publication,

last

the American Sociological Review, 48. Then

to his classic, The presentation of self in everyday

also a

Goffman



in

Littlefield,

or connections

Out

It





Web



Stigmatized identities: For an insightful and disturbing account of

Byte

Arlie Russell Hochschild

and the Presentation of Emotion

how

Goffman's theories can be used to understand homelessness, see David

Snow and Leon street •

Anderson's

Down on

people (University of California

their luck:

A

study of homeless

Press, 1993).

Frames: The idea of frames has been creatively applied to the use of culture

in social

movements. See David Snow, "Frame alignment processes:

Micromobilization and

movement

participation" (1986),

in

the American

Sociological Review, 51, pp. 464-481.

Seeing the World •

After reading and understanding this chapter, you should be able to

answer the following questions (remember to answer them

theoretically),

o

What produces the interaction order? What is a front and how is managed? What are the different ways in which we can relate to social roles? What are the effects of these different ways? What are the differences between focused and unfocused encounters?

o

How

o o o

it

are frames related to social reality and

how do

they work?

Engaging the World •

Compare and idea of

contrast at least

about the way they dress and ently?

two

of your professors using Goffman's

How are their offices different? How talk? How do they use the setting differ-

impression management.

How do

deference?

their

demeanors communicate

different levels of expected

Performing the



How would What



and video games be understood as forms of keying?

How

Using Goffman's theory, explain Internet interactions. different



flirting

other examples of keying can you think of?

from and

are they both

similar to face-to-face interactions?

Using a sporting event, concert, or newscast, use frame analysis to explain the different frames that have probably been used

in

the past and are

being used currently. •

How would

a

dramaturgical theory explaining

class,

race, gender,

sexual inequality be different from a symbolic interactionist theory?

and

How

would they complement one another?

Weaving the Threads •





What are the differences between the symbolic interactionist notion of "Me" and Goffman's theory of ego identity? Compare and contrast the ways Goff man and symbolic interactionists conceive of the way behaviors and selves become patterned and predictable. Compare and contrast the SI notion of emergent interactions and Goffman's idea of the interaction order.

Self

93

CHAPTER

5

Emotion and Interaction Ritual

Chains Randall Collins

(1

Photo: Courtesy of Randall

941 -)

Collins.

95

3

1

96

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

PEOPLE

ITS

Collins's Perspective: Science, Emotion,

98 Exchange and Emotion

and Exchange

98

Chains (IRCs)

101

Theory

Scientific

The Situation

98

00

1

Concepts and Theory: Interaction

Ritual

101

Rituals

The Micro-Macro Link The Case of

9/1

7

1

1

03

06

Concepts and Theory: The Micro-Level Production of

The Vertical Dimension of Power

The Horizontal Dimension of Networks Concepts and Theory: Sociology of Creativity

The Sense of Truth

Academic

Rituals

1

08

1 1

1 1

1

1

Sociology of Thinking

Summary

107

Stratification

107

1

1

115

Building Your Theory Toolbox

have been ThereVinci,

a

few

116

minds.

really great

Curie, and

Among artists we can think of Dali,

and so on.

Matisse, Monet, Picasso,

da

Newton number among

Einstein,

Darwin, Galileo,

the scientists. Philosophy's pantheon

includes such people as Plato, Descartes, Kant, Wittgenstein, and Heidegger. In our

own

discipline

we have Marx, Weber, and Durkheim. These

nent that most of us only need their towering

intellects

sociological

there

one and

component

all.

last

names

are people so promi-

They

to recognize them.

are

But have you ever thought that there might be a

and

to their thinking

creativity? Randall Collins thinks

is.

Shifting gears,

let's

think for a

moment about

events of that day have influenced

America? The easy answer

is

life

in

9/11. There

is little

America. But what was

that the attacks themselves

stopped.

was

Sound waves continued

a material

boundary where

past that point

that the

that

changed

impacted

think simply about the physical attributes of the terrorist acts. leveled buildings, yet there

doubt

it

us.

The

However,

explosions

physical destruction

and people heard the explosions

but did not experience any damage. Past the point where sound stopped, there were little if

any physical

attacks, is it

effects.

and we continue

Nonetheless, most people in the United States "felt" the

to feel their reverberations.

What

is it

that

we

sense?

How

that an event that occurred hundreds, even thousands of miles away can impact

us so strongly? Yet have you noticed that while 9/11

have nearly the power

understand the

initial

it

did for the

first

impact and then

few months

its

waning?

Is

still

affects us,

after the attack?

it

How

doesn't

can

we

there a single theory that can

Emotion and Interaction

explain both intellectual creativity and the impact of 9/1 thinks there

1?

Again, Randall Collins

is.

Collins gives us an abstract theory that can explain such diverse issues

more. (like

And

it is

and

between macro-level phenomena

a theory that provides a clear link

the U.S. response to 9/11) and micro-level interactions (like intellectual cre-

ativity).

For a theory to propose that these two apparently dissimilar

phenomena

are related,

it

must have

a specific

the next. Collins provides such a link

and the

creativity



mechanism

as well as

through chains of interaction

rituals, specifically

interaction.

One

we can

we go

note before

cover in this chapter.

further:

We

of social

levels

that links

one

an explanation of

nationalist response to 9/11. For Collins, the link

level to

intellectual is

provided

through the emotional energy and

cultural capital that are created within encounters

than

Ritual

and then transferred

to the next

The breadth of Collins's theory

is

larger

won't, for example, be covering his conflict

or geo-political theories. You will find those aspects of Collins's theory in the form

of

Web

Bytes.

rE The Essential Collins Biography Randall Collins

was

was born

in

Knoxville, Tennessee,

part of military intelligence during

was

sent to a

New

July 29, 1941. His father

WWII and then

department. Collins thus spent a good deal of teenager, Collins

on

a

member

his early years in

of the state

Europe. As a

England prep school, afterward studying

at

Harvard and the University of California, Berkeley, where he encountered the

work

of Herbert Blumer

time. Collins

number

and Erving Goffman, both professors

completed

his Ph.D.

in

at Berkeley at the

1969. He has spent time teaching at a

of universities, such as the University of Virginia, the Universities of

California at Riverside

and San Diego, and has held

sorships at Chicago, Harvard, Cambridge,

Japan, and China.

He

is

and

a

number

of visiting profes-

at various universities in Europe,

currently at the University of Pennsylvania.

Passionate Curiosity Collins conflict

has enormous breadth, but seems focused on understanding

and

Specifically,

stratification his

passion

is

work through face-to-face to understand

how

ritualized

societies are

how

interactions.

produced, held

together, and destroyed through emotionally rather than rationally motivated behaviors.

Keys to Knowing interaction rituals, interaction ritual chains, emotional energy, cultural capital,

deference and demeanor personality, ritual density

rituals,

order-takers and order-givers, bureaucratic

Chains

97

98

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

PEOPLE

ITS

Collins's Perspective:

and Exchange

Science, Emotion, Scientific

Theory

Collins (1986)

of science

is

who

a social scientist

is

sees theory at the core:

precisely theory ... a generalized

"The essence

and coherent body of

which

ideas,

explain the range of variations in the empirical world in terms of general principles.

.

.

.

more

centrally,

it

such, Collins's theorizing ticularly

It is

explicitly

cumulative and integrating"

talks

talks

When

about emotion and culture.

about specific emotions

emotion generally with which Collins

his interest in culture. In Collins's hands, culture

is

concerned. The same

word

that Collins has in

The kind of theory cumulation synthesis, a

we take elements from

Collins synthesizes theory

One

sacred), modifies it

it

is

creative synthesis. In a

From

to

form

As we work through

his theory,

from Durkheim (the production of the

with an insight from Goffman (interaction

with Weber's idea of legitimacy.

true of that are

of the most notable things about the

his thriftiness.

you'll see that Collins takes a basic principle

and so

culture in the

and bring them together

different theories

is

is

par-

mind.

that Collins engages in

new, hopefully more powerful theory.

way

is

becomes symbolic goods it

is

As

Collins talks

like love, joy, hate,

used in exchange or sacred symbols that unite a group. Again, broadest sense of the

1345).

(p.

cast at fairly high levels of generalizability This

noteworthy when he

about emotion, he never forth.

is

is

this

and blends

ritual),

simple recipe, Collins creates a theory

with very few elements but with enormous explanatory power. As Collins (1975) notes about theory, "a good theory gives a coherent vision within which research

can elaborate complexities without having them overwhelm us"

(p. 51).

Exchange and Emotion Collins (1993)

common

is

an interesting kind of exchange theorist:

denominator of rational

action.

long-standing critiques of exchange theory.

time accounting for

He

To bring emotion First,

sees

in,

emotion

as the

he points to three

exchange theory has a

difficult

Merriam-Webster (2002) defines altruism

altruistic behavior.

as "uncalculated consideration of, regard for, or devotion to others' interests." If

most or

all

of our interactions are exchange-based and

if all

our exchanges are

how can

based on self-motivated actors making rational calculations for

profit,

altruism be possible? Collins claims that exchange

arguing that the

actually selfish in altruistic behavior

actor

is

being

altruistic.

However, just what that

Second, there

is

profit

theorists are

left

— she or he gains some is

has generally been

profit

from

unspecified.

evidence that suggests that people in interactions are rarely

rational or calculative. In support of this, Collins cites Goffman's

work, the idea of bounded rationality logical

left

in

and GarfinkePs

organizational analysis, as well as psycho-

experiments that indicate that when people are faced with problems that

should prompt them to be rational, they use non-optimizing heuristics instead. These heuristics function like approximate or sufficient answers to problems rather

Emotion and Interaction

than the most rational or best answer. The third criticism of exchange theory there ric

no

is

common

metric or

and medium of trade

services; however,

and

medium

of exchange. Money, of course,

isn't

enough

general

to

embrace

all

that

the met-

produced goods and

for exchanges involving economically

money

is

is

Ritual

exchanges,

goods,

all

services.

all

Collins sees each of these problems solved through the idea that emotional

energy

is

common denominator

the

ning that this approach

is

of rational action.

rather adventuresome in that

have usually been thought of as mix. At

least,

refer to

any specific emotion;

and water

oil

it

is,

it

note from the begin-

combines two things that

—emotion and

came

they didn't before Collins

Let's

rationality just don't

along. Emotional energy does not

emotion and

rather, a very general feeling of

motivation that an individual senses.

"amount of emotional power

the

It is

that

flows through one's actions" (Collins, 1988, p. 362). Collins (2004a) conceptualizes

emotional energy as running on a continuum from high

levels

of confidence,

enthusiasm, and good self-feelings to the low end of depression, lack of ambition,

and negative

The

self-feelings (p. 108).

idea of emotional energy

chological drive, but emotional energy Collins

based in social

arguing that emotional energy

is

exchanges. In

fact,

emotional energy

exchanged good and friend,

is

money, emotional energy

at a is

like that

of psy-

general

enough

embrace

to

it's

a guitar, a pet, a conversation, a car, a

show or sporting

event,

and so on. More

basic than

Emotional energy

the motivation behind all exchanges.

can also be seen in back of social exchanges that might seem counterintuitive.

would

exchange

I

This, of course,

is

my

free

time to work

an example of

the idea of emotional energy,

exchange. Collins gives us a

is

all

the underlying resource in back of every

is

whether

service,

your attendance

is

is

activity.

at a

Why

soup kitchen on Sunday mornings?

altruistic behavior.

Exchange theory, apart from

hard pressed to explain such behaviors in terms of

more general property of exchange

in the

tional energy. People engage in altruistic behaviors because of the

form of emo-

emotional energy

they receive in exchange.

The

idea of emotional energy also solves the

As Collins

problem of the lack of rational

making

rational

calculations during interactions. Rather than being rationally calculative,

"human

calculations.

behavior

pism

is

may

notes, people aren't generally observed

be characterized as emotional tropism" (Collins, 1993,

an involuntary movement by an organism that

response to a stimulus.

The stems and

An example

of tropism

is

leaves react positively to the sun

react negatively

my moving away from

it

is

p.

223).

A

tro-

a negative or positive

the response of a plant to sunlight.

by reaching toward

and deeper

in the

it,

and the roots

ground. Collins

is

telling

us that people aren't cognitively calculative in normal encounters. Instead, people

emotionally

feel their

way

to

and through most interactions, much

like a plant

reaches toward the sun.

The Web Byte emotion

for this chapter

— the work of Thomas

in a different direction: the effects

J.

Scheff

— takes the idea of

of pride and shame on the individual.

Like Collins, Scheff gleans inspiration from Goffman; but unlike Collins, Scheff

brings his insights inside the person. Scheff's theory is

is

also like Collins in that

it

based on emotion, but Scheff has particular kinds of emotion in mind, where

Collins speaks of emotion in a general sense.

Where

Collins uses deference

and

Chains

99

100

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

demeanor issue in

all

AND

ITS

PEOPLE

rituals to theorize

interactions.

One

about

stratification, Scheff sees deference as the core

further comparison: Both Scheff

and Collins give us

theories to explain creative genius; but, again, Collins tunes us into those factors that exist in the situation

and Scheff focuses on the person. In some

interesting

ways, Collins and Scheff represent two sides of the same coin. Collins provides us

with the situational effects and Scheff the inner effects of social emotion.

The Situation In simple terms, there are four possible sites of social

and behavioral

research:

the individual, the interaction or social situation, social structures, and social or global systems. Collins

makes

a strong case for starting with the social situation

He

rather than the individual, structures, or systems.

points out that what

by the individual varies by the social and cultural context and for social science research.

to

There are two ways

you

are,

For example,

social identities meet.

most of your answers would be

in the

we mean

thus a poor focus

understand his point. The

to

understand that what we mean by "the individual"

which various

is

if

form

is

were

I

first is

really the social point at

to ask

you

to

tell

of social categories

me who

and would

involve such things as age, gender, sexuality, friendship, marital status, and so on.

The

individual,

from

this

point of view,

is

of sociopolitical organization

a reflection

rather than essential characteristics.

The other way profound. From

social context

is

much more

of "the individual"

is

the product

to see that the individual varies

this perspective, the entire idea

by

of political, religious, and social changes that have occurred in the past few centuries.

More

defined

specifically, the idea

civil rights (as a result

of the individual came about as Western society

of the

rise

of democracy) and moral responsibilities

(as a result of the Protestant Reformation). The idea of the individual also became

more pronounced through

capitalism (consumerism)

the individual, Collins (2004a) says,

quasi-transient flux in time

and

and

social diversity.

"The human individual

space. ...

proper to think about ourselves and others

It

.

.

is

.

is

an ideology of

About

a quasi-enduring,

how we

regard

not the most useful analytical

it

start-

ing point for microsociology" (p. 4).

On the other side of the structures

book is

is

situation are structures.

held in question by most of the theorists in the

(in Section

II,

we

will

be introduced to a

central in theorizing about

heuristics



As we've seen, the idea of social

that

is,

set

first

of theorists for

society). For Collins, social structures

they are aids to discovery. Collins (1987)

is

section of this

whom

structure

and systems are

arguing that

we can

use the ideas of structure and social systems to "make generalizations about the

workings of the world system, formal organizations, or the ing the appropriate comparisons and analyses of the reality behind these heuristics

is

the pure

its

own

class structure

by mak-

data" (pp. 194-195). But

number of

face-to-face situations

strung out over time and space. In other words, social structures arc built up by the aggregation of

many interactions over long periods o) time and large portions ot we find part of Collins's micro-macro link, which we will

geographic space. Here

soon explore.

Emotion and Interaction

Ritual

Chains

101

Concepts and Theory: Interaction Ritual Chains (IRCs) Rituals For Collins, rituals are patterned sequences of behavior that bring four elements together: bodily co-presence, barrier to outsiders,

mutual focus of attention, and

shared emotional mood. These elements are variables the effects of ritualized behavior. There are five

group

solidarity,

and individual

One

of the

main

as they increase, so also will

effects

of interaction

feelings of morality, individual

group symbols,

cultural capital. Collins's theory

first



things that the

model

is

diagramed

in Figure 5.1 calls

emotional energy,

in Figure 5.1.

our attention to

which describes the degree of physical closeness. Even

ical co-presence,

phys-

same

get, the

Durkheim (1912/1995) says, "The very act powerful stimulant. Once the individuals are

more we can sense

the other person. As

of congregating

an exceptionally

gathered together, a sort of electricity

launches them

is

in the

room, we can be closer or further away from one another. The closer we

is

rituals:

is

generated from their closeness and quickly

to an extraordinary height of exaltation" (pp. 217-218). Bodily pres-

ence appears theoretically necessary because the closer people

are, the

more

easily

they can monitor one another's behaviors. Part of

what we monitor

is

the level of involvement or shared focus of attention,

the degree to which participants are attending to the

symbol, or idea

at the

same time

(a difficult task, as

same behavior,

event, object,

any teacher knows).

We watch

we monitor how emotions are expressed and drawn away from an interaction. Members of similar groups

bodily cues and eye movements, and

how

easily others are

pace an interaction in terms of conversation, gestures, and cues

have the

ability to

in a like

manner. Part of the success or intensity of an interaction

is

a function of

this kind of rhythm or timing.

The key

to successful rituals "is that

attuned" (Collins, 2004a,

p. 64).

Collins

human means

nervous systems become mutually

that in intense interactions or ritual

Individual

Barrier to

Emotional

Outsiders

Co-presence

Shared Focus of Attention

Energy

Collective

Effervescence

Group Symbols Group Solidarity Standards

of Morali

T

Figure 5.1

Common

Individual

Emotional

Cultural

Mood

Capital

Basic Interaction Ritual

]

102

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

AND

PEOPLE

ITS

performance, we physically mimic one another's body rhythms; we become physi-

Rhythmic entrainment

cally "entrained."

become enmeshed during noticeable as in

hand or arm

estimated that

It is

level

Much

These bodily patterns may be large and

expressions, or they

they occur below the level of

in duration.

refers to recurrent bodily patterns that

successful rituals.

human

human

may

be so quick and minute that

consciousness.

beings can perceive things

down

about 0.2 second

to

of this entrainment occurs below that threshold, or below the

of consciousness

—which

indicates that people literally feel their

way through

intense ritualized interactions. Collins (2004a, pp. 65-78) cites evidence

and audience-speaker behavior

versational analysis

to

show

rhythmically coordinated with one another in interactions.

shown

that conversations not only

the acoustical voice frequencies

gram) recordings have indicated

become synchronized.

Condon and Ogston found

A

become rhythmic

become entrained

in

from con-

humans become Some research has

that

terms of turn-taking, but

as well.

EEG

(electroencephalo-

that even the brain waves of interactants can

In a study of

16mm

body motion and speech using

film,

(1971) discovered that in interaction, "a hearer's body was

harmony with

to 'dance' in precise

the speaker" (p. 158).

common emotional mood tend to reinforce entrainment. Common emotional mood refers to the

shared focus of attention and

one another though rhythmic

degree to which participants are emotionally oriented toward the interaction in the

same way.

In ritual terms,

ing about.

What

that,

I

want

is

it

doesn't really matter what kind of emotion we're talk-

important

that the

is

to point out that there

is

emotion be commonly

an upper and lower limit

of the things that tends to become entrained in an interaction

The

rule for turn-taking

turns are taken

is

vitally

One

simple:

person speaks

important for a

successful conversation will hover

is

turn-taking.

The speed

0.1 second. If the

solidarity will be produced.

If,

in a

time between turns

too great, at say 1.0 second, the interaction will be experienced as dull and

and no

which

at

The time between statements

ritual.

around

at a time.

said

to ritual intensity.

One

is

Having

held.

is

lifeless

on the other hand, conversational statements

go in the other direction and overlap or interrupt one another, then the "conversation" breaks

down and no

feeling of solidarity results.

sations are typically arguments,

it is

level that "solidarity processes are easier to enact is

that conflict

is

latter

which can be brought about by

emotional mood. Collins (2004a) points out that

implication

These

much

kinds of conver-

common

a hostile

generally the case at the micro

than conflict processes.

.

.

.

The

easier to organize at a distance" (p. 74).

Being physically co-present tends to bring about the other variables, particularly, as we've seen, the shared focus of attention.

of ritual barriers. Barrier

up

Co-presence also aids

to outsiders refers to

to other people attempting to join

in the

production

symbolic or physical obstacles we put

our interaction. The use of barriers increases

the sense of belonging to the interaction that the participants experience.

apparent and certain that boundary, the greater

will

be the

level

The more

of ritualized inter-

action and production of group emotional energy. Sporting events and rock concerts are

good

illustrations of using physical

boundaries to help create intense

ritual

performance. Notice that there cence that

is

is

produced

a total

of

five effects

coming out of the emotional

in rituals. Let's first talk

efferves-

about the interrelated group

effects

Emotion and Interaction

group symbols, and standards of morality. Group symbols are those

solidarity,

first:

The

symbols we use to anchor

social emotions.

vescence that's created in

rituals, the greater will

symbol comes symbol If

to represent.

this

It's

greater the level of collective effer-

emotion

is

be the

level

embody and

gang

flag,

group boundaries and

They

creating a

common

Group

to

ritual

enactment by focusing attention and

are used to facilitate ritual

solidarity

The symbols help

Group symbols have an important

identities.

We

and sport team emblems and

insignia,

colors as examples, in addition to the obvious religious ones.

function:

represent the group.

high enough, these symbols take on sacred qualities.

can think of the United States

create

of emotion that the

investment of group emotion that makes the

symbol. The symbol comes to

a collective

the invested

Ritual

emotional mood. is

the sense of oneness a collective can experience. This concern

originated with

Durkheim (1893/1984,

tion in a society,

measured by the subjective sense of "we-ness" individuals have, the

and meant the

pp. 11-29)

constraint of individual behaviors for the group good, social units. Collins appears to

the feeling of

mean

oneself as part of a larger whole.

sense of

in a

it

membership with the group

membership

tive effervescence.

is

One

emotional.

Of course,

more

level

of integra-

and the organization of

general way.

Group

solidarity

that an individual experiences.

of the important things to see here

It is

It's is

is

seeing

that the

derived from creating high levels of collec-

the higher the level of effervescence, the higher will be

the sense of belonging to the group that an individual can have.

Standards of morality refer to group-specific behaviors that are important to

group membership and are morally enforced. Feelings of group solidarity lead people to want to control the behaviors that denote or create that solidarity. That is,

many

of the behaviors, speech patterns, styles of dress, and so on that are associ-

ated with the group

become

issues of right

boundaries have stringent entrance and

and wrong. Groups with high moral

exit rules (they are difficult to get in

WWII

out of). Today's street gangs and the Nazi party of

are

and

good examples of

groups with high moral boundaries.

One

of the things to notice about our example

is

the use of "moral."

probably don't agree with the ethics of street gangs. In

wrong and

ethics are morally

we

moral,

moral

are not referring to

if its

and

norms and

level

WWII

of us

is

a

when

sociologists use the

term

something that we think of as being good.

are viewed

by the members

of standards of morality any group

of interaction

level

their

A group

is

behaviors, beliefs, feelings, speech, styles, and so forth are controlled by

strong group

Because the

reprehensible. But

Most of us

we probably think

fact,

terms of right and wrong. is

a function of their

we could safely say that, by this definition, both gangs probably more "moral" than we are, in this sense, unless one

rituals,

Nazis are

member

in

may have

of a radical fringe group.

The Micro-Macro Link In Collins's theory of interaction ritual chains, the individual

micro-macro

link.

cultural capital.

There are two components to

Emotional energy

away with them from an

is

interaction.

this linkage:

is

the carrier of the

emotional energy and

the emotional charge that people can take

And

as such,

emotional energy predicts the

Chains

103

— 104

AND

THE SOCIAL SITUATION

PEOPLE

ITS

comes away from an

likelihood of repeated interactions: If the individual

tion with as high or higher emotional energy than she or he

person

be more

will

energy also

went

interac-

in with, then the

out further rituals of the same kind. Emotional

likely to seek

involvement within the interaction. People

sets the person's initial

entering an interaction that are charged up with emotional energy will tend to be fully involved

and more

readily able to experience rhythmic entrainment

and

collective effervescence.

Cultural capital

a

is

shorthand way of talking about the different resources we

have to culturally engage with other people. The idea of cultural capital covers range of cultural items:

how we

dress, walk,

others. Collins capital

is

lists

references the

It

and

act



in short,

way we

anything that culturally references us to

three different kinds of cultural capitals. Generalized cultural

of this generalized cultural capital comes from

5.1 notes, a great deal

interaction rituals. This kind of cultural capital

with strangers, somewhat the way

dancing bear on

it.

money

man

the airport standing next to a

said,

a full

to talk about;

the individual's stock of symbols that are associated with group identity.

As Figure

and

what we have

talk;

is

group

and can be used

specific

can. For example, the other day

was

I

in

wearing a handmade tie-dye tee-shirt with a

Another fellow who was coming off

a different flight

saw him

"Hey, man, where ya from?" These two strangers were able to strike up a

man

conversation because the one fans of the band,

recognized the group symbols of Deadheads

The Grateful Dead. They were

able to engage

one another

in

an

interaction ritual because of this generalized cultural capital. Particularized cultural capital refers to cultural items specific people.

and so forth

For example,

my wife

meanings, and

my

I

share a

we have

in

common

number of words,

sets us

up

friend Steve,

for it

one another, references shared experiences and

an interaction

will

ritual.

have no social

But

effect

if



I

hear an Armstrong song

there are

no shared experi-

ences (past ritual performances) that will prompt us to connect.

examples, you get a good sense of what cultural capital does:

toward one another, gives them

a

From

It

If

last

shared focus or attention, and creates a

kind of cultural capital that Collins

talks

somebody knows something about you, she or he

in conversation than if

but remember that this cultural capital. If he

compelled

to

you is

engage him

in

about is

Mel Gibson,

in a public space,

an interaction

is

more

are a complete stranger. That

a variable.

were seen

these

two

orients people

focus of attention, which are most of the ingredients of an interaction

The

with

terms, songs,

that are specifically meaningful to us. Hearing Louis Armstrong, for

instance, instantly orients us toward

around

and

common

ritual.

reputational capital. likely to

makes

engage you

sense, of course,

for example, has a great deal

many

people would

feel

of

almost

ritual.

Figure 5.2 depicts Collins's idea behind interaction ritual chains. Notice that there are several interactions pictured and that each interaction case of two people. Each person

comes

is

made up

energy (EE) and cultural capital (CC) that have been gleaned from previous actions.

The

his levels of

likelihood of an individual seeking out an interaction ritual

emotional energy and cultural

interacting with

one another

is

in this

into an interaction with stocks of emotional

capital; the likelihood of

is

inter-

based on

two people

based on both the similarity of their stocks and

Emotion and Interaction

Ritual

Chains

105

Person E 3 C's Previous Interaction

(^ Interaction

>,

-Person

Rituals

C_Ritual

C

EE. 2

?rson A Person

CC. 2

J

\J

^

-

EE. 3

CC. 3

Interaction

A's Previous

Ritual

Interaction^

Person A

Person A

Rituals

EE.

1

CC.

1

EE. 2 CC. 2

Person D

Interaction

'

Person B

EE.

1

^CC.

1

B's Previous

EE. 2

CC

Rituals

2 '

EE. 3

^^ ^— n

163

164

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

almost

all

women

are

AND SYSTEMS women's movements have been

among

the

to

first

by middle-class women. These

led

experience gender consciousness due to the effects

of industrialization and urbanization. Industrialization

changes such as increases

social

number

initiates a large

of

urbanization, commodification, the use of money

in

and markets, worker education, transportation and communication technologies, and so

These

forth.

importance of

means

also

it

this

all

work together

expansion

isn't

to

expand the

more middle-class

that there are

nondomestic jobs that may be

size

filled

Women

males

is

are

more

likely to

class.

The

Many

jobs available.

of these are

by women.

Industrialization thus structurally creates workforce fill.

of the middle

simply that there are more middle-class people;

be called upon to

fill

number

kept fairly constant or at least the

demands

these roles

that

when

women

can

number of

the

doesn't increase at the

same

rate

demand for labor. The more rapid the growth of industrialization and urbanization, the more likely the demand for labor will outpace the supply of men.

as the

As

women

increase their workforce participation, they increase their level of

material and political resources as well, thus decreasing males' relative micro

and the

of gender differentiation, as well as weakening gender stereotypes,

level

ideologies,

power

and normative expectations (gender

women's resources and thus

social definitions). In addition, as

micro power increase, they are more able

their

to influ-

ence the household division of labor and men's contribution to familial and domestic

work. And, as

more

men

contribute

more

to

domestic and familial work,

women

are

able to gain resources through workforce participation, as noted by the feed-

back arrow

in Figure 7.2.

In addition to influencing these micro-level issues, industrialization, urbanization,

and women's increased workforce participation do two other

increase

women's experience of

social contacts.

deprivation Social

is

relative deprivation

movements

are extremely unlikely with groups that experience absolute will

nor the resources to organize

movements. Relative deprivation, on the other hand, implies resources and experiences rising expectations. Thus,

comparable

to men's,

resources that can potentially be used to

a

women who

and they

become

will

political

group that has

are

newly moving

They

into the workforce will tend to experience relative deprivation.

see that their salaries are not late

survival, relative

comparative sense of being disadvantaged.

They have neither the

deprivation.

They

and the number of women's

While absolute deprivation implies uncertain

a subjective,

things:

will

begin to

begin to accumu-

politically active.

Urbanization and industrialization also increase a group's ability to organize. Ralf Dahrendorf (1957/1959) talked about this ability to organize as the principal difference between quasi-groups lectives that

and

interest groups.

Quasi-groups are those

col-

have latent identical role interests; they are people that hold the same

structural position

and thus have similar

interests but

do not experience

a sense of

"belongingness." Interest groups, on the other hand, "have a structure, a form of organization,

The

a

program or

goal,

interest group's identity

and

a

personnel of members"

and sense of belonging

are

(p. 180).

produced when people

have the ability to communicate, recruit members, form leadership, and create a

unifying ideology. Urbanization and industrialization structurally increase the

probability that these conditions of interest group

membership

will

be met.

Women

Gender

living

and working

status

As

and

dilemmas

role

women

advanced urban settings are more

in technically

who

into contact with like others

come from women working

that

likely to arise.

is

and

buy

its set

into a radical ideology or

movements

will

radical feminist goals.

that as a result social

While the public may not

broadly. This support, along a direct effect

from women's

and

elites to create laws, policies,

moment and talk about short-term social problems. Chafetz argues of women having and using greater levels of resources, short-term

problems are

Chafetz uses the term "social problem" in a gen-

likely to arise.

eral sense to indicate the challenges that society at large have to

significant

related to articu-

unequal distribution of scarce resources by gender.

to help alleviate the

pause a

more

problems and

workforce participation, place pressure upon

Let's

is

of goals, the ideologies and goals of women's

tend to justify gender change

with pressure from short-term social

programs

become weak-

Chafetz argues that a significant

portion of what women's movements have been able to achieve lated critical gender ideologies

and the

double workday.

a

begin to organize and as traditional gender definitions

ened, public support for change

come

likely to

are experiencing relative deprivation

change occurs. In other words, change to the

social

overcome anytime

system brings a kind

of disequilibrium that has to be solved so that actions and interactions can once

accompany any type of

again be patterned. Such social problems tend to

social

change as a society adjusts culturally and socially. In the case of gender, the short-

women

term problems are related to

having greater

of resources and thus

levels

higher levels of independence and power. Examples of these kinds of problems include increases in the divorce rate and women's

own

demands

bodies. Social disruptions such as these tend to motivate elite support of

women's

rights in order to restore social order.

As you can see from Figure

7.2, elite

support shows up twice in Chafetz's theory.

movement

Sociologists have learned that every social

from the

elite.

The

elite

works of people

The

in

new

Elites create

this case, the

incumbency advantages

and not

show up

in elite roles,

women"

way we have been

place elite support

elites

p. 152).

This kind of change

shows up

determined outside the model

in

interests,

this case, elite

though

women. Chafetz argues

some form of social

problems faced by their

dis-

society,

their

it

may

that we've

group with similar

support

an exogenous variable (that

which

it is

is,

one

used), in the upper top

may appear more

directly tied to

not necessarily be generated out of concern for

made

the mistake before of thinking of the elite

interests. In fact, the elite are

factions, each struggling over power. In this likely to see

maybe incremen-

women's movements. as

model. In

perceive

that basic

is

groups are

far.

are exacerbated by a gender system that devalues and dis-

(Chafetz, 1990,

is

elite

talking about so

numbers of people and may possibly jeopardize

specifically associated with

right of the

as a single

in the

may perceive

affect large

whose value women's

is

support comes mostly because

The second

social capital (net-

or support already established laws that help bring social order. In

order. In other words, "they

which negatively

money and

powerful positions).

place elites

first

eventually requires support

not only pass laws and oversee their enforcement, they can

also lend other material or political support, such as

tal

for control over their

women

divided into different

kind of political environment, some

as a potential resource

and make promises

Inequality

165

166

AND SYSTEMS

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

designed to gather their support. At

changes that reduce gender

sonic of these promises result in actual

least

stratification.

I'm going to restate Chafetz's theory of gender change in brief propositions, since this

is

the discourse in which Chafetz works. Be sure to follow the elements of

the propositions through the model. This

way

be able to get

you'll

a textual

and

visual rendering of the ideas.



Taken together, the tional efforts

level

of reduction in gender stratification due to inten-

male domestic

a positive function of the level of

is

labor, elite

support, and women's control of material resources; and a negative effect of the level of male micro power. •

Women's

level

of control over material resources

industrialization, urbanization, in general

is

a positive

and the

size

a positive function of

is

of the middle

class. Elite

support

function of the level of women's control over material

resources, the level of short-term social problems, the level of public support for changes

advanced by women's movements, and

elite

competition.

Summary and control over

In general, Chafetz argues that workforce participation

material resources both stabilize and change a system of gender inequality.

when women's participation in the workwhen women are allowed to work and control and reduced

Gender inequality force

is

restricted

is

perpetuated

material resources.

Chafetz argues that gender

is

more through

stabilized

rather than the use of coercive power.

When men

voluntaristic actions

control the division of

labor in society, they are able to exercise authority at the

assuring male incumbencv in

elite

positions

and

women's exchange of deference and compliance thus control gender social definitions that set

psychodynamic structuring, gender sion of gender through impression

to

level

through

level

through

up engenderment and the

management and in

meso micro

for material resources.

socialization,

derment and wifely compliance work from the workforce,

at the

Men

processes:

idealized expres-

interaction.

Engen-

turn to solidify women's exclusion

impose double duty upon those

women who do

work,

and resources, and

to

women but positive ones for men. women are allowed greater participation

in

to stabilize the unequal distribution of opportunities

define negative worker attributes for

Gender inequality the workforce

is

reduced as

and increased control over material resources. These

decrease women's reliance

then contribute

women

more

to

to participate in

upon men and men's authority over women. Men domestic and familial work, which further the workforce

roles increases the probability o(

frees

and weakens gender stereotypes,

norms, and ideologies. In addition, women's access

work

factors

women's

to resource-generating

political

movements, which

Gender

along with weakened gender definitions positively impacts public opinion

and

support for women. Short-term social issues that come about

elite

because of women's increased workforce participation also impact

elite

port, as well as the elite's desire to consolidate or gain political power. stratification

is

reduced as

sup-

Gender

women move into the workforce and control more

material resources, as elites support

men's micro resource power

is

women's

rights

and

legislation,

and

reduced and their domestic contribution

increased.

Building Your Theory Toolbox Learning More •



— Primary Sources

work is Gender and change, Sage, 1990.

Chafetz's most important stability

She

is

also the editor of the excellent

equity:

An

integrated theory of

Handbook of

the sociology of

gender, Kluwer, 1999.

Check •

Out

It

Web

Bytes: Janet Chafetz gives us a generalized, sociological explanation

of gender oppression.

The

Conflict Theory, focuses

the •

In

Web

Byte for this chapter, Randall Collins

on Chafetz's

theoretical approach.

In

and

terms of

approaches to gender, there are Chapters 17 and 18, as well as

different

Web

Byte Patricia

Hill Collins

and

Intersecting Oppressions.

1993, Chafetz joined Rae Lesser Blumberg, Scott Coltrane, Randall

Collins,

and Jonathan Turner to produce

stratification. This

a rare

is

a synthesized theory of

and powerful

effort:

gender

"Toward an integrated

theory of gender stratification," Sociological Perspectives, 36, 185-216.

Seeing the World •

After reading and understanding this chapter, you should be able to

answer the following questions (remember to answer them o

Explain

why

the workforce of

women

is

theoretically):

so important to Chafetz's

theory,

how exchange processes work to produce gender inequalities. How do men use their micro power to their gendered advantage?

o

Explain

o

What

o

Explain the differences girls.

are the three types of

Explain

how

gender definitions?

between the

intrapsychic structures of boys

they are created and

how

and

they influence gender

inequality, o

How

does

social

understanding of

learning theory

how gender

and dramaturgy contribute to our

inequality

is

voluntaristically

reproduced?

o

How

o

According to Chafetz, what two characteristics about gender make

does gender inequality unintentionally change?

change

as

difficult? (Be sure to explain

them

fully)

Inequality

167

168

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

AND SYSTEMS

o

What

o

How do women's movements

are the structural forces that

change? What does

make gender change

form and

this tell us

about

how do

social

likely?

they influence gender

movements

general?

in

Engaging the World •

Consult at least four reliable Internet sources for the "separation of spheres." least six



What

is it

ways that

and

how does

it

figure into Chafetz's theory?

this historical, structural issue influences

Use your favorite search engine. Type

on information from

in

your

"global gender inequality" Based

at least three different societies, prepare a report

them. Also, compare and contrast these societies with the one you

How

applicable

List at

life.

do you think Chafetz's theory would be

in

on

live in.

those other

three societies? •

Volunteer at a local women's shelter or resource center.

Weaving the Threads •

Use Mead's theory of the

self

and

Collins's

theory of interaction

ritual

to

elaborate Kanter's ideas about organizational personality. •



Compare and

contrast Collins's

specifically

about

of coercive

and

how

Collins's

and Chafetz's theories of

voluntaristic structures.

Using Berger and Luckmann's theory, explain reality for

cultural

the

and

inequality. Think

theory might (or might not) contain issues

women

in

Chafetz's theory.

constructivist

components

in

In

how

inequality

Chafetz's theory?

Can Berger

and Luckmann add anything to our understanding of how works?

becomes

other words, what are the

inequality

CHAPTER

8

The Replication of Class Pierre

Photo:

©

Bourdieu (1930-2002)

Corbis.

169

— 170

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

AND SYSTEMS

171

Bourdieu's Perspective: Constructivist Structuralism

Sociology as Combat Sport

Overcoming Dichotomies Dialecticism

and

1

71

72

1

a Theory of Practice

and Symbolic Violence

Class Reproduction

Reflexive Sociology

1

F/e/c/s

1

1

78

82

Concepts and Theory: Replicating Class Linguistic Markets

1

83

Symbolic Struggle

1

86

Summary

76

1

76

1

Habitus

74

1

75

Concepts and Theory: Structuring Class Capitals

73

1

83

1

187

188

Building Your Theory Toolbox

Why

are

you

most students, you're

in school? If you're like

get a degree so

you can

get a job.

Is

in school to

the school that you're attending

much

Harvard, Yale, or Princeton? Degrees from those schools are

more job,

valuable in terms of getting a job. So,

why wouldn't you be

at

So, ier to

what

is

class

you're in school so you can get a

one of the Ivy League schools?

had enough sociology by now probably because of

if

to

tell

me

that

if

I

good

imagine that you've

you're not at a top- 10 school,

it's

class.

and how

is it

answer than the second

reproduced? The

(yet

measuring

part of that question

first

class

is

difficult as well).

We

is

eas-

usually

think of class in terms of socioeconomic-status (SES), as reflected by a measure-

ment of

wealth, income, occupational status, and education.

that class

is

replicated

But what structured

if

by the structuring of those

something more

going on? What

—by something hidden, by something more

what are structures anyway? they

is

come from

How

in the first place?

most of us think of

as class.

And

do they work

The work of he'll

And we

usually think

factors. if

class

is

reproduced

insidious than SES? Further,

to replicate class?

And where do

Pierre Bourdieu will challenge

what

challenge the general sociological notion of

structure.

Class

is

one of the most fundamental and important

mines not only every

human

how much we

can spend

social categories

at the mall, but also the

life



being living under capitalism. Yet, according to Bourdieu,

only just begun to understand

how

it

works.

it

deter-

chances of

we have

— The Replication of Class

The

171

Essential Bourdieu

Biography Bourdieu was born August

Pierre

1930,

1,

Denqum,

in

Bourdieu

France.

studied philosophy under Louis Althusser at the Ecole Normale Supeneure

1958 to 1960, Bourdieu did empirical research that laid the

groundwork

Algeria (The Algerians, 1962)

A

Social Critique of the

of the 20th century's 10

(International Sociological Association).

Judgment of

at College de France (the

same

Taste,

most important works of sociology

He was the founder and

director of the

Centre for European Sociology, and he held the French senior chair chair held by sociologist

in

sociology

and anthropologist

Marcel Mauss). Craig Calhoun (2003) writes that Bourdieu was "the most ential

and

25

for his sociology. In his career, he published over

books, one of which, Distinction:

was named one

in

original French sociologist since

in

From

After his studies, he taught for 3 years, 1955-1958, at Moulins.

Paris.

Durkheim"

(p.

influ-

274).

Passionate Curiosity Bourdieu's passion

with

class,

and

is

honesty and

intellectual

way

particularly the

class

is

He of course

rigor.

created and recreated

is

conscious ways. But above and beyond these empirical concerns intellect

bent on refining

invitation to think

critical

concerned

subtle,

in

is

non-

a driving

thinking and never settling on an answer:

with Bourdieu

is

Bourdieu, and against him whenever required" (Wacquant, 1992,

"An

beyond

of necessity an invitation to think

p. xiv).

Keys to Knowing m-

constructivist structuralism, field, habitus, cultural capital, symbolic capital guistic markets, symbolic violence

Bourdieu's Perspective: Constructivist Structuralism Sociology as One

Combat Sport

of the wonderful things about working

in

academia

job to learn things. In preparing to write this chapter,

chapter on Bourdieu. Professor

Calhoun

The

talks

first

section

is

about Bourdieu's

I

entitled "Taking life

as a

is

that

it is

part of

Games

Seriously." In

former rugby player and

how

influenced his theory. Throughout Bourdieu's writing, he uses such terms as

game, and

practice,

and he

talks

about the bodily inculcation of culture.

Bourdieu and approached such terms and ideas reason,

it

never occurred to

me

to

the analogy of the game. But as fascination with rugby, his ideas

I

my

read Craig Calhoun's (2003)

as theoretical concepts.

it,

it

field,

had read

1

For some

understand their use as a kind of analogy read Calhoun's three pages about Bourdieu's

and terms

all

came

alive for

me

in a

new

way.

172

AND SYSTEMS

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

Calhoun, the

So, thanks to Craig

perspective

Bourdieu's use of the analogy doesn't

Bourdieu was

rugby

a

Rugby

player.

we

thing

first

the analogy of the game.

is

come from

is

about

will talk

important to keep

It's

background

a

much more

Bourdieu's

mind

that

playing cards.

in

European game somewhat

a

in in

like

American

it

is

considered by most to be

rugby, the play

is

continuous with no substitutions or time-outs (even for injury).

football, but

The game can

anywhere from 60-90 minutes, with two halves separated by

take

5-minute halftime. An important part of the game players

from each

around each

men

grueling than football. In

form

side

The

other.

ball

a

the scrum. In a scrum, eight

kind of inverted triangle by wrapping their arms

a is

is

placed in the middle and the two

struggle head to head against each other until the ball

To see the struggle of the scrum

gives a

bound groups of

freed

is

from the scrum.

whole new perspective on Bourdieu's idea

of social struggle.

Rugby matches and

are played

take place

on

by individuals

a field, involve strategic plays

who

by the rules of the game and the

are of course structured

and intense

struggles,

have a clear physical sense of the game. Matches

delineates the parameters of the play, but each field

is

field.

The

field

not only

and thus knowledge

different

important for success. The rules are there and, like in all when they are broken, but a good player embodies the rules games, come into play and the methods of the game. The best plays are those that come when the player of each

is

field

of play

is

in the "zone," or playing

without thinking. Trained musicians can also experience

when

this zone by jamming with other musicians. Often

cian can play things that she or he normally

time explaining after the

a difficult

to a

good game than the

And,

finally,

there

is

rules

know

it

much

field;

it,

and one's own but

through the use of analogy.

work our way through you'll find

and the

would not be

The same the

is

such a

state, the

and might have

able to,

true for athletes. There

game

is

embodied

musi-

is

more

in the performer.

the struggle, not only against the other team, but also the lim-

itations of the field, rules,

You may not

fact.

in

I

I

just gave

abilities.

you

a brief

will occasionally

the material, but

I

think

overview of Bourdieu's theory

mention the game analogy if

you keep

it

as

we

consistently in mind,

easier to grasp the intent of Bourdieu's thinking.

Overcoming Dichotomies There

is

a central

dichotomy in sociology and the human sciences

dichotomy, and those derived from pline,

it,

sets

in general.

This

some of the basic parameters of our disci-

such as the distinction between quantitative and qualitative methods and the

divergence between structuralism and interactionism. This dichotomy also sets up

one of the thorniest

macro

levels

issues sociologists address: the link

of society. The dichotomy that

structure (objective) versus agency

(

And Bourdieu knowledge

knowledge

am

referring to

subjective), or, as

as

He

Bourdieu

is

the

talks

dilemma of

about

it,

social

characterizes the

dichotomy between

one of the most harmful

in the social sciences.

physics versus social phenomenology. objective and subjective

I

between the micro and

(1985) sees overcoming the break between objective and subjective

as the

most

steadfast

and important

factor guiding his

work

(p. 15).

The Replication of Class

Bourdieu brings the two sides of the dichotomy together constructivist structuralism, or structuralist constructivism

term both ways



what he

in

calls

— Bourdieu uses the

which both structure and agency are given equal weight.

in

Bourdieu (1989) says that within the social world, there are "objective structures independent of the consciousness and

will

of agents, which are capable of guiding

constraining their practices or their representations" (p. 14).

and

little

differently

about

how and where

these structures exist).

same time, Bourdieu emphasizes the

Yet, at the

constructivist

Bourdieu's (1989) scheme, the subjective side

sides. In

"schemes of perception, thought, and action"

what Bourdieu does

to detail the

is

constructed; thus, there research. But

is

a

(p. 14),

is

and subjective

also structured in terms of

which he

calls habitus.

Part of

ways through which both kinds of structures are

kind of double structuring

in Bourdieu's

Bourdieu doesn't simply give us an historical account of

how

tures are produced. His theory also offers an explanation of tures are dialectically related

thus keeps

Durkheim gave us (although Bourdieu

structures in the objective social world that

thinks a

He

these

and how the individual uses them

theory and

how

struc-

two

struc-

strategically in

linguistic markets.

and

Dialecticism

Theory of Practice

a

In preserving both sides of the dichotomy, Bourdieu has created a unique theoretical

problem.

He

does, nor does he

doesn't want to conflate the two sides as Giddens (Chapter 12)

want

to link

them up

in the

way

that Collins

and Blau do. He

wants to preserve the integrity of both domains and yet he characterizes the

dichotomy

and

yet

Bourdieu

as harmful.

thus

is

left

with a sticky problem:

How can he keep

change the dichotomy between the objective and subjective moments with-

out linking them together or blending them together? Let's take this issue

out of the realm of theory and state

more approachable. The problem between the individual and

Does

yes.

society determine

society.

Bourdieu

Do we

left

with

yet the

product of free choice? I

the relationship

sion because they stand in opposition to

one another. And

yes.

to see the

moments,

can

problem

create ten-

that tension

is

exactly

solves his theoretical problem.

Bourdieu argues that the objective and constructive moments stand tical

How

I've stated the issue a

want you

Structure and agency, or the objective and subjective

how Bourdieu

is

bit

have free choice? Bourdieu would say

too simplistically for Bourdieu's theory, but

clearly.

is

terms that are a

what we do? Again Bourdieu would say

something be determined and bit

that

in

it

in a dialec-

relationship (see Chapter 2 for the dialectic). Bourdieu's dialectic occurs

between what he

calls

the field and the habitus. Both are structures; habitus

"incorporated history" and the p. 66).

We will go

of society that

into

more depth

lives in the

Bourdieu's dialectic. objective structures

later

on, but for

now

are both

much more,

The tension of

think of habitus as that part

and the

but what

the dialectic

dialectic itself

is

found

is

is

(Bourdieu, 1980/1990,

individual as a result of socialization

They

as social structures.

field is "objectified history"

I

and think of the

want us

to see

field

now

is

between the subjective and

in the individual

and

collective

173

174

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

AND SYSTEMS

struggles or practices that transform or preserve these structures through specific

and

practices In

linguistic markets.

other words, Bourdieu

lives are

structured, and

is

number of different elements

arguing that a

among them

in

our

are the habitus of the individual (schemes of

thought, feeling, and action) and the social

field

(structured social positions and

the distribution of resources). These different structures dialectically exert force

upon one another through And,

tion.

most

as with

the strategic actions and practices of people in interac-

dialectics, the tension

can produce something

new and

different out of the struggle; these differences can then influence the structures of

habitus and

field.

and Symbolic Violence

Class Reproduction

While Bourdieu's work covers focus in

is

on the

a diverse landscape,

Marx, the economy and

And whereas

work

replication of class. In this, his

which Bourdieu's theory may be seen class are

as the

think

I

is

fair to

it is

say that his

Marxian, and there

is

a sense

mirror image of Marx. According to

two of the most important structures

Bourdieu's theory begins with material

class,

in society.

he clearly moves the

reproduction of class structures into the symbolic realm. In the reproduction of class,

the symbolic field and the relations expressed by and through habitus that

it is

have the greater causal force. Like Marx, Bourdieu defines the social world as the place

where the competition

petition sees

is

much

for scarce resources takes place.

an unequal distribution of economic

capital.

The

result of this

com-

But unlike Marx, Bourdieu

of this competition as taking place in a symbolic realm that produces an

economic,

social, cultural,

also central to Bourdieu. For

Marx, ideology

unequal distribution of four different kinds of

capital:

and symbolic.

The Marxian notion of ideology

is

functions to preserve false consciousness and to prevent the working class from seeing their oppression. Intrinsic within this notion of ideology the idea that people

fail

is

misrecognition,

to see or recognize the relations of production within a

commodity or means of production. clothing at a relatively tions that

So, for example, when we purchase a piece of we fail to see the oppressive "sweat shop" condicommodity at such a low price. Bourdieu expands Marx's

good

produced that

price,

notion by arguing that misrecognition

is

present within

all

social practices

and

forms of knowledge. As Calhoun (2003) succinctly observes, "every recognition

is

also a misrecognition" (p. 290).

Bourdieu

is

nition because

particularly concerned with this it

is

Symbolic violence as such.

More

a necessary condition for

is

it

general notion of misrecog-

the exercise of violence and oppression that

specifically,

"symbolic power

exercised only with the complicity of those subject to

more

symbolic violence and oppression.

is

that invisible

who do

is

not recognized

power which can be

not want to

know

or even that they themselves exercise if (Bourdieu, 1991,

that they are p. 164).

1

or

example, for quite some time, patriarchy was seen as part of the natural order of things. Yet, in believing in her husband's right to rule, a

blinded herself to her

own

woman

participated in and

oppression. Here's another example: In believing that

schools should be locally controlled and funded and that education

is

the legitimate

The Replication of Class

we

path to upward social mobility, class

More lence.

insidious for Bourdieu

afraid of

making

so admired, but I

is

way language

the

Why didn't you?

If

a fool out of yourself.

him

never talked to

I

easily seen

It is

But

graffiti taggers.

including the

we don't know condemns [us] Part of

They

more or

to a

p. 97,

move through

unless

we know

Web Byte for

graduate school that I

I

knew

just

Every social group has specific

and people

is

to

in high-status positions,

we

know

don't

And, while

the language, "which

desperate attempt to be correct, or to silence"

less

original).

doing

expanding Marx's approach to

is

As we

class.

see Bourdieu employing new ideas and terms

his theory, you'll

Another approach

in

was absolutely necessary.

it

foolish.

that

order to open up the Marxist analysis of culture.

you wanted

typically have specialized languages.

emphasis

what Bourdieu

symbolic vio-

with such pop culture groups as hip-hop, skaters, and

the language,

(Bourdieu, 1991,

in the

had a professor

I

also true with experts

it is

elite class.

inflict

social status that

you're like me, you didn't because you were

would misspeak and say something

languages.

used to

is

Have you ever been around someone of higher

to talk to but didn't?

that

actively participate in the perpetuation of the

system in the United States (see Kozol, 1991).

the arena of symbolic

class, specifically in

working with Marx's theory of

this chapter: Erik Olin Wright:

in

class

Measuring Class

is

demonstrated

Inequality. Rather

than augmenting Marx's theory, Wright's analytical Marxism seeks to theoretically explicate Marx's concepts.

more amenable

may

The main reason

to scientific testing.

for

doing so

is

to render the theory

During your undergraduate education, you

have heard that Marx's theory didn't work; the revolution never materialized

and capitalism survived. An Analytical Marxist would counter and you measure Marx's concepts? matter

is

Marxism

that very is

little

How

did you

theory?"

test his

ask,

The

"How

did

truth of the

of Marx's theory has been scientifically tested. Analytical

trying to change that.

Reflexive Sociology Bourdieu wants us to engage

in reflexive sociology,

where we move "in a

spiral

between theory, empirical work and back to reformulating theory again but different level" (Mahar, Harker,

& Wilkes,

Bourdieu's books, such as Distinction,

and the

world graphically

social

1990, p. 3). If

we would

laid out.

On

we were

is

and abstract theory. cept, considers it

it

moving back and

movement, Bourdieu proposes

this way, his

methodological stand and writing are them-

selves theoretical statements of structural constructivism.

embedded

practice,

moves

in the empirical world,

dialectically:

transformed through

its

to

it

is

in

An

It's

and theory,

never finished,

it

Theory,

like social

prac-

like social structures

never arrives, but

it

is

and

always

intrinsic tensions.

Bourdieu never published

came

con-

a

of the empirical world, and then continually reconsiders

throughout the book. In

tice, is

may be two or text. What Bourdieu is

any given page, there

forth between dense empirical descriptions

In this back-and-forth

in light

at a

one of

see this reflexive vision of theory

three different print fonts with lines separating the different

doing graphically

to look at

a definitive

—the

statement of his theory

Invitation to Reflexive Sociology

— and

his later

closest

he

works don't

175

176

AND SYSTEMS

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

necessarily build

upon or include

much

sorial definitions" hut

Wacquant, 1992,

dynamic space from which agency. And, as

about

how

we

class

rigor.

more concerned with

is

more

will see

and

to think

&

insight

Bourdieu gives us an inspiring way through

gap between objective and subjective sociology.

to bridge the

like "profes-

"open concepts" (Bourdieu

p. 95). Reflexive sociology, then,

and inspiration than creed and which

work. Bourdieu doesn't

his earlier

prefers the idea of

He

gives us a

about the relations between structure and

moment, he

clearly in a

gives us

new ways

to think

and how they change over time.

social positions are patterned

Concepts and Theory: Structuring Class Capitals The

basic fact of capitalism

income. Income

is

capital. Capital

different

is

from either wealth or

generally measured by annual salary and wealth by the relation-

is

and debt. Both income and wealth

ship between one's assets

are in a sense static;

they are measurable facts about a person or group. Capital, on the other hand, active:

The

defined as

It's

purpose of

entire

Bourdieu actually bolic,

and

cultural

is

accumulated goods devoted to the production of other goods.



capital

all

is

produce more

to

capital.

—economic,

social,

sym-

of which are invested and used in the production of

class.

talks

about four forms of capital

Bourdieu uses economic capital

Economic

in its usual sense.

capital

is

generally

determined by one's wealth and income. As with Marx, Bourdieu sees economic

However, unlike Marx, Bourdieu argues that the impor-

capital as fundamental.

tance of economic capital

is

that

it

strongly influences an individual's level of the

other capitals, which, in turn, have their

own independent

effects. In

other words,

economic

capital starts the ball rolling;

may have

stronger influences on the perpetuation of class inequalities.

but once things are

Social capital refers to the kind of social

know and how

people you

social capital

can be captured in the saying,

that counts."

For example, as Phillips

if

The

you

network an individual

member of an

Andover Academy,

afforded the opportunity to

Yale,

make

elite class,

is

you

running

It

clearly associated with class.

such

and Harvard. At those schools, you would be social

connections with powerful people

for the office of President of the

doesn't exclusively determine social capital. tionally, or

set within.

will attend elite schools

example, in elections over the past 30 years, there has been ate

is

what you know but who you

"it isn't

distribution of social capital

are a

motion, other issues

they are situated in society. The idea of

refers to the

know

in

United

at least

States.



for

Yale gradu-

But economic capital

We can build our social

sometimes through happenstance. For example,

one

if

networks inten-

you attended Hot

Springs High School in Arkansas during the early 1960s, you would have had a

chance to become friends with

Symbolic capital social realities.

With

is

Bill

Clinton.

the capacity to use

this idea,

symbols

Bourdieu begins

to create or solidify physical

to

open our eyes

and

to the symbolic

nature of class divisions. Social groups don't exist simply because people decide to gather together.

Max Weber

recogni/.ed that there are technical conditions that

— The Replication of Class

must be met able to ship;

for a loose collection of people to

form

a social group: People

must be

communicate and meet with one another; there must be recognized

and

group needs

a

clearly articulated goals to organize. Yet,

leader-

even meeting

those conditions doesn't alone create a social group. Groups must be symbolically

recognized as well.

With the idea of symbolic symbols

(Chapter

in interaction

Bourdieu pushes us past analyzing the use of

capital,

the emergent result of ongo-

is

meaning doesn't

ing symbolic interactions. We're symbolic creatures, but

within the symbol

must be pragmatically negotiated

itself; it

We've learned

tions.

how

about

a great deal

human

Symbolic interactionism argues that

1).

beings are oriented toward meaning and meaning

reside

in face-to-face situa-

people create meaning in different

situations because of symbolic interactionism's insights. But Bourdieu's use of

symbolic capital

quite different.

is

Bourdieu recognizes that not

all

letters

all

human

write a

I

of recommendation for students each year. Every form

question: "Relationship to applicant?"

And

my

and

I fill

good number

my

of

out asks the same

always put "professor."

I

ing of the professor-student relationship emerges out of

students,

and

relationships are created symbolically

people have equal symbolic power. For example,

Now,

mean-

the

interactions with

my

student-professor relationships are probably somewhat different

from some of my colleagues

as a result.

my students

However, neither

nor

I

created

the student-professor relationship. Recall our earlier discussion about Bourdieu's critique of sociology's dichotomy.

Here we can see both Bourdieu's critique and can't

account for the creation of the categories

categories

— Bourdieu (1991) and gender,

as class, race,

"Symbolic power

a

is

his answer: Social it

uses,

and

phenomenology

social physics reifies the

us that objective categories and structures, such

tells

are generated through the use of symbolic capital:

power of constructing

reality" (p. 166).

Bourdieu (1989) characterizes the use of symbolic capital as both the power of constitution and the

power

to

make

sions, that implicit,

is

is,

power of revelation

groups.

.

power

the

political

.

The power

make

to



to

it is

there

First,

the

power of "world-making

impose and

visible

power par excellence"

based on two elements. nition.

.

must be

and

identity,

is

such as

officially

(p. 23).

scientists, legislators,

against

all

sufficient recognition to

impose recog-

or sociologists in our society. Institutional

form of an educational credential (school its

to

world-make

is

ical reality is tal.

This

is

think

it's

in this

holder from the symbolic

some

best to see this as a variable.

(p. 22).

relation to a reality

"symbolic efficacy depends on the degree to which the vision proposed I

is

labeled by a person

by imposing the universally approved perspective"

The second element needed

in reality" (p. 23).

the

This power of world-making

sense operates as a representative of the state), "frees all

.

recognized as having the ability to symbolically impart

accreditation, particularly in the

struggle of

.

explicit social divisions that are

The group must be recognized and symbolically

or group that

.

to inculcate a vision of divi-

The more

is

founded

social or phys-

already present, the greater will be the effectiveness of symbolic capi-

the sense in which symbolic capital

Symbolic power

is

the

power

is

the

power

to reveal the substance of

space. But note that granting a

group symbolic

life

to consecrate or reveal.

an already occupied social

"brings into existence in an

177

178

AND SYSTEMS

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

instituted, constituted

form

.

.

.

what existed up

until then only as ... a collection

persons, a purely additive series of merely juxtaposed individuals"

of varied

Thus, because legitimated existence

extremely important conflict in society

the struggle over symbols and classifica-

is

The heated debate over race classification in the U.S. 2000 census

tions.

(p. 23).

dependent upon symbolic capacity, an

is

good

a

is

example.

There

between symbolic and cultural

a clear relationship

is

symbolic capital creates the symbolic eral, cultural capital refers to

person garners as

tastes that a

ways we

different

Bourdieu alized,

the informal social

talk, act,

a result

The use of

capital.

wherein cultural capital

field

of her or his economic resources. that are the result of

and embodied. Objectified

cultural capital refers to the material

the

class.

goods (such

computers, and paintings) that are associated with cultural

Institutionalized cultural capital alludes to the certifications (like degrees

mas) that give

official

Embodied cultural

acknowledgement capital

is

to the possession of

and

is

it

capital.

and diplo-

knowledge and

the most important in Bourdieu's scheme.

of what makes up an individual's habitus, and lives in

It is

our

identifies three different kinds of cultural capital: objectified, institution-

as books,

ties.

and

habits, linguistic styles,

skills,

and make distinctions

gen-

exists. In

abili-

part

It is

refers to the cultural capital that

expressed through the body. This function of cultural capital mani-

fests itself as taste.

an individual preference or fondness for something, such as "he

Taste refers to

has developed a taste for expensive wine." tastes aren't really individual;

tastes are

embodied

What Bourdieu

To hear

a piece of

telling us

is

that

they are strongly influenced by our social class

cultural capital.

Here

a particular taste

and recognized by only those who have the proper cific.

is

music and

classify

it

as

is

our

—our

legitimated, exhibited,

cultural code,

which

class spe-

is

baroque rather than elevator music

implies an entire world of understandings and classification. Thus,

when

individu-

express a preference for something or classify an object in a particular way, they

als

are simultaneously classifying themselves. Taste

phenomenon, but

natural

(1979/1984) says, "Taste taste

is

"one of the most

it

is

may appear

as

an innocent and

an insidious revealer of position. As Bourdieu

classifies,

and

vital stakes in

it

classifies the classifier" (p. 6).

The

issue of

the struggles fought in the field of the

inant class and the field of cultural production" (p.

1

dom-

).

1

Habitus Taste ply it

,\n

is

part of habitus

economic

merely a

sciousness) one's of

classification

set

of



class

body and

and habitus

life is

embodied

(one that exists because of symbolic capital), nor

is

both

a

may become aware

inscribed in our bodies. Habitus in the world.

walking, speaking, eating, and laughing;

Habitus

cultural capital. Class isn't sim-

circumstances of which people

deployment

its

is

It is

it is

in

in

system whereby people organize their

is

con-

the durable organization of

is

found

found

(class

our posture, and our way

every way

own

we use our body.

behavior and

a

system

through which people perceive and appreciate the behavior of others. Pay close attention: This svstem of organization and appreciation bodies.

We

physically feel

how we should

act;

we

is felt

in

our

physically sense what the actions

The Replication of Class

we approve of or censure them physically (we are comfortable or uncomfortable); we physically respond to different foods (we can become voracious or disgusted); we physically respond to certain sexual prompts and not the list can go on almost indefinitely. Our humanity, including our class others of others mean, and



position,

not just found in our cognitions and mental capacity;

is

it is

our very

in

bodies.

One way

to see

what Bourdieu and

love to play sand volleyball,

means I'm not very good

at

other players are situated.

I

the ball or ing

if

way

is

can do

I

off.

They

make

they

it

is

have to watch to see

if

the player next to

ball (but the other

their

moves is

and

bunglers on

effort). Professional volleyball players

They sense the

rarely have to think.

particulars. Volleyball

me

is

ball

and

my team

compete their

my tim-

end up with

I

a

are usu-

in a differ-

teammates and

than they could cognitively work through

faster

I

going for

watching and mental activity means that

so. All this

my

rugby analogy.

to recall the

about once every 5 years, which

typically dive for the ball 1.5 seconds too late,

I

impressed with

ent world.

talking about

have to constantly think about where the ball and

it. I

mouthful of sand rather than the ally

is

only get to play

I

the

all

inscribed in their bodies.

Explicating what he calls the Dreyfus model, Bent Flyvbjerg (2001) gives us a detailed

way of seeing what

going on here. The Dreyfus model indicates that there

is

advanced beginner, competent performer, profi-

are five levels to learning: novice, cient performer,

and

expert. Novices

uation; advanced beginners

still

know

the rules and the objective facts of a

have concrete knowledge but see

it

and the competent performer employs hierarchical decision-making responsible for outcomes.

of knowledge. The

level

two

With

first

proficient performers

three levels are

experts, "their skills have

are

Habitus thus works below the will. its

It is

and

feels

enter another final

beyond

specific power,

level

of conscious thought and outside the control

most automatic gestures or the apparently most [it

and evaluation of the

insignificant

engages] the most fundamental principles of consocial world, those

division of labour ... or the division of the p.

With

that they are not

"beyond the reach of introspective scrutiny or control by

techniques of the body ...

1979/1984,

analytical rationality.

much a part of themselves of their own bodies" (p. 19).

so

the embodied, nonconscious enactment of cultural capital that gives

the will ... in the

struction

skills

we

based on cognitions, but in the

that go

skills

become

more aware of them than they

habitus

experts,

knowledge becomes embodied. Here situations and problems are under-

levels

stood "intuitively" and require

of the

all

and

sit-

contextually;

466). Bourdieu's point

is

we

that

which most

directly express the

work of domination" (Bourdieu,

are

all,

each one, experts in our class

Our mannerisms, speech, beginning the day we are born.

tastes,

and so on

There are two factors important

in the

production of habitus: education and

position.

are written

on our bodies

distance from necessity. In distance from necessity, necessity speaks of sustenance, the things necessary for biological existence. Distance from the necessities of

enables the upper classes to experience a world that trast,

the poor

away from

must always worry about

is

free

their daily existence.

that essential existence, they are freed

are free to practice activities that constitute an

from

end

life

from urgency. In conAs humans move

that constant worry,

in themselves.

and they

For example, you

179

180

SOCIAL STRUCTURES AND SYSTEMS

probably have hobbies. Perhaps you is

ends

in themselves.

The poorer

it

brings are

paramount

We

middle.

in the

We

and the emo-

on the uppermost part of the continuum, and enough, they might

I

eat?

They

eat anything, as long as

for

probably

have to be somewhat concerned about our

why do homeless people

is

life."

hood, but we also have time and energy to enjoy leisure

example,

them

no time or resources

should think of distance from necessity as a continuum. You and

somewhere

fall

they are

for

life

struggle for survival

in their lives, leaving

pursuing hobbies and "getting the most out of

do. There

I

activities;

classes don't have that luxury. Daily

make ends meet. This

a grind, a struggle just to

tional toll

or play guitar as

like to paint, act,

enjoyment that comes with those kinds of

a sense of intrinsic

it

shows

isn't

liveli-

are

in their every activity.

For

eat to survive. it

The

elite

activities.

And

poisonous.

they are hungry

Why

do working

classes or nearly poor people eat? For the same basic reason: The working classes

much

are

better off than the homeless, but they

by and large

still

mouth. However, because they are further removed from

more a

life,

what they

particular about

though the focus

eat,

"meat and potatoes" menu. Now, why do the

to survive,

will

live

hand

still

elite eat?

to

can be

necessity, they

be on the basics of

You could say they

eat

but they are never aware of that motivation. Food doesn't translate into

the basics of survival. Eating for the elite classes

them, plate presentation Thus, the further

more important than

is

removed we

from

are

is

an aesthetic experience. For

enough

getting

necessity, the

calories.

more we can be concerned

with abstract rather than essential issues. This ability to conceive of form rather

than function ize



aesthetics



dependent upon "a generalized capacity

is

to neutral-

ordinary urgencies and to bracket off practical ends, a durable inclination and

aptitude for practice without a practical function" (Bourdieu, 1979/1984,

And

this aesthetic

works

aesthetic of luxury, or

itself

out in every area. In

what Bourdieu

calls

economic necessity implies

physical reality

that

is

abstract

addition, distance from

reality. In

natural and physical desires and responses are

all

and dematerialized. The working

and economic

example, the upper-class

the pure gaze, prefers art that

while the popular taste wants art to represent

to be sublimated

art, for

p. 54).

class,

necessity, interact in

because

more

it is

immersed

in

physical ways through

touching, yelling, embracing, and so forth than do the distanced

elite.

A

lifetime of

exposure to worlds so constructed confers cultural pedigrees, manners of applying aesthetic

competences that

differ

by

class position.

This embodied tendency to see the world in abstract or concrete terms forced and elaborated through education. cation of the

elite

education places

and the working

us.

One obvious

classes

is

is

rein-

difference between the edu-

the kind of social position in which

The education system channels

individuals toward prestigious

or devalued positions. In doing so, education manipulates subjective aspirations (self-image)

and demands

(self-esteem).

experience has to do with the

Another

essential difference in educational

amount of rudimentary

scholastics required

—the

simple knowing and recognizing of facts versus more sophisticated knowledge. This factor varies by

At the lower

number of years of education, which

levels,

the simple recitation of facts

education, emphasis

is

is

in

turn varies by class position.

required. At the higher levels of

placed on critical and creative thought. At the highest levels

of education, even the idea

ot "fact"

is

understood

critically

and held

in

doubt.

The Replication of Class

Education also influences the kind of language we use to think and through which

we see the world. We can conceive of language as varying from complex to simple. More complex language forms have more extensive and intricate syntactical elements. Language is made up of more than words; it also has structure. Think about the sentences that you read in a romance novel and then compare them to those in an advanced textbook. In the textbook, they are longer and more complex, and that complexity increases as you move into more scholarly books. These more complex syntactical elements allow us to construct sentences that

thinking



this

is

The more formal education we

more complex

words and syntac-

are the

we

elements of our language. Because we don't just think with language,

tical

in

receive, the

correspond to multileveled

and thinking are functions of language.

true because both writing

think

language, the complexity of our language affects the complexity of our thinking.

And our thinking influences the way in which we see the world. Here's a simple example: Let's say

you go

my dog and then my dog, but if you

to the zoo, first with

with three different people. You'd have to blindfold and muzzle

could get her to one of the cages and then remove the blinders, she would

start

barking hysterically. She would be responding to the content of the beasts in front of her. All she would gerous,

and

Now

ing.

know

is

that those things in front of her smell funny, look dan-

picture yourself going with three different people, each

social class

and thus education

As you stand

in front of the

look

at all

tion.

She stands

those apes."

person has

and

level.

same cage

less

levels

is

same

college educa-

amazing." The third

never seen gorilla

in

terms of

content of an object, rather than

its

will

its

relationship

tend to see objects in

its

earlier, isn't

more

talk

middle

The simple and

creates

most

more

we

act in

Bourdieu's notion of

working

it is

class. Class, as

part of our body.

class or elite),

we

ious than Marx's

act

mid-

and experiencing the world, and "the most automatic insignificant techniques of the

accordance with our

how

is

from necessity and education determine

don't choose to act or not act according to class; as

system

sensitivity to the

body

—ways of walking

or blowing one's nose, ways of eating or talking" (Bourdieu, 1979/1984,

And,

organizing

classification

about the replication of

class (or

dle class. Differing experiences in distance

one's tastes, ways of seeing

the learned abil-

likely are the

simply a part of the social structure;

are not only categorized as

it is

matrix of relationships. Conversely, the

structure.

Bourdieu uses the idea of habitus to

tion.

gorilla,

of meaning and to classify them abstractly. This type of lin-

individual's classification system, the

gestures or apparently

dog, he says, "Man,

determined by education and

characterized by a low order of abstractedness

We

I've

system brings sensitivity to the structure of an object;

mentioned

a different

cage."

complex language system

syntactical elements to be of limited range.

I

my

to

says, "Gorillas are so

education and says, "Wow,

respond to an object

complex an

from

fight-

person has a high school education.

you showed

gorilla berengei all in the

Part of our class habitus, then,

ity to

first

that

of the cage and

to language. Individuals with a

terms of multiple

The

The second person you go with has had some

in front

a master's level

gorilla graueri,

guistic

down

are undoubtedly capable of killing her, but she's going to go

class

is

replicated

is

it's

p.

466).

We

the result of lifelong socializa-

we replicate our class. Thus, much more fundamental and insidclass,

and more complex than Weber's.

181

182

AND SYSTEMS

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

However, we would

fall

mark

short of the

we simply saw habitus

if

as a

structuring agent Bourdieu intentionally uses the concept (the idea originated with Aristotle) in order to talk

agent.

He

about the creative,

and inventive powers of the

active,

uses the concept to get out of the structuralist paradigm without falling

back into issues of consciousness and unconsciousness. tured but

vidual because class

completely objective

isn't

it



experts, habitus

In habitus, class

is

struc-

doesn't merely exist outside of the indi-

a significant part of her or his subjective experience. In habitus,

it's

structured but not structuring

is

it

The

intuitive.

is

cated subjectively and in daily

—because

as with high-caliber athletes

shows us how

idea of habitus, then, life,

and

class

is

and

repli-

introduces the potential for inspired

it

behaviors above and beyond one's class position. Indeed, the potential for exceeding one's class decisions est

is

much more

— most

powerful with Bourdieu's habitus than with conscious

athletes, musicians,

and other experts

will tell

you

that their high-

achievements come under the inspiration of visceral intuition rather than ratio-

nal processes.

through habitus that the practices of the dialectic are performed.

It is

Fields As we mind.

about Bourdieu's notion of the

talk

keep the rugby analogy in

field,

Just like in rugby, fields are delineated spaces

wherein "the game"

is

played.

Obviously, in Bourdieu's theoretical use of field, the parameters are not laid out using fences or lines

on the ground. The parameters of the

by networks or a field

may be

adamant

filled

we

that

themselves.

of connections

sets

It's

among

focus on the relationships

among

For example, while the different culture groups

all

is

the actors and not the agents

a region

may have

a lot in

(like theater

common,

it's

the universities in the United States

groups, reading clubs,

they probably do not form a

because there are no explicit objective relationships

hand, most

positions within

among and between the positions that sets the parameters of a field.

and choirs) within

tively linked

The

by individuals, groups, or organizations. However, Bourdieu

not the people, groups, or even interactions that are important;

the relationships

field

theoretical field are delineated

objective positions.

among them. On

do form

a field.

They

the other

are objec-

through accreditation, professional associations, federal guidelines, and

so forth. These relationships are sites of active practices; thus, the parameters of a field are

always at stake within the

field itself. In

other words, because fields are

defined mostly through relationships and relationships are active, which positions

and relationships go into making up the constitutes a field

is

field

fill

initially

by the

constantly changing. Therefore, what

always an empirical question.

Fields are directly related to capitals. that

is

The people, groups, and organizations

the different objective positions are hierarchically distributed in the field,

through the overall volume of

relative

More than

all

the capitals they possess and secondly

weight of the two particular kinds of capital, symbolic and cultural.

that,

each

field is different

because the various cultures can have

similar weights. For example, cultural capital

demic rather than economic in

economic

m

each, but they aren't

fields

than

in all

fields;

conversely,

academic ones.

is

much more important

economic

capital

All tour capitals

given the same weight.

It

is

is

dis-

in aca-

more important

or powers are present

the different weightings of

The Replication of Class

Cultural

183

Habitus

Capital

Legitimate

*

Structuring of

Replication?

Social Reality

Habitus and the Replication of Class

Figure 8.1

the cultures that define the

and

field,

it is

the field that gives validity and function

to the capitals.

While the parameters of any

cannot be determined prior to empirical

field

investigation, the important consideration for

between the empirical

field

responds to a symbolic

symbolic creates

field,

its

and legitimates the

social affairs in general.

and reproduce the

is

is

the correspondence field cor-

given legitimation and reality by those with

capital

relations

works to both construct and recognize

between and among positions within the

and symbolic

It is

Bourdieu

symbolic representation. The objective

which

Here symbolic

capital.

In this sense, the empirical

I've

and

fields are



it

field.

both constitutive of class and of

the symbolic field that people use to view, understand,

objective.

pictured Bourdieu's basic theory of class structuring in Figure 8.1.

When

mind Bourdieu's intent with open concepts. This model reading the model, keep something we can use to help us see the world. The is simply a heuristic device in



on the

figure starts

far left

with the objective

But for Bourdieu, the objective replication,

and

that

is

that the objective field

symbolic

capital.

field isn't

where many sociologists

becomes

real

The use of symbolic

initial

and the distribution of

stop.

it

further in

symbolic

field,

which

The exercise of symbolic

in

capital,

distribution of capitals, creates cultural capital that varies by

distance from necessity and by education.

And

cultural capital produces the inter-

nal structuring of class: habitus. But notice that the tial

Bourdieu takes

and

replicable through the use of

capital creates the field.

capitals.

to account for class reality

and potentially

turn orders and makes real the objective

along with the

field

enough

of habitus to replicate

is

held in question



it

model

is

indicates that the poten-

habitus exercised in linguistic

markets and symbolic struggles that decides the question.

Concepts and Theory: Replicating Class Markets

Linguistic Bourdieu is

(

1991

)

says that "every speech act and,

an encounter between two independent forces

more

(p. 37).

generally, every action"

One

of those forces

is

184

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

AND SYSTEMS

habitus, particularly in our tendency to speak

comes from the

cultural capital. The other force

A

market

linguistic

"a system of relations

is

and

as a system of specific sanctions linguistic

The

linguistic

of

of force which impose themselves

and thereby help fashion products" (Bourdieu

'price' of linguistic

market

is

any other market:

like

profit are

symbols and discourses. The notion of

as

level

&

p. 145).

Here exchange and

to seek profit.

our

that reveal

structures of the linguistic market.

specific censorship,

production by determining the

Wacquant, 1992,

and say things

It's

of exchange and a place

a place

sought through linguistic elements such

a free

market

an ideal type:

like

is

It's

an

idea against which empirical instances can be measured. All markets are structured

one degree or another, and

to

One

turing.

linguistic

markets have a

of the principal ways they are structured

Every society has formalized

fairly

high degree of struc-

through formal language.

language. Even in the case where the nation

its

Canada, the languages are

might be bilingual, such

as

guage comes as a

result

of the unification of the

education system

is

still

state,

formalized. Standard lan-

economy, and

culture.

We

remember times

all

would correct our speech ("there

in

no such word

is

grammar

school

when

as ain't"). In the univer-

happens, but mostly through the application of stringent

sity, this still

The

used to impose restrictions on popular modes of speech and to

propagate the standard language. teachers

is

criteria for

writing.

Linguistic markets are also structured through various configurations of the capitals

and the empirical

relative

weights of the capitals

symbolic capital and

to

As we've seen, empirical

field.



so, for

artistic fields

need and use economic

capital.

example, religious

more import

The same

markets are defined through the

fields are

relative

is

defined by the

more weight

fields give

to cultural capital, but they both

true with linguistic markets. Linguistic

weights of the capitals and by the different

discourses that are valued. For example, the linguistic market of sociology ily

based on cultural

to

know

capital.

And

amount about

a fair

in

order to do well

Karl Marx, Emile

in that

is

heav-

market, you would have

Durkheim, Michel Foucault, Pierre

Bourdieu, Dorothy Smith, and so forth. Linguistic markets are also structured by the empirical

field, in

particular

by the gaps and asymmetries that

positions in the field (by their placement and position of capitals,

more powerful than

in a field are

others).

between

exist

some

positions

These empirical inequalities help struc-

ture the exchanges that take place within a linguistic market.

When guistic

— meaningful

people interact with one another, they perform speech acts

kinds of behaviors that are related to language. In a speech

act,

habitus and

markets come together. In other words, the person's embodied

and cultural

lin-

class position

capital are given a certain standing or evaluation within the linguistic

market. The linguistic market contains the requirements of formal language; the salient

contour of capitals; and the objective, unequal distribution of power within

the empirical Let

me

conference, a

field.

give I

number of

you three examples from

my own

life.

When

I

go to a professional

present papers to and meet with other academics. different sources,

among them

habitus has

are training in etiquette by a British

mother and many years spent studying scholarly discourse. The linguistic market in academia

My

is

texts

and engaging

in

academic

formed by the emphasis on

cultural

The Replication of Class

and symbolic

some people have more powerful

Each encounter, each speech I

tend to

home"

"feel at

in the empirical field held

and by the positions

capital,

at the conference;

informed by these

act, is

and

(habitus),

such circumstances,

issues. In

and arguing with

interact freely, bantering

I

by everyone

positions and others less so.

other academics in a kind of "one-upmanship" tournament.

This weekend,

Here the

will

I

market

linguistic

that goes along with is

made up of

be going to the annual Christmas party

much more

from what

it

was

capital

my

differences,

at the professional

my wife's

and the

And

highly prized.

work.

cultural capital

the empirical field

and relationships achieved

differing positions

American business. Because of these ferent here

Economic

different.

is

are

it

at

in the struggle of

market position

conference. In

fact,

is

quite dif-

have no mar-

I



my habitus remains the same. The way talk the words use and the way phrase my sentences is very different from the other people at this event. The tempo of my speech is different (it's much slower) as is the way walk try and avoid speech acts. When and hold myself. In this kind of situation, ket position. Worse,

I

I



I

I

I

encounters are unavoidable, have to

say,

the

way

I

say

it,

I

say as

little

and even the tempo of

These two different examples

because

as possible

my speech

know

I

won't

that

what

fit in.

an extremely important point

illustrate

I

in

Bourdieu's theory: Individuals in a given market recognize their institutional position,

have a sense of

how their

habitus relates to the present market, and anticipate

my professional

differing profits of distinction. In

conference example,

high rewards and distinction; but in the office party example,

and few rewards. In situations

tinction

as a self-sanctioning

like

it

isn't silly

when

it

comes

encounters with government

can

relate to so that

important speech

seldom used

endowed with

silly

and so

clearly

promotions,

forth.

but

a type of legitimacy.

We

don't see

is

in their

own

legal confrontations,

gave you an example that

I

in other,

we

more

Symbolic power it

is

power

on the part of those

form and thereby

an invisible power and

power; we see

as

the oppressed are participating in their tion presupposes,

symbolic violence. In society, power

translated into symbolic

ing as legitimate the hierarchical relations of

is

dis-

with reference to an office party,

understand what happens

acts are the arena of

as coercive force,

erally misrecognized:

which

low

acts.

These kinds of speech is

officials,

anticipate

the office example, anticipation acts

to job interviews,

we could more

I

anticipate

mechanism through which individuals participate

domination. Perhaps "domination" sounds but

I

it

in

is

gen-

as legitimate. In recogniz-

which they are embedded,

own domination: "All symbolic dominawho submit to it, a form of complicity

neither passive submission to external constraint nor a free adherence

to values. ...

It

is

inscribed, in a practical state, in dispositions

which are impal-

pably inculcated, through a long and slow process of acquisition, by the sanctions

of the linguistic market" (Bourdieu, 1991, pp. 50-51).

My

third

among

example

is

from

a conversation with

equals, formal linguistic markets have

my

little if

wife. In

most conversations

any power.

We

talk

and joke

around, paying no attention to the demands of proper speech. I'm certain that

you can think of multitudes of such speech at

the

gym

or in your apartment.

that way, unless

one of you has

And a

acts: talking

with friends

at a cafe

or

those kinds of speech acts will always stay

higher education or a greater distance from

185

186

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

necessity

AND SYSTEMS



that

is,

unless vour habitus

come

markets usually won't

linguistic

different Even

is

into play. But they can. "Every linguistic

exchange contains the potentiality of an act of power, and it

who occupy asymmetric

involves agents

relevant capital" tells

I

Bourdieu

& Wacqant,

different, the potential for

more

the

all

so

when

positions in the distribution of the

1992,

p. 145,

emphasis

where the market position

us in such situations,

such cases, however,

in

is

original).

Bourdieu

different or the habitus

power and symbolic violence

only

is

is

set aside for the

moment.

Symbolic Struggle change for Bourdieu

Social

given Bourdieu's emphasis

rooted in symbolic struggles, which makes sense

is

on symbolic

capital

and power. Part of

that struggle

occurs within the speech act or encounter. As we've seen, encounters are structured

by markets of differing distinction, and habitus expresses

We

those markets.

silence ourselves,

habitus

is

will feel at

all

home

itself

or foreign in an encounter;

naturally within

we

will

speak up or

without thought. However, we also have to keep in mind that

embodied and expresses

our intuitions can lead us

itself

board, the music stage, or the speech

through intuitive

And sometimes field, the game

feelings.

moves, whether on the sports

to brilliant

act. Just so,

our habitus

at

times can lead us to

speech acts that defy our cultural, symbolic, economic, or social standings.

This kind of symbolic struggle can bring gives us hints

about

some incremental change. Bourdieu can occur, but keep in mind that

how more dynamic change

theory of social change or revolution. Bourdieu allows that there are two

his isn't a

methods by which

a

may be

symbolic struggle

carried out,

other subjectively. In both cases, symbolic disruption viduals or groups

may

act in

example of this method

is

is

one objectively and the

the key. Objectively, indi-

such a way as to display certain counter-realities. His

group demonstrations held to manifest the

size, strength,

and cohesiveness of the disenfranchised. This type of symbolic action disrupts the taken-for-grantedness that

all

systems of oppression must

work within



it

offers

an objective case that things are not what they seem. Subjectively, individuals or

groups

may

try

and transform the categories con-

structed by symbolic capital through which the social world

is

perceived.

On

the

may be accomplished through insults, rumors, questions, and A good example of this approach is found in bell hooks's (1989) book

individual level, this the

like.

Talking Hack: Thinking Feminist, 'Flunking Black: "It back,' that

is

no mere gesture of empty words,

object to subject

Groups may most

— the

is

that act of speech, of 'talking

the expression of

moving from

liberated voice" (p. 9).

also operate in this

typical of these strategies

reconstructing

that

is

way by employing more

political strategies.

the redefinition of history; that

is

a past fitted to the

needs

of the present"

is,

The

"retrospectively

(Bourdieu, 1989,

p. 21).

But

notice with each of these kinds of struggle, a response from those with symbolic capital

would be required. These disruptions could bring attention

symbolic power would be necessary field fust

And then the objective

to give

field.

it

life

to the cause, but

and substance within the symbolic

The Replication of Class

187

Summary Bourdieu's basic approach

With

constructivist structuralism.

is

attempting to give us a point of view that gives

Bourdieu

is

structure

and agency. There

turalism, between agency

uses to understand

is

and

this idea,

weight to

full

tension between constructivism and struc-

structure,

how both can

and

coexist.

that tension that

it is

The tension

is

Bourdieu

and

a dialectic

is

played out in symbolic markets and social practices.

Bourdieu to

specifically

is

Marx, Bourdieu sees

concerned with the reproduction of class replicated

class. In

contrast

through symbolic violence rather than

overt oppression. Bourdieu argues that there are four types of capital: eco-

nomic,

social, cultural,

and symbolic. The

latter

two are

his greatest concern.

Symbolic capital has the power to create positions within the symbolic and objective fields.

The

mined though the

become

real

objective field refers to social positions that are deter-

distributions of the four capitals. But these positions don't

names them. This naming

capital

someone with symbolic

or meaningful for us unless and until

groups that occupy effects in that

it

it,

gives the position,

social viability.

and the individuals and

The symbolic

field

has independent

can be manipulated by those with symbolic

capital;

people

use the symbolic field to view, understand, and reproduce the objective

Cultural capital refers to the social

tive fields. Cultural capital

is

particularly important because

embodied. This embodiment of cultural habitus: the

and

sity

habitus

way

level is

and speech is

body

exists

and

is

it

becomes

the individual's

used in society. Distance from neces-

is

replicated through the

economic

capital. Class

embodied, nonconscious behaviors

acts of individuals.

expressed in linguistic markets. Linguistic markets are structured capitals.

One's position within the mar-

determined by different rankings on the capitals and the embodied

ity to

acts

becomes

tastes

and objec-

of education are two of the most important ways in which

by different weightings of the various ket

is

capital

structured, both of which are related to

position, then,

Habitus

the

and

skills, habits, linguistic abilities,

that individuals have as a result of their position in the symbolic

field.

perform within the market. Linguistic markets are played out

where individuals sense how

their habitus relates to the

in

abil-

speech

market and thus

anticipate differing profits of distinction. This nonconscious sense provides

the basis for symbolic violence: Anticipating few rewards in acts where they are "outclassed," individuals simultaneously sanction themselves

mate the hierarchical There

is,

relations of class

and

legiti-

and power.

however, the possibility of symbolic struggle. The struggle involves

symbolic disruption.

First,

individuals or groups can act in such a

objectively picture alternative possibilities. This

is

way

as to

what we normally think

of as social movements or demonstrations. But because Bourdieu sees the

importance of symbolic power

in the replication

these demonstrations as pictures issues that disrupt

— they

of

class,

he understands

are objective images of symbolic

the taken-for-grantedness in which oppression

must

.

188

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

AND SYSTEMS Second, individuals and groups can challenge the subjective

operate.

meanings

intrinsic within the

symbolic

field. In

daily speech acts, the indi-

vidual can disrupt the normality of the symbolic field through insults, jokes,

questions, rumors, and so on.

by redefining

Groups can

way things

also challenge "the

are"

history.

Building Your Theory Toolbox Learning More •

— Primary Sources

recommend

I

that you begin your exploration of Bourdieu with the

following: o

Distinction: Press,

Harvard University

and symbolic power. Sociological

Theory,

o

Social space

o

Language and symbolic power, Harvard

o

An

o

Acts of resistance: Against the tyranny of the market,

14-25, 1989.

7,

University Press,

991

1

Chicago

invitation to reflexive sociology, University of

Learning More •

A social critique of the judgment of taste,

1984.

Press,

New

Press,

1992. 1

999.

— Secondary Sources

There are a number of good secondary sources. The two

I

find

most

helpful are

David Swartz: Culture and power: The sociology of Pierre Bourdieu,

o

University of

Press,

Richard Jenkins: Pierre

o

Check

Chicago

It

Out





Web



Symbolic differences and

Byte

(Eds.):

Erik

01in Wright: Measuring Class Inequality

Chicago

&

Michele Lamont

identity:

Cultivating differences: Symbolic boundaries

inequality, University of •

1998.

Bourdieu (Key Sociologists), Routledge, 2002.

Press,

Marcel Fournier

and the making of

1993.

Overcoming dichotomies: See Anthony Giddens

in this

book, Chapter 12.

Seeing the World •

After reading

and understanding

this chapter,

you should be able to

answer the following questions (remember to answer them o

Explain

Bourdieu's

answer, be certain

constructive

structuralism

approaches and

How

o

What

o

How

In

your

to define and explain the problems associated with

the social physics (structural) and social

o

theoretically):

approach.

how

phenomenology

(subjective)

Bourdieu's approach counters both.

are symbolic fields produced? is

habitus and

how

is it

produced?

are class inequalities replicated,

your answer, be certain to explain

and the

role that habitus plays.

and how

linguistic

is

class

contingent 7

In

markets, symbolic violence,

The Replication of Class

Engaging the World •

Use Bourdieu's theory to describe and explain the differences between the

way you

talk

with your best friend versus the

way you

talk

with your

theory professor. •

Using Bourdieu's take on misrecognition, analyze the following ideas:

and

race, gender, in

sexuality.

What

kinds of things must

Look up Bourdieu's notion of doxa (1972/1993,

How do

p. 3;

doxa and symbolic violence work together

and

race, gender, •

we

misrecognize

order for these to work as part of the symbolic violence of this society?

know

best (race, gender,

Using what you already know, analyze that structure

sexuality, religion). .

p. 68).

the oppression of

sexuality?

Choose the structure of inequality that you using Figure 8.1

1980/1990,

in

How would

approaching the study of inequality change

using Bourdieu?

Weaving the Threads •

Compare and

contrast Bourdieu's constructivist structuralism with either

Blau's or Collins's theory of the

micro-macro

to point out the individual similarities tion to the

and

link.

Obviously, you will

differences, but also

approaches themselves. What are the differences between

approaching the structure/subject debate from a micro-macro thinking about •

In

what ways

(Blau)?

How



it

link

same? What do we gain or

lose by thinking of

different markets?

Both Berger and Luckmann and Bourdieu give us theories based on

theories

form

two

of the

most important differences between

cul-

their

and explain them. Can these differences be brought together to

a fuller theory of culture?

Compare and

If

so,

how?

contrast Bourdieu's ideas of linguistic markets and symbolic

violence with Collins's (Chapter 5) idea of deference and als.

and

terms of doing away with the dichotomy?

are linguistic exchanges different from social exchanges

ture. Pick at least



in

are they the

two

these as

want

pay atten-

How

demeanor

ritu-

could these ideas be brought together to form a more robust

theory of stratification

in

everyday encounters?

189

CHAPTER

9

Global Capitalism and the Decline of American

Hegemony Immanuel

Wallerstein (1930-)

Photo: Courtesy of Immanuel Wallerstein.

191

192

AND SYSTEMS

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

194

Wallerstein's Perspective: World-Systems Critique

Globality

1

Historicity

94 1

94

Concepts and Theory: The Dialectics of Capitalism

The Division of Labor and Exploitation

Accumulation and Overproduction

1

1

1

95

96

97

Concepts and Theory: The End of the World as World-Empires and World-Economies

We Know 1

Waves 201 The Modern Crisis 203 Structural and Cultural Signs of the End Summary 209 210 Building Your Theory Toolbox

It

1

99

99

Kondratieff

So

book, we've considered what happens in social situations,

far in this

meaning and

self are

formed and maintained, and how

influence our existence. tions take a

206

quantum

leap.

With the work of Immanuel

We move

from

how

social structures

Wallerstein, our ques-

social structures to systems.

As

I

men-

tioned in the section introduction, the idea of structure implies systems. But most structuralists leave system qualities in the

tures

background and look

Both Wallerstein and Niklas Luhmann,

in the next chapter, bring the idea

some massive

systems to the forefront and ask us to think about tions.

Not only do they ask us

up

us

but

how

is

We

hear a

that separate nations can exist

it

aren't

ask,

how

are the United States

that's

not

all.

and

and function together

Or,

Wallerstein and

Luhmann

How

history.

we could

do they depend

create

one another?

also ask us to think about history.

We can

from the advent of ideographic writing

we can

as a system?

parts. In this sense

Brazil part of each other?

There are multiple ways of talking about ilization

move

simply a collection of independent things; rather, a system

upon each other? More importantly, how do they influence and But

processes and rela-

about globalization today,

lot

group of interdependent and mutually constituting

a

of social

to consider a single society as a system, but they

about the world system.

to think

Remember, systems is

at specific struc-

and how they function.

categorize time periods in terms of

to the

talk

about the stages of

dawn

civ-

of the computer age.

economic technologies, with our

epochs then running from hunting and gathering societies to agrarian

and postindustrial. Or, we can divide history up

in

to industrial

terms of culture, such as the

Medieval, Renaissance, Classical, and Romantic periods. Wallerstein

and Luhmann

sociology student, you already

aware of

it

talk

about our historical period

know about

as

modernity. As a

the idea of modernity, whether you are

or not. This concept of modernity was a leading concern for

social theorists.

So

central

was

this issue that in

classical,

order to understand the transition

Hegemony

Global Capitalism and the Decline of American

from

traditional societies to

modern

societies,

typologies, such as Tonnies's gemeinschaft

and organic

And most Spencer it

solidarity,

and

some

theorists constructed social

gesellschaft,

Durkheim's mechanical

and Simmel's organic and rational group memberships.

of the classical theorists had an idea of modernity's central dynamic: For

was structural

it

differentiation, for

was rationalization, and for Durkheim

it

Marx

it

was capitalism, For Weber

was population density and the division

of labor. But,

ence

no matter how we divide

life,

and

in a

it

up, one thing

fundamental way our

is

certain: Historical periods influ-

epoch matters. Think about

historical

way: You as an individual exist within social situations. Those situations

this

it

exist

within social structures, which in turn exist within society. Societies exist within

systems of societies, and those systems are historically specific. Thus, we've been

moving up

that

and stronger

the social ladder to consider bigger and bigger contexts

and stronger

influences. Unfortunately, these contexts

most people

are least aware of; but

and influences are the ones

our theorists aim

to

change

that.

know how capitalism He also wants to know why the revooccurred. And he is particularly interested in

Wallerstein asks big questions. Like Marx, he wants to influences

all

Marx

lution that the

of society and the entire globe. predicted hasn't yet

end of the world

The

as

we know

it.

Essential Wallerstein

Biography Immanuel Wallerstein was born

in

New

York City on September 30, 1930. He

attended Columbia University where he received (1954),

and Ph.D. (1959). Wallerstein has

sities

around the globe, including the Universite

Libre

de

was

to his retirement

Amsterdam,

7-Denis-Diderot, Universite

Paris

and Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico.

Bruxelles,

teaching post

his bachelor's (1951), master's

also formally studied at various univer-

at

in

British

Binghamton

University (SUNY),

His primary

where he taught from 1976

1999. However, he has also held

visiting professor posts in

Columbia, and the Chinese University of Hong Kong, as well

as several other locations.

In

addition to

many

professional posts, he has served

as president of the International Sociological Association

Fernand Braudel Center for the Study of Economies,

and

director of the

Historical Systems,

and

Civilizations.

Passionate Curiosity Wallerstein

how ism,

is

driven to

first critically

understand (through a Marxian perspective)

the nations of the world are joined together

and second to

find

ways to

politically act to

in

a global system of capital-

change that system.

Keys to Knowing world-systems, division of labor, exploitation, overproduction, capitalist states

and quasi-monopolies,

core, periphery, external areas, world-empires

economies, Kondratieff waves

and world-

193

194

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

AND SYSTEMS

Wallerstein's Perspective: World-Systems Critique Wallerstein uses a Marxian perspective to critique global capitalism. As such, there

two main strands

are

Marxian theory and world systems. I'm

in his perspective:

going to hold off talking about his Marxian roots until we get to Wallerstein's theory.

I

how his

think this will better help us see

tems, however,

We want

is

theory works. The idea of world sys-

unique perspective and thus requires some explanation up

a

to specifically address

two

issues: globality

and

front.

historicity.

Globality Wallerstein intentionally uses the is

hyphen

in

world-system to emphasize that he

way of

talking about systems that constitute a world or a distinct

touched on the idea of systems

remind you

that this

approach looks

at society as

part systemically influencing the others.

A

upon

do; Peru

is

pressuring globality.

it

isn't

it

environment. Thus, world-

is

it

it is

this idea, Wallerstein

is

form

a system.

world-

to

something every nation

caught in a global

to change. Wallerstein captures this systemic

With

in response to systemic-

from the outside. For example, according

capitalist

among

will

system that

is

approach with the idea of

introducing a distinct level of analysis.

an analysis that looks at the relationships ties that

its

change

"modernizing" because

modernizing because

We me

systems approach additionally places

systems analysis argues that nations or collectives factors that press

let

an interrelated whole, with every

emphasis on the relationship between the system and

systems analysis, Peru

existing.

introduction to this section, but

in the

It is

nations and other political enti-

Thus, the systemic factors cut across cultural and

political

boundaries and create an "integrated zone of activity and institutions which obey certain systemic rules" (Wallerstein, 2004, p. 17).

The

idea of systems

globality

and

is

important because

globalization. Globalization

is

it

points out the differences between

a

term that was coined

in the early

1990s to describe "the closer integration of the countries and peoples of the world

which has been brought about by the enormous reduction of costs of transporta-

and communication, and the breaking down of the

tion

ratification barriers to the

flows of goods, services, capital, knowledge, and (to a lesser extent) people across

borders"

(Stiglitz,

2003,

p. 9).

While the boundaries of what

definition of globalization are unclear,

nomenon, one

that

is

it is

clear that

cal

and

is

to

be included

in the

seen as an economic phe-

focused on free trade. In this economy, as in most economists'

models, market forces and invisible hands operate to control prices

it is

and the behaviors of

reified. Globality,

on the other hand,

both the economy and relations

like devices

of natural selection

firms. Wallerstein sees these forces as mysti-

among

explicates the systemic properties of

nations.

Historicity It

soci.il

through for

actors such as nations, institutions,

and groups are

a specific system, then the history of that system

understanding

how

the system

is

working

is

related to each other

extremely important

presently. Wallerstein picked

up the

— Hegemony

Global Capitalism and the Decline of American

195

notions of structural time and cyclical process from French historian and educator

Fernand Braudel. Braudel

we

are

most

The

event-dominated

criticized

familiar, as being too idiographic

and

prefix "idio" specifically refers to the individual or one's

knowledge, then,

approach

Abraham Lincoln and

is

the Civil

to

understand U.S. history

of systematic social

facts, but, rather,

through unique events and felt

in

War and Martin Luther King

movement. Such an understanding doesn't

Braudel

Jr.

and the

of

like

civil rights

perceives historical change as occurring

it

political figures.

that this kind of history

knowledge. The word nomothetic

The

An example

terms of things

see changes through history as the result

is

dust and

tells

us nothing about the true

historical processes. Yet Braudel also criticized the opposite

law.

own. Idiographic

focused on unique individuals and their events.

is

this event history

kind with which

history, the

political.

is

approach, nomothetic

Greek word nomos, which means

related to the

goal in seeking nomothetic knowledge, like that of science,

to discover

is

the abstract and universal laws that underpin the physical universe. According to

when nomothetic knowledge

Braudel,

is

sought in the social sciences,

it

more

often

than not creates mythical, grand stories that legitimate the search for universal laws instead of explaining historical social history. Wallerstein's idea of historicity lies

between the ideographic focus on events and

the law-like knowledge of science. Rather than focusing

on

events, Wallerstein's

approach concentrates on the history of structures within a world-system. For example, capitalism

a

is

have always been people

world-system that has

who

italism of modernity, the kind that italism,"

from

its

is

particular history. There profit,

Weber 1904-1905/2002) termed

unique to a particular time period.

An

account of rational capitalism

beginnings, from around the 16th century, that would include

relations

is

what Wallerstein has

in

Historicity thus includes the

and so

it

is

and

all

the prin-

their systemic

mind.

centered

is

time within the structures. Wallerstein

have histories, and

forth)

unique variable of time. In taking account of

world-systems rather than event history, historicity cyclical

but the cap-

"rational cap-

(

cipal players (such as nations, firms, households,

and the

own

its

have produced products to make a

is

upon

structural time

telling us that structures

the history of structures with which

we should be con-

cerned, rather than events, because structures set the frames within which

behavior and meaning take place. Structures have

life

they die, and within that span there are cyclical processes. Here see Wallerstein's

Marxian roots

clearly.

The

human

spans, they are born

and

we begin

to

idea of structural change occurring

through cycles comes from Marx's notion of the dialectic (please see Chapter 2 for an introduction to ory,

this

important concept). As we move through Wallerstein's the-

keep in mind the idea of structural change through dialectical oppositions

pay attention to the contradictions that are intrinsic to capitalism.

Concepts and Theory: The Dialectics of Capitalism Wallerstein's critique

is

says needs to be done:

essentially a

He

Marxian

critique.

Marx did what

Wallerstein

focused on structures moving through cyclical time.

196

AND SYSTEMS

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

He was

particularly interested in capitalism

elements of capitalism are

— and,

according to Wallerstein, the

fed the only features that can truly create

in

system today. Certain of Marx's concepts, then, have special importance ing and critiquing the world-system. exploitation, accumulation,

Among them

and overproduction.

I

will

a

world-

in explain-

are the division of labor,

be explaining these concepts

before putting them into place in Wallerstein's theory.

The Division of Labor and Exploitation The

division of labor

is

some ways, it

spective; in

is

one of the more important elements

Marx

the most important.

of species being. Species being contains two ideas: exists

is

the

Marxian per-

theory with the idea

starts his

First,

in the

way

the

human

species

through creative production; second, humans become conscious of their

existence (or being) through the mirror effect of the product. Humanity, then,

defined and knows

itself

through creative production. There

is,

is

then, an intimate

connection between producer and product: The very existence of the product define* the nature of the producer. If

you think about

it,

we acknowledge

this

connection

we meet someone new. One of the first questions we ask a new person is, "What do you do?" In doing so, we assume the connection between what people

every time

do and who they

are.

For Wallerstein, the importance of the division of labor characteristic of an

of

human

behavior; without

labor creates

that

is

economic world-system. Labor, of course,

some of

the

it

we would

cease to exist.

most basic kinds of

is

it is

the defining

an essential form

By extension, the division of

social relationships; these relation-

ships are, by definition, relations of dependency. In our division of labor,

upon each other

to

perform the work that we do not.

for food production,

depend upon the farmer

and the farmer depends upon teachers

children. These relations of

units into a structured is

I

dependency connect

to educate her or his

different people

whole or system. Wallerstein argues

connected by the current

we depend

and other

social

that the world-system

of labor: World-systems are defined

capitalist division

"quite simply as a unit with a single division of labor

and multiple cultural systems"

(Wallerstein, 2000, p. 75). Multiple cultural systems are included because world-

systems connect different societies and cultures.

The important I

went into some

as

we go through

measurable

feature of this division of labor

detail defining exploitation in

the next section, keep in

entity;

it

is

is

that

Chapter

mind two

it is

7,

so

based on exploitation. I

won't do so now. But

things: First, exploitation

is

a

the difference between what a worker gets paid and what

she or he produces. Different societies can have different levels of exploitation. For

we compare the situation of automobile workers in the United States we will see that the level of exploitation is higher in Mexico. The second thing to keep in mind is that exploitation is fundamental to capitalism. example,

if

with those in Mexico,

Surplus labor and exploitation are the places from which profit comes and are thus necessary for capitalism.

What

is

important to see here

is

that profit

is

based on exploitation and there are

limitations to exploitation. Yet the drive for exploitation doesn't definition are driven to increase profits.

The search

for

let

up; capitalists by

new means of exploitation,

Global Capitalism and the Decline of American

Hegemony

then, eventually transcends national boundaries: Capitalists export exploitation.

Because of the limitations on the exploitation of workers in advanced countries

—due primarily

to the effects of worker

movements,

the natural limitations of technological innovation kets

where the

level

Wallerstein's theory

of exploitation is

based upon

tures the division of labor

higher.

is

it.

It is

upon which

capitalist

and

state legislation,

— firms seek other labor mar-

Marx had

a

vague notion of

this,

but

the exportation of exploitation that struc-

the

world-economy

is

based.

Accumulation and Overproduction We

know what modern capitalism is: It is the investment of money in order to make more money (profit). As Wallerstein (2004) says, "we are in a capitalist system only when the system gives priority to the endless accumulation of capital" (p. 24, emphasis original). We see the drive to make money in order to make more money all around us; but most people only think about the personal effects this all

kind of capitalism has are the effects

(like the fact that Bill

Gates

is

worth $46.6

billion).

on the economy? Most Americans would probably say

on the economy

is

a

good one: continually expanding

profits

and higher standards

of living. Perhaps, but Wallerstein wants us to see that something else

order to fully understand what he has in mind,

well. In

role of It's

government

in the endless pursuit

But what

that the effect

we need

is

going on as

to think about the

of the accumulation of capital.

obvious that for capitalism to work,

it

needs a strong state system. The state

provides the centralized production and control of money; creates and enforces laws that grant private property rights; supplies the regulation of markets, national borders, inter-organizational relations; that the state does in a capitalist system.

and so

But there

forth.

is

something

else

We generally assume that the firm that pays

the cost enjoys the benefits, as in the capitalist invests the

money

so she or he can

enjoy the profit. However, the state actually decides what proportion of the costs of production will be paid by the firm. In this sense, capitalists are subsidized by the state.

There are three kinds of costs that the

state subsidizes: the costs associated

transportation, toxicity, and the exhaustion of raw materials. Firms rarely

pay the

full

structure

state, for

such things as road systems. Almost

tion produces toxicity, whether noxious gases, waste, or

environment.

How

always an issue.

The

and when these least

isn't a

firms rarely pay these costs.

and who pays

for

to the

them

is

problem), but the costs are eventually paid and

When

restore or recreate the materials.

up raw

materials; but again

resources are depleted, the state steps in to

Economists

refer to the

duction that are paid by the state as externalized

However

produc-

some kind of change

costs are incurred

usually by the state. Capitalist production also uses

all

all

expensive methods are short-term and evasive (dumping

the waste, pretending there

matter not

ever

cost of transporting their goods; the bulk of the cost for this infra-

borne by the

is

if

with

costs,

expenses of capitalist pro-

and we

will see that in this

states are created equal.

helpful these externalized costs are to the pursuit of accumulation,

states that contain the

most successful

a structure for quasi-monopolies.

capitalist enterprises

A monopoly

is

do more: They provide

defined as the exclusive control

197

198

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

of

AND SYSTEMS

market or the means of production; quasi-monopolies don't have exclusive

a

control but they do have considerable control. W.illei stein

make

argues that totally free markets would

tion of capital impossible. Totally free markets imply that

means of production

and available

are free

to

all

a very large

number of

is

number of buyers, and

participants have complete

perfect market,

a

that

all

would always be possible

it

factors influencing the

all

goods and services flow

firms, that

without restriction, that there

sikh

the endless accumula-

and

a

is

knowledge. "In

full

down

would destroy the

basic underpinnings of capitalism (Wallerstein, 2004, pp. 25-26).

market

a very large

for the buyers to bargain

the sellers to an absolutely minuscule level of profit," which

totally free

and

sellers

The converse of a

monopoly, and monopolized processes are

far

more

lucra-

than those of the free market. Thus, the perfect situation for a capitalist firm

tive

to have monopolistic control;

would then be able

it

lation of capital with the greatest efficiency

The most important way

in

which

and

is

pursue the endless accumu-

to

success.

quasi-monopolies

states facilitate

is

through

patent laws that grant exclusive production rights for an invention for a certain

number of years. This in a

The

capital.

The

state

guarantee allows companies to gain high

levels

of profit

monopolistic market for long enough to obtain considerable accumulation of practice of granting patents also results in a cycle of leading products. successful firms actively market a patented product as long as

and most

largest

the profit margin

is

high.

As soon

product becomes

as the

less profitable

through

given over to less profitable companies, with

more open competition,

the product

the original firm creating

new leading products. Producers of the unpatented product

engage

is

competition but with

in freer

less profit.

We're about ready to discuss the effect of all

Marx 1932/1978c) argues

ingredient.

(

tion of the first

need

first

.

.

.

leads to

historical act" (p. 156). In other

words,

no limitation placed upon the

is

Now think about what

this

the definition of

capital

(it's

by the

state,

we need to throw in one more

many other things.

needs; and

create additional or secondary "needs."

there

but

that "life involves before everything else eat-

ing and drinking, a habitation, clothing and

new

this,

this

human

.

.

.

that the satisfac-

production of new needs

beings have the unique ability to

proliferation of commodities.

means: Capitalists are driven to endlessly accumulate

modern

capitalism). In this pursuit they are subsidized

support of quasi-monopolies means that

new needs and

new products

thus produce and buy

state's

are always being created,

being produced. And, by nature,

still

the

And, because people can create new needs,

most importantly through the support of quasi-monopolies. The

with the older ones

is

new commodities

human

beings create

endlessly. Together, the

continuous expansion of commodification and production inevitably leads to overproduction

—too

continue to create longer bear

it.

much production

new and produce

for the current

existing

Therefore, overproduction

that inexorably leads to

is

demand.

commodities a

until the

Capitalists will

market

will

no

fundamental property of capitalism

production cutbacks, worker

layoffs,

and,

in

due course,

economic downturns. Interestingly, the issue of

culture.

Commenting on

saying that "Karl

a

overproduction has entered the mindset of popular

slow holiday season, Time magazine carried an

Marx theorized

that capitalism

was condemned

article

to repeated

Global Capitalism and the Decline of American

depressions because malls

of cycles

of overproduction.'

week and seen the heavy discounting

last

the emergence of cut-rate sites like

doubt have 2001,

felt

.

.

.

if

Marx had

—or looked on the

Amazon. corn's new

hit the

199

shopping

Internet

outlet store

Hegemony

and seen

—he would no

vindicated" (Cohen, Baumohl, Buia, Roston, Ressner,

& Thompson,

p. 21).

The

and exploitation work

cycles of overproduction

in

tandem, both of them

demand

driven by accumulation. Accumulation increases the

for labor

and product

innovation. State protection through patent rights, tax incentives, and the like

quasi-monopoly that

creates a state sanctioned

tion, better enabling the firm to

demand

for labor.

Over time, the demand

pool, which drives wages up and

nomic slowdown, the

and of

in

itself

increases accumula-

engage in product innovation and increasing the for labor decreases the size of the labor

down, which,

profits

in turn, precipitates

and the search

collapse of small businesses,

for

an eco-

new methods

of exploitation through technological innovation in the work process or exporting exploitation. In the

medium

run, exporting exploitation

the two because technologies

become

is

more

the

efficient of

diffused throughout the business sector.

Exporting exploitation implies the movement of specific goods outside the national boundaries, and product explicitly entails

advanced

such a

movement from most

shift.

profitable to less profitable firms

Both processes, then, move goods and labor from

capitalist countries to rising capitalist countries.

to the collapse of small businesses capital held in fewer

And both

processes lead

and the centralization of accumulation



that

is,

and fewer hands.

Concepts and Theory:

The End of the World as

We Know

World-Empires and World-Economies Worlds end and worlds change. Of course, very few people world think about their world ending; but they

all

do.

The

living in

any specific

Mesopotamian,

great

Roman empires are gone; the sun has set on the British Empire; and even more recently, the USSR crumbled and is no more. Of course, just like the Phoenix,

Greek, and

new worlds

arise

out of the ashes and history moves on. But what of our world?

History

us

worlds

tells

ern world, and

all

more

fail

—when

specifically,

one

will

that

our world is

fail?

Generally,

Wallerstein asks us to consider the possibility that our world

we

between

are in a chaotic period

some of

us, Wallerstein

historical

historical

is

failing

and

moments. Perhaps shockingly

that for

argues that this shift in historical epochs will lead to the

demise of the United States what

we live in a mod-

defined by American capitalism.

as

epoch do we

we know

live

it.

and how

So,

let's

is it

take these questions seriously: In

affecting

our world?

Wallerstein argues that there have been two types of world-systems throughout history,

mon

one with

a

common

political

political entity are called

system and one without. Systems with a com-

world-empires. World-empires exist through military

dominance and mandatory economic ernment

is

tribute.

spread and held in place through

The a

political influence

of one gov-

strong military, but this sets up

It

200

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

a

AND SYSTEMS demise of the empire. Maintaining

cycle thai eventually Leads to the

army

that

raised

is

geographically extended costs quite a

hit

a

through tribute and taxation. Heavy taxes make the system

standing

money

of money. This

is

less efficient, in

terms of economic production, and this increases the resistance of the populace

means

as well. Increasing resistance

which,

that the military presence

in turn, increases the cost, taxation,

economic

efficiency.

These cycles continue

historicity above) until the

Rome, China, and

empire

falls.

resistance,

worsen

to

must be increased,

and

it

further lowers

through structural time (see

Hxamples of such world-empires include

India.

These world-empire cycles continued began

and

until

about 1450, when

a

world-economy

common political system, world-economies are common division of labor and through the endless accumulation we saw earlier, in the absence of a political structure or common cul-

to develop. Rather than a

defined through a

of capital. As ture, the

world-system

is

created through the structures intrinsic to capitalism.

The

worldwide division of labor created through the movement of products and labor

from advanced

capitalist nations to rising capitalist nations creates relationships of

economic dependency and

exploitation. These capitalist relationships are expressed

through three basic types of economic Briefly, core states are

states: core,

semi-periphery, and periphery.

those that export exploitation; enjoy relatively light taxa-

well-paid labor force; and constitute a large

consumer market. The

tion;

have a

state

systems within core states are the most powerful and are thus able to provide

free,

the strongest protection (such as trade restrictions) and capitalist inducements,

such as externalizing costs, patent protection, tax incentives, and so on. Periphery those whose labor

states are

is

forced (very

world-system, these states are also the weakest

way of tax and The periphery

states are those to

more

a capitalist

— they

which

economy and

are able to provide

and they are the weakest players

cost incentives,

exploitation and

occupational choice and few

little

worker protections) and underpaid. In terms of

in the

the

little in

the

world-system.

capitalists in core states shift

worker

competitive, less profitable products. These shifts result in "a

constant flow of surplus-value from the producers of peripheral products to the

producers of core-like products" (Wallerstein, 2004,

The

p. 28).

between the core and the periphery

relationship, then,

is

processes and profitability. There

is

from core

Furthermore, there are cycles

to periphery countries.

Periphery countries are continually developing their we've seen, profitability

is

dependent upon powerful

economy

is

one of production

a continual shift of products

own

in

and exploitation both directions:

capitalist-state base.

states.

Thus, changing positions

dependent upon the power of the

in the capitalist

Worker protection

— they

create tax incentives

protection, and they

become

states

more

laws are passed, wages increase, and product innova-

tion begins to occur; the states can then begin to

countries

world-

state.

Overtime, periphery economies become more robust and periphery powerful:

As

highest in quasi-monopolies and these, in turn, are

a

perform much

and externalize

more powerful

like the states in

core

costs for firms, grant product

player in the world-system economy.

These nations move into the semi-periphery. Semi-periphery states are those that are in

transition

from being

a

land of exploitation to being a core player, and they both

export exploitation and continue to exploit within their

own

country.

Hegemony

Global Capitalism and the Decline of American

A good

illustration

were produced

of

in very

this process is the textile industry. In the 1800s, textiles

few countries and

it

was one of the most important core

by the beginning of the 21st century,

industries;

A

the core nations.

clear

textiles

and recent example of

had

all

this process

is

but

moved out

Nike. Nike

is

of

the

world's largest manufacturer of athletic shoes, with about $10 billion in annual rev-

enue. In 1976, Nike began

moving

Korea and Taiwan, which

States to

Within 4 years,

90%

its

manufacturing concerns from the United

at the

time were considered periphery

of Nike's production was located in Korea and Taiwan.

However, both Korea and Taiwan were on the cusp, and within a period of time they had

moved

into the semi-periphery.

relatively short

Other periphery

opened up, most notably Bangladesh, China, Indonesia, and Vietnam. in the early

1

states.

990s, Nike began

states

had

So, beginning

moving its operations once again. Currently, Indonesia

contains Nike's largest production centers, with 17 factories and 90,000 employees.

But that status could change. Just a few years ago, in 1 997, the Indonesian government

announced a change in the minimum wage, from $2.26 per day to $2.47 per day. Nike refused to pay the increase

and

in response, 10,000

workers went on

strike. In

answer

to the strike, a company spokesperson, Jim Small, said,"Indonesia could be reaching a

point where

it is

pricing

itself out

of the market" (Global Exchange, 1998).

Yet the existence of the semi-periphery doesn't simply serve as a conversion point;

has a structural role in the world-system. Because the core, periphery,

it

and semi-periphery share similar economic,

political,

and ideological

interests, the

semi-periphery acts as a buffer that lessens tension and conflict between the core and periphery nations. "The existence of the third category means precisely that the upper

stratum

is

not faced with the unified opposition of all the others because the middle

stratum

is

both exploited and exploiter" ( Wallerstein, 2000, p. 9 1 emphasis original). ,

Kondratieff

Waves

Since 1450, world-economies have

moved through

four distinct phases. These

phases occur in what are called Kondratieff waves (K-waves),

named

after Nikolai

Kondratieff, a Russian economist writing during the early 20th century. Kondratieff

noticed patterns of regular, structural change in the world-economy. These waves last

50 to 60 years and consist of two phases, a growth phase (the A-cycle) and

a

stagnation phase (the B-cycle).

Much from the

of what drives these phases in cycles of exploitation

modern economic world-systems comes

and accumulation

that we've already talked about.

During the A-cycle, new products are created, markets expanded, labor employed, and the

political

nal areas rials

and economic influence of core

— new geographic

states

moves

into previously exter-

areas are brought into the periphery for labor

(imperialism). At 25 to 30 years into the A-cycle, profits begin to

and matefall

due

to

overproduction, decreasing commodity prices and increasing labor costs. In this B-cycle, the

economy

and small businesses capital

enters a deep recession. Eventually, the recession

collapse,

which

leaves fewer firms

and greater centralization

accumulation (quasi-monopolistic conditions), which,

for the next

upswing

Historically, these

in the cycle (A,-cycle)

waves reach

a crisis point

bottoms out of

in turn, sets the stage

and the next recession

(B, -cycle).

approximately every 150 years. Each

201

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

202

AND SYSTEMS

Netherlands/

France

Spain

*

1450

1

Empire Decline of Hapsburg

of

1 1

^ '

7cn /OU

Russian Revolution World Wars (1 & II)

Massive Geographic Expansion Core: England With U.S.

Mercantile Capitalism

Decolonization Decline of British Rule Short-Lived American

and Germany

Nation-State

Hegemony

Periphery: Asia, Africa,

Agricultural Capitalism

Latin

?

>.

igi7

Industrial Revolution

Colonization

Monarchy Rise

*

640

Systemwide Recession State Entrenchment

Decline of Ottoman

United States

Britain

Multinational Corporations

America

Semi-Periphery: Russia, Japan

Consolidating Capitalism

Industrial Capitalism

Figure 9.1

World-Systems Phases

wave has

dominant

its

own

configuration of core and periphery

states,

with generally one

state, at least initially.

Wallerstein sees these waves as phases in the development of the world-system.

Within each phase, three things occur: The dominant form of capitalism changes (agricultural -» mercantilism -» industrial -» consolidation); there

is

a geographic

expansion as the division of labor expands into external areas; and a particular configuration of core

and periphery

states

emerges. There have been four such phases

thus far in the world-system. In Figure 9.1, I've outlined the different phases and their

movement through

hegemonic core nations

time. I've also noted

some of

the major issues and the

comparison. Wallerstein (2004) uses the term

for easy

hegemonic to denote nations that for a certain period of time "were able to establish the rules of the

game

in the interstate system, to

production, commerce, and finance), to get their

dominate the world-economy

way

politically

(in

with a minimal use

of military force (which however they had in goodly strength), and to formulate the cultural language with

which one discussed the world"

I'm not going to go into

much

(1974, 1980, 1989) three-volume

historic detail here.

work

(p. 58).

You can read

Wallerstein's

for the specifics. But briefly, phase

one

occurred roughly between 1450 and 1640, which marks the transition from feudal-

ism and world-empires to the nation-state. Both the Ottoman Empire and the

Hapsburg dynasty began

their decline in the 16th century.

weakened, Western Europe and the nation-state emerged

As the world-empires

as the core, Spain

and the

Mediterranean declined into the semi-periphery, and northeastern Europe and the

Americas became the periphery. During agricultural,

which came about

as

an

this time, the

effect

major form of capitalism was

of technological development and eco-

logical conditions in Europe.

The second phase

lasted

from 1640

to

1750 and was precipitated by

recession that lasted approximately 80 years. tralized,

and attempted

to control

dominant form of capitalism the

all

During

facets of the

in this phase.

this time, nations

a

systemwide

drew

in,

cen-

market through mercantilism, the

Mercantilism was designed to increase

power and wealth of the emerging nations through the accumulation

of gold,

favorable trade balances, and through foreign trading monopolies. These goals

were achieved primarily through colonization (geographic expansion). As with the

Global Capitalism and the Decline of American

previous period, there was a great deal of struggle

among

three-way conflict

The

third phase

lead in this area.

and

the core nations, with a

the Netherlands, France, and England.

began with the Industrial Revolution. England quickly took the

The

last

attempt by France to stop the spread of English power

was Napoleon's continental blockade, which industry,

among

Hegemony

failed.

Here capitalism was driven by

expanded geographically to cover the entire globe.

it

end of the third phase

Wallerstein places the

beginning of the fourth phase

at the

beginning of

WW

I

and the

1917 with the Russian Revolution. The Russian

at

Revolution was driven by the lack of indigenous capital, continued resistance to

from the agricultural

industrializing

meant

national status. Together these that of a semi-peripheral

sector,

and the decay of military power and

that "the Russian Revolution

was

essentially

country whose internal balance of forces had been such

that as of the late nineteenth century

During

tus" (Wallerstein, 2000, p. 97).

began on a decline towards

it

a peripheral sta-

Empire receded, due

this time, the British

to

number of factors including decolonization, and two states in particular vied for the core position: Germany and the United States. After the Second World War, the a

United States became the leading core nation,

Hegemonic or leading

states always

a position

have a limited

it

enjoyed for two decades. span.

life

Becoming

a core

nation requires a state to focus on improving the conditions of production for capitalists;

but staying hegemonic requires a state to invest in political and military

become economically competitive and

might. Over time, other states

economic power diminishes. In attempts

state's

to

the world-system, the hegemonic state will resort to exercising

its

military

the past 25 years).

maintain first

power (note the increasing

The "use of

military

power

is

its

the leading

powerful position in

to military threats

and then

U.S. military intervention over

not only the

first

sign of weakness

but the source of further decline," as the capricious use of force creates resentment first in

the world

community and then

war increases taxation

Thus, the cost of hegemony state's

position of

came from as Japan,

in the state's

home

population as the cost of

(Wallerstein, 2004, pp. 58-59). is

always high and

it

inevitably leads to the

power within the world-system. For the United

the Cold

War with

the

USSR; competition with

end of a

States, the costs

rising core nations,

such

China, and an economically united and resurgent Western Europe; and

such displays of military might as the Korean, Vietnam, Gulf, and Iraqi Wars. The decline of U.S.

hegemony

actually increased,

due

since the late 1960s has

to the relative size

meant

that capitalist

freedom has

and power of global corporations. There

many multinational corporations now that are larger and more powerful many nations. These new types of corporation "are able to maneuver against

are

bureaucracies whenever the national politicians

worker pressures" (Wallerstein, 2000,

p. 99).

The

become too responsive overall health of

than state

to internal

world capitalism

has also meant that the semi-periphery has increased in strength, facilitating

growth into the

core.

The Modern

Crisis

There are several key points

in

time for the world-system, such as the Ottoman

defeat in 1571, the Industrial Revolution

around 1750, and the Russian Revolution

203

204

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

AND SYSTEMS

1917. Each of those events signaled a transition

in

from one

another. Wallerstein argues that one such event occurred

ary

movements raced

Italy,

in

regime

capitalist

1968,

when

Germany, Poland,

across the globe, involving China, West

many

Japan, Vietnam, Czechoslovakia, Mexico, and the United States. So the mostly student-driven social movements

nations were caught up in collectively,

they have been called the

to

revolution-

that,

world revolution. They were certainly

first

powerful and extensive. Wallerstein (1995) argues that these worldwide

movements came out of

tension that has long existed between "two modernities

nology and the modernity of liberation"

Enlightenment and

positivistic philosophy.

European history from the

late

(p.

— the modernity of

1600s to the

late

tech-

472). Modernity grew out of the

The Enlightenment

assumption that the knowledge of most worth

the

refers to a period

of

1700s that was characterized by the is

based on reason and observation

(science) rather than faith (religion). Thinkers in the Enlightenment believed that,

through reason, humans could control not only the physical universe but society as well.

gion.

This was a positivist view of

Humans

could

make

as

life

a difference;

compared

to fatalistic perspectives of reli-

humans could change

their

life

course and

not be subject to an impenetrable god. Part of this hope lay in technology: tools

through which humanity could control the material universe and improve the physical standard of living. This

hope was, of course, embodied

in science

and

its

offshoots, such as medicine.

The other pronounced hope of modernity concerned ied in the nation-state; this

scheme of

place in this grand

2003), one of the very its

human

happiness"

is

first

how well

it

equality. For

sociologists,

importance from

derives

state

the second modernity.

is

saw

their

example, Harriett Martineau (1838/

this great consideration

measures up to

and was embod-

scientists

argued that "every element of social .

.

For Martineau, the ultimate

(p. 25).

equality

Many social

.

the relative

test

life

amount of

of any society and

its

one great consideration. Nevertheless, mod-

this

ern society, especially in the United States, was founded on a contradiction: inalienable rights but only for a select group.

Wallerstein

and the

failure

tells

us that the upheavals of 1968 were directed at this contradiction

of society to

fulfill

the

hope of modernity:

liberation for

all.

Students

by and large rejected much of the benefits of technological development and proclaimed society had failed

The material

at

the one thing that truly mattered:

benefits of technology

and capitalism were seen

had blinded people to the oppression of blacks, women, and this critique wasn't limited to technologically

advanced

human

freedom.

as traps, things that all

minorities.

And

country

after

societies. "In

country of the so-called Third World, the populaces turned against the movements of the Old Left and charged fraud. their states as the agents of a

The 1968 movements

.

.

.

[The people of the world] had

modernity of

emphasis on material wealth and hypocrisy In Wallerstein's

liberation''

in particular rejected

scheme, the collapse of

|

lost faith in

Wallerstein, 1995, p. 484).

American hegemony because

of

its

in liberation.

Communism was

simply an extension

of this revolt, one that most clearly pointed out the failure of state government to

produce equality

for

all:

"Even the most radical rhetoric was no guarantor of

the modernity oi liberation, and probably

a

poor guarantor of the modernity

of

Global Capitalism and the Decline of American

technology"

484). Interestingly, Wallerstein sees the collapse of Leninism as a

(p.

disaster for world capitalism. Leninism had constrained the "dangerous

resented an alternative

once again.

hope

to the contradictions

hope gone, "the dangerous

classes

unstable"

Structurally, the upheavals of 1968 occurred at the

world was standing

B-cycle. In other words, the

turn or stagnation, which

lasted

in capitalist states.

may now become

become

the world-system has

Politically,

found

at

classes,"

Communism

those groups oppressed through capitalist ideology and practice.

the alternative

Hegemony

(p.

rep-

With

truly dangerous

484).

beginning of a K-wave

the brink of an

economic down-

through the 1970s and 1980s. As we've seen, such

B-cycles occur throughout the Kondratieff wave, but this one

The 20-year economic stagnation became an important

From 1945

the prosperity of the preceding A-cycle.

more economic growth and prosperity than

ever.

was particularly deep. because of

political issue

to 1970, the

world experienced

Thus the economic downturn

gave continued credence and extra political clout to worldwide social movements.

Economically, the world-system responded to the downturn by attempting to

back production costs by reducing pay

scales,

roll

lowering taxes associated with the

welfare state (education, medical benefits, retirement payments) and re-externalizing ,

input costs (infrastructure, toxicity, raw materials). There was also a shift from the idea of developmentalism to globalization,

and

capital

through

all

which

calls for

the free flow of goods

nations.

However, while the world-system

putting effort into regaining the A-cycle,

is

there are at least three structural problems hindering

economic rebound.

First, as

we've noted, there are limits to exporting exploitation. Four hundred years of capitalism have depleted the world's supply of

continued geographic expansion, and

More and more of

that expansion.

power

it

cheap labor. Every K-wave has brought

appears that

we have reached

the world's workforce

is

the limit of

using their political

to increase the share of surplus labor they receive. Inevitably, this will lead to

a sharp increase in the costs of labor in profit

and production and

margins. Remember, capitalism

worldwide

is

a

corresponding decrease

defined by continual accumulation. This

then, represents a critical point in the continuation of the current

shift,

capitalist system,

Second, there

is

a squeeze

on the middle

classes. Typically, the

middle

classes are

seen as the market base of a capitalist economy. And, as we've seen, a standard

method of for the

pulling out of a

middle

additional

downturn

classes, either

money

is

to increase the available spending

commodity purchases and subsequently

spurs an increase in

production and capital accumulation. However, class

wages

is

becoming too much

must happen: Either these

money

through tax breaks or through salary increases. This

for firms

this continual

and

costs will be rolled

states to bear.

back

in

expanding of middle-

One

of two things

or they will not. If they are

not

reduced, "both states and enterprises will be in grave trouble and frequent bankruptcy" (Wallerstein, 1995, political disaffection

p.

among

485).

If

they are rolled back, "there will be significant

precisely the strata that have provided the strongest

support for the present world-system"

(p.

485).

In the United States, indications are that the costs are being rolled back.

to

14.6% of the

total,

while that of the

Between

20% of the population dropped from 17.3% upper 20% increased from 43.8% to 50.0%.

1967 and 2001, the income of the middle

205

206

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

AND SYSTEMS and 1999 there was

Further, between 1981 ruptcies. ot

And,

in

2001,

1.4

340%

a

increase in middle class bank-

million Americans lost their health insurance

— over

halt

those had an annual household income above $75,000, clearly indicating that the

majority were middle to upper-middle Jass.

[ranted, these are only isolated

(

exam-

but they give an indication of what might be happening in the United States.

ples,

Third, as we've noted, accumulation

is

based on externalizing costs. Two ot those

costs, raw material depletion and toxicity, have natural limits and

appears that we

it

might be reaching them. Global warming, ozone rupture, destruction of the rain forests,

and land degradation from waste are themes with which we are

Nowhere does

the idea of natural limits

Peter Vitousek, professor of biosciences

come out more

familiar.

all

clearly than in the

work of

Stanford University.

at

Vitousek, Ehrlich, Ehrlich, and Matson (1986) argue that directly (through

consumption) and about

40%

indirectly (through toxic waste),

is

mals. In other words, of the total

tion a

beings presently use up

of the world's net primary production (NPP), which represents the rate

of production of biomass that

human human

human

beings use

40%

of

it.

available for

available for

plants

all

on

life

and

ani-

this planet,

Predicting the Earth's long-term ability to support

to calculate, because

life is difficult

consumption by

amount of energy

it

depends on the wealth of the popula-

and the kinds of technologies supporting

it,

but

we can

see that

humans

use up

hugely disproportionate amount of the Earth's resources (we are but one of some

5-30 million animal species on the planet) and we can see that the resources of the Earth are

finite.

But limits aren't the only concern; toxic waste has been accumulating for years. Typically, firms take the cheapest else's



property

dumping. But the laws sibility.

The

way of handling waste

until public outcry motivates

result

is

are not retroactive,

that

and

—dump

governments

appears difficult to assign respon-

it

government, not industry, tends to pay for the bulk

cleanup. According to a recent article in The Washington Post, "the

or hazardous

sites

have to spend

on someone

it

to pass laws restricting

number

ot

o\ toxic

requiring federal attention continues to grow, and Congress will

at least

$14

billion to $16.4 billion over the

keep pace with the problem" (Pianin, 2001, gives us a strong critique of the capitalist

p.

A19). The

coming decade

Web

management of

just to

Byte for this chapter

the environment:

Check

out James O'Connor: Selling Nature.

Structural

and Cultural Signs of the End

Wallerstein argues that world-systems enter a time of chaos during transition periods.

runs

its

Mow

things change or into what form

cyclical courses

stagnation, finally ending in collapse. ble, but, unlike

is

not predictable.

A

through the KondratiefF wave, with periods

A new

world-s\ stem ot

growth and

configuration emerges out ot this rub-

Marx, Wallerstein offers no clear predictions. However, Wallerstein

does argue that the uprising of 1968 marked the beginning of the end o\ the current world-system.

We can

see not only the clear

the end o\\\ 130-year KondratiefF wave,

upon which capitalism has been

we can

marks of the

dialectical cycles near

also see that the structural supports

built are limited

and Hearing exhaustion.

— Global Capitalism and the Decline of American

There are also cultural and structural signs that indicate that the system

Hegemony

in the

is

uncertainty of transition. Wallerstein points to two cultural signs: the introduction

of complexity theory in science and postmodern theory in the social sciences. In the

number of physical

past 15 years or so, a significant

scientists

and mathematicians

have turned against the causal predictability of Newtonian physics. Newtonian physics postulated a universe run according to universal laws

and

in every place

—laws

that in

time

all

could explain, predict, and control the physical features of the

cosmos. Currently,

many

case of

only in circumstances that are clearly circumscribed or limited.

The

reality;

it fits

tools of science

scientists are saying that

Newtonian physics

must therefore incorporate more

scopes of application.

And

so today

theory, chaos theory,

strange attractors, fuzzy logic, and so on. Wallerstein's (1995) point

and

natural world scientific

all its

phenomena have become

a special

schemes with wider

flexible

we hear of complexity

is

"The

is this:

historicized" (p. 486). That

is,

the

view of the universe has historically changed: The old science was built on

view of the universe; the new science

a mechanistic, linear

not linear nor

is

is it

mechanistic.

The

idea of a historicized science

spective of science. Science

assumed

is

an oxymoron,

at least

that the universe

is

from the

initial

per-

empirical and operates

according to law-like principles. These principles could be discovered and used by

humans

to understand, predict,

and control

their world. Science

was

in the business

of producing abstract and universal truths, not truths that only hold under certain conditions.

and

society change according to the context.

now become knowledge the

new

susceptible to the

is

(p.

The scene it

critique:

human

behav-

hard, laboratory sciences have

According to complexity theory, is

universal

and

all

"Hence

certain.

most fundamental questions about the modernity

in the social sciences

was before. In the past 25

it

in technologically

tural signs, symbols,

years, the

most vocal and

(see

was brought into the advanced

and images

Most of them come not from

become even

has followed suit and

been postmodernism

radical form, as

world

same

The

of

486).

social sciences has

most

been an argument against the pos-

contextual and contingent; nothing

science raises the

technology"

than

historicity of society has always

of social science, precisely because the factors that influence

sibility

ior

The

societies

that

we

real social

is

Chapter

15).

less certain

influential voice in the

Postmodernism

in its

social sciences, argues that the social

a virtual or hyper-real world.

The

use aren't connected to any social

groups

in face-to-face interaction,

cul-

reality.

but are,

produced by media and advertising concerns.

in fact,

As a

result

of

this cultural

grand narratives are held

fragmentation and the

in distrust.

new doubts

in science, all

Grand- or metanarratives are

stories that

attempt to embrace large populations of people. Typically, grand narratives are generated by political groups (as in nationalism and national identities). In their place,

postmodernism advocates

argues that

all

voices are equal

polyvocality,

or

many

voices.

Postmodernism

and should be given equal weight. These voices are

of course linked to specific groups, such as men,

women,

blacks, Chicanos,

and

all

the subdivisions within the groups, such as bisexual-Chicano-Catholic males.

There

is

thus an ethical dimension to postmodernism

"it is a

mode

of rejecting

207

208

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

AND SYSTEMS

modernity of technology on behalf of the modernity of liberation"

the

(Wallerstein, 1995, p. 487).

The two

we

structural signs that indicate

been limited success

are in a time of chaotic transition are

and worldwide organization of

financial speculation

in rolling

for.

As

from

profits

this

kind of speculation, but

and subject

to

it

Many

On 2004,

It is

in fact

one of

p. 86).

the political scene, since 1968 there has been a shift from

electoral

in

have taken great

world-economy very

also "renders the

swings of currencies and of employment.

the signs of increasing chaos" (Wallerstein, 2004,

but not

profits,

have sought profit

a result, capitalists

the area of financial speculation rather than production.

volatile

movements. There has

back costs and reducing the press on

hoped

nearly what was needed or

social

movements

for

changes to the "organization of a movement of movements" (Wallerstein, Rather than national movements seeking change through voting

p. 86).

within the system, radical groups are binding together internationally to seek change

Forum (WSF) as an among var-

within the world-system. Wallerstein offers the World Social

example.

not

It is

itself

an organization, but a virtual space for meetings

ious militant groups seeking social change.

Another indicator of

this political decentralization

attacks worldwide, such as the strike

2001, and the

bomb

attacks

is

the increase in terrorist

on the World Trade Center, September

on London,

The

July 7, 2005.

selves are decentralized, non-state entities,

which makes

terrorist

conflict

11,

groups them-

between

a state like

the United States and these entities difficult. Nation-states are particular kinds of entities defined

and

a

by

a

number of factors, most importantly by

have specified

is

mean

standing military. These factors and the political orientation they bring

that nation-states are

taries.

territory, rational law,

most

confronting other nation

efficient at

territories, that legitimate rational law,

Almost everything about the

terrorist

and the and

States to

engage the terrorists

defeat or

make peace with them.

wing groups

make

relation to physical place

But more than

The United



there

that, the attacks

in the

United

States.

is

no

it

extremely

interface

of September It

modern

1 1

has allowed

States

is

facing

is

in social

difficult for the

between the two

mili-

a central-

These differences

terrorists are decentralized groups.

structure

that have

ones that

groups that the United States

antithetical to these qualities of the nation-state.

ized state

and

states,



United

let

alone

have energized politically right-

them

to cut ties with the political

center and "to pursue a program centered around unilateral assertions by the

United States of military strength combined with an attempt to undo the cultural evolution of the world-system that occurred after the world revolution of 1968 (particularly in the fields of race

and sexuality)" (Wallerstein, 2004,

along with attempts to do away with

many

p. 87). This,

of the geopolitical structures

set in

place after 1945 (like the United Nations), has "threatened to worsen the already-

increasing instability of the world-system" (p. 87).

These issues are the reason that Wallerstein (1999)

talks

world-systems theory. Remember, world-systems theory of global capitalism. As global capitalism thinking can give us will

become

fails,

is

about the demise of a critical perspective

the insights that world-svstems

less significant. Yet in the

remaining years of

Global Capitalism and the Decline of American

Hegemony

209

global capitalism, world-systems theory gives us a critical perspective for social

involvement.

What

will follow the

400-year reign of capitalism

theory, as Wallerstein sees

it, is

time and cyclical processes; of our

lives so that

the stage of our see

and

and,

we can

lives; it is

ears to hear the

finally,

Wallerstein Rather, he

it is

to call

meant

to

is

lift

perceive the world-system in

historical

all its

power

critical perspective to

work within the

still at

means

that "fundamental change

possible

is

capitalist system;

Wright Mills (1956),

.

.

good

act rationally, in

to seek a better historical system" (Wallerstein, 1999, p. 3).

and

.

faith,

this fact

(Wallerstein, 2004, p. 77),

is

likely to

we must make

(p. 3).

makes

and with strength

Because the system

period of transition where "small inputs have large outputs" (1999,

"every small action during this period

to set

have eyes to

not saying that "great changes are beyond [our] control"

claims on our moral responsibility to

a

to thinking in structural

our eyes from the mundane problems

intended to give us the

Marxian dynamics

uncertain. World-systems

our attention

intended to spur us to action. Unlike C.

is

it

is

meant

p.

1)

in

is

and

have significant consequences"

understand what

diligent efforts to

is

going on; we must make choices about the direction in which we want the world to

move; and we must bring our convictions into action, because that will affect the system. In Wallerstein's (2004)

and the

three tasks as the intellectual, the moral,

but they are closely interlinked. claim we

do,

we

are merely

it is

words, "We can

political tasks.

our behaviors think of these

They

are different,

None of us can opt out of any of these

making

a

hidden choice"

tasks. If

we

(p. 90).

Summary Wallerstein sees his

work more

theory. His point

that

is

it is

ing rather than the other

terms of

in

a

type of analysis than a specific

the principles of analysis that drive the theoriz-

way around. There

Wallerstein's perspective: globality

and

are

two main features of

historicity. Globality conceptualizes

the world in system terms, which cut across cultural

and

political

boundaries.

Historicity sees history in terms of structural time

and

cyclical

time within

the structures, rather than focusing

on

In terms of theory, Wallerstein takes a

division of labor, exploitation,

events, people,

and

and the processes of accumulation and over-

production. In Marxian theory, exploitation

is

the chief source of profit.

Thus, capitalists are intrinsically motivated to increase the tion.

And

linearity.

Marxian approach. He focuses on the

since wages tend to go

up

as capitalist

the level of exploitation and profit, there

export exploitation to nations that have a

is

level

of exploita-

economies mature, reducing

therefore a constant tendency to

less

developed

capitalist

economy,

thus increasing the worldwide division of labor. Capitalist

ating

accumulation implies that capital

more

capital,

which

in turn

modern capitalism, this state. The state specifically In

is

is

invested for the purpose of cre-

invested in order to create

process of accumulation

is

more

capital.

augmented by the

bears the costs associated with transportation,

210

AND SYSTEMS

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

toxicity,

and the exhaustion of materials. More powerful

provide conditions that profits

ists'

and the

Overproduction

is

quasi-monopolies, thus increasing capital-

facilitate

rate of

states additionally

accumulation.

endemic

Because they are driven by

to capitalism as well.

the capitalist need for accumulation, commodification (the process through sale)

and

continue to create

new

which material and nonmaterial goods are turned into products for production are intrinsically expansive. Capitalists

and produce existing commodities thus creating

will

market

until the

no longer bear

will

it,

more supply than demand.

Taken together, the processes of exploitation and the division of labor and the

dynamics of accumulation and overproduction create there

is

movement of products and

a continual

which

a scenario in

more powerful

labor from

to

powerful nations.

less

In the

world-economy, there are four types of nations: the core, semi-periphery,

and mass produc-

the periphery, and external areas. In general, exploitation

move from

tion of least-profitable goods

However, because sition

move of nations

as they tran-

to peripheral to core. Eventually, there will

be no more

this

from external

the core to the external areas.

is

a system, there

areas to exploit with low-profit

also a

is

mass production, which

will lead to

system

breakdown.

The world-economy thus tends sion,

and breakdown. These

to go

According to Wallerstein, the world economies. The

last

through cycles of expansion, depres-

cycles reach a crisis about every 150 years. is

now

in

its

fourth phase of world-

phase began in 1917, with the United States as the world-

economy's core nation. Wallerstein marks the beginning of the end of

this

phase with the social upheavals of 1968. In addition to the social movements,

world-economy entered

the

and

lasted for

a cycle of depression that

was

about 20 years. While the world-economy

come back from

this

economic depression, there

particularly deep

is

actively trying to

are three factors that are

inhibiting this attempt: the system limits to exploitation; the middle-class

squeeze; and the limited ability of states to pick Wallerstein argues that the world-system

is

up externalized

on the brink of

costs.

collapse

Thus,

and

is

currently experiencing the chaotic period that always precedes such an end.

Building Your Theory Toolbox Learning More •

— Primary Sources

Wallerstein built his theory through three volumes of historical data (The

Modern World-System, convincing, but

with o

his later

I

II,

III).

The

historical

breadth

is

impressive and

would suggest you begin your reading of Wallerstein

works:

The end of the world as century. University of

o

I,

we know it:

Minnesota

World-systems analysis:

An

Social science for the twenty-first

Press,

1999.

introduction.

Duke

University Press, 2004.

Global Capitalism and the Decline of American

A good

o

chapter-length introduction to this perspective

is

Christopher Chase-Dunn, "World-systems theorizing,"

provided by

in

Handbook

of sociological theory, edited by Jonathan H. Turner, Kluwer, 2002.

Check

It

Out

—James O'Conner:



Web



Globalization: Globalization

Byte

good

introduction,

discontents, •

Orientalism

Selling is

Nature

recommend Joseph

I

W.W. Norton, 2002. and political identities: The

a political construct.

concept

primarily a E.

Stiglitz,

in

economics. For a

Globalization

and

its

idea of the "Orient" or the East

is

See Edward W. Said, Orientalism, Vintage, 1979.

Seeing the World •

After reading and understanding this chapter, you should be able to

answer the following questions (remember to answer them o o

theoretically):

What makes world-systems analysis unique? What are the central features that link national economies

into a

global system? o

what ways do

In

states

externalize

costs

and help create quasi-

monopolies? o

What are the Marxian economic dynamics in back of the relationships among the core, semi-periphery, periphery, and external areas? Explain how these dynamics work and how they are related to the demise of capitalism,

o

What are Kondratieff waves and how do they factor into global changes?

o

Beginning with the events

What

modernity. is

o

In

in

1968, explain Wallerstein's

are the structural

and

crisis

of

system

cultural signs that the

failing?

the face of this

crisis,

what recommendations does

for political involvement?

these recommendations

Be certain to explain

will

Wallerstein have

his rationale for

saying

influence the system.

Engaging the World •

In

reference to his work, Wallerstein (2000) has said,

biography porary

is

one long question

reality that

Wallerstein, Wallerstein,

I

I

for

"My

intellectual

an adequate explanation of contem-

and others might

act

upon"

(p. xv). In

keeping with

have only one question to put to you: After reading

how

will

you engage your world?

Weaving the Threads •

Consider the approaches to inequality given us by Chafetz, Bourdieu, and

now

Wallerstein,

and then answer the following questions: What kinds

of inequalities or scarce resources are the

What

most important

in

kinds of structures perpetuate these inequalities?

change possible

for

each theory?

How

is

social

each of these theorists? Can these three theories

complement one another?

Hegemony

211

CHAPTER

10

Systems and Their Environments Social

Niklas

Luhmann (1927-1998)

Photo: Courtesy of University of

Bielefeld.

213

9

7

214

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

AND SYSTEMS

Luhmann's Perspective: Thinking System ica

I

215

ly

215

Functionalist!!

Systems Theory

2

1

219

Concepts and Theory: Self-Referencing Systems Environments and Complexity

2

Meaning and Social Systems

1

220

221

Reflexivity

222

Concepts and Theory: Social Evolution Three Societal Systems

222

Evolutionary Processes

224

225 229 Concepts and Theory: Changing Sociology's Question Patterns of Differentiation

Modernity

232

Society as System

Complexity and Indeterminacy

235

236

Building Your Theory Toolbox

The

two chapters have addressed

last

class inequality.

fication issues ical

The



last

stratification, specifically

three chapters of the

race, gender,

book

will also

look

—but from

and sexual inequality

gender and

a

at strati-

more

rad-

point of view. All five of these chapters, and the theorists they represent, assume

that stratification

kinds of issues

son and

is

is

rationality.

But what

if

a

problem, one that can be solved. This idea of solving these

linked to what

Human

way we think about really a part

all?

see as the basic premise of modernity: rea-

and inequality

What

society

of society at

many

beings can rationally decide to

stratification

cation can't be "solved"?

if

233

234

The Problem With Systems

Summary

231

231

Leftover Vocabularies

if

aren't really

the idea of inequality

and not

really

an issue

be? Speaking just as a sociologist, that

the world better.

problems? What is

at all?

if stratifi-

actually an effect of the

What

if inequality isn't

These are profound and disturbing questions. But what

the ideas in back of those questions are right?

would be

make

I

can

tell

What would

the ramifications

you that one important ramification

most of sociology has been moving

in the

wrong

direction for almost

200 years. Obviously, I'm not starting this chapter off with these questions without purpose. I'm asking sider:

them because

this

is

exactly

what Niklas Luhmann wants us

to con-

We may be wrong in the way we've been thinking about society— society isn't

what most for the

o\ us

most

think

it

is,

and

part, sociology has

stratification isn't

what most of us think

been wrong about society

for

200 years.

it is.

And

Social

To

get at this

What

question:

is

argument of Luhmann's, we have society?

We've touched on is

nomethods of micro-organization or

in

terms of cultural

theorists, society exists as

reality

and managed. However, Luhmann society,

and structures of

perhaps more than anyone

else.

What

on

And

is

all

society?

in the eth-

we've looked

inequality. For those

a thing that

going to challenge

is

found

networks of exchange.

an objective structure,

215

to start with a very basic

this topic a bit in the chapters

a generalized other or

people in interaction. There, society

at this issue in

Systems and Their Environments

can be discovered

our preconceptions of

And what

are the ramifi-

cations of thinking about society differently?

The

Luhmann

Essential

Biography Niklas tially

work

Luhmann was born on December worked

studied law and sabbatical

He began Speyer,

in

1961,

lecturing

in

Luhmann 1962

In

1968,

sociology at the University of retirement

in

1927,

in

Luneburg, Germany. He

ini-

On

a

studied Talcott Parsons's theories at Harvard.

at the University for Administrative Sciences in

Germany, and published

formal organizations.

8,

as a public administrator for over 10 years.

his first of

over 30 books

in

1964, a study

Luhmann took his first position Bielefeld in Germany where he

in

as professor of

stayed until his

1993.

Passionate Curiosity

Luhmann's concern it

work

at a

is

whole?

sociology's big questions:

His

first

came through Talcott modern society and argued

tions

What

is

society,

and how does

exposure to the issue of society and

Luhmann was

Parsons.

vigorously with Jurgen

specifically

how

it

func-

concerned with

Habermas about the

differ-

ences between "rational modernity" and modern society as a complex system.

Keys to Knowing organismic analogy, requisite needs, social evolution, social structures, cybernetic hierarchy of control, generalized media of exchange, equilibrium,

systems, system environments,

risk

open and closed

and complexity, co-evolution, autopoiesis,

self-thematization, social systems, three processes of social evolution, segmental differentiation, stratified differentiation, functional differentiation,

modern

society,

positive law, leftover vocabularies

Luhmann's Perspective: Thinking Systemically Functionalism Luhmann's perspective ory.

Functionalism

is

is

heavily informed by functionalism

principally based

and systems the-

on the organismic analogy and the work

of

216

AND SYSTEMS

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

three theorists:

2005a).

Hmile Durkheim, and Talcott Parsons (see Allan,

[erberl Spencer,

I

The organismic analogy

is

a

way of looking

model. The fundamental idea taken from site needs.

in

this

These needs push the organism

to select

order to meet those needs. For example,

oxygen and you get your oxygen from

air.

at society

analogy

is

using organisms as a

that organisms have requi-

and create

internal structures

order for you to survive, you need

in

Because of that need and the way

met, your body has a specific organ or structure



have lungs because they don't get oxygen from

By analogy, the

such as

fish don't

same

true for society: Different social structures meet specific needs.

is

The organismic analogy organism

is,

also implies evolution. Evolution basically occurs to

the greater will be

its

more complex an

chances of surviving. Complexity

terms of structural differentiation and specialization. celled; that

air.

survivability. Generally speaking, the

enhance an organism's

it is

your lungs. Other organisms

Initial

is

defined in

organisms were single-

they only had one structure. As evolutionary processes continued,

is,

organisms became increasingly more complex. They developed different structures to

meet

specific needs, which, in turn,

The human body,

for example,

(such as heart, lungs,

liver,

is

enhanced the organism's

made up of many

and bones) and many

ability to survive.

different kinds of structures

different subsystems (digestive

system, respiratory system, nervous system, and so on).

The same

is

true for society. In fact,

who

Herbert Spencer

Darwin. As society evolves, ized.

interesting to note that

it is

coined the phrase "survival of the it

becomes more

it

fittest,"

structurally differentiated

Generally speaking, social structures are

was

actually

not Charles

and

special-

made up of connections among

sets

of positions that form a network. The interrelated sets of positions in society are generally defined in terms of status positions, roles, cultural elements create

and norms. These

social

and manage the connections among people, and

connections that form the structure. Structural differentiation

it

and the

is

in society, then,

is

become

the process through which social networks break off from one another and functionally specialized. Social evolution, however, creates a problem. Spencer called

coordination

and

control: If social structures are distinct

and

it

the problem of

specialized,

how

are

their actions coordinated and controlled? Spencer generally argued that power

centralized in the state provides the necessary control of diverse parts.

Durkheim

phrased the problem in terms of social integration. Parsons, drawing on Durkheim,

came up with

a different approach,

sider in reference to control. In the

Luhmann.

human

tem. This system

is

one that

is

particularly interesting for us to con-

Parsons's idea

body, cybernetics

is

is

called the cybernetic hierarchy of

the study of the

autonomic nervous

formed by the brain and nervous system, and control

is

sys-

created

through mechanical-electrical communication systems and devices. This kind of control

is

based on communication rather than power, and communication takes

place through generalized media of exchange.

Think about

it

this

way: The heart and lungs use blood as a

medium

of

exchange. Blood circulates between the heart and lungs, exchanging carbon dioxide for oxygen. But

and lungs?

How

what

is

the

medium

of exchange between the brain and the heart

does your body communicate with

diverse structures

itself generally,

and systems? The human body uses

among

electrical signals

all

the

and the

.

Social

autonomic nervous system

Systems and Their Environments

both the heart and lungs. In

to control

society, the

in culture,

which operates through the cybernetic

The organismic analogy implies one

further issue for functionalism: equilib-

a state of balance

between or among opposing forces or

generalized media

found

is

hierarchy.

rium. Equilibrium

is

processes resulting in the absence of change.

equilibrium because

mal world, we

it is

One

life

We

spans of many,

many

exist

interrelated,

tend toward or ani-

one of the problems

is

much change

in

our lifetime or

is

undoubtedly due to the

fact that all things

sudden change would probably bring chaos instead of order. In the in

one

societal

subsystem

will

tend to bring chaos, unless

countered with equal changes in other subsystems. In other words,

is

unless social changes are

demise of that There

don't see

will

at the physical

within interrelated systems and subsystems. Because systems are

same way, sudden change the change

we look

generations.

of the reasons for this slowness

appear to

life. If

see a great deal of overall stability. In fact, that

with which evolutionists are faced:

even the

Most organic systems

the natural state of

met with

equilibrating pressures, they will lead to the

society.

are, then, five

defining features of structural-functionalism, as

it

comes

to

us in the Spencer-Durkheim-Parsons tradition:

Every system has requisite needs that must be met in order for that system

1

to survive.

Specialized structures function to satisfy the needs of the system. Structures,

2.

and the systemic whole are thus

functions,

intrinsically related.

Specialization of structures occurs through the evolutionary process of

3.

differentiation.

Differentiation creates problems of coordination

4.

and control, which,

in turn,

create evolutionary pressures for the selection of integrating processes.

Integrating processes tend to keep the system in a state of equilibrium.

5.

Systems Theory Luhmann blends elements of functionalism with ideas from systems theory to a new approach to understanding society. In this chapter, we're going to move back and forth between how classic functionalism sees things and how Luhmann's system theory is different. So we'll have examples and specific comparisons as we form

now

progress. Right

I'm simply interested in laying out the general principles of

each perspective. As you'll see, there are

some

clear overlaps

functionalism and systems theory. But there are also In brief, there are at least four qualities

interrelated parts.

functionalism ships

ism

is

among

is

a

between structural-

some important

of a system.

First, a

system

differences. is

made up

Your car and your body are both examples of systems. In systems theory.

It's

of

this way,

fundamentally concerned with the relation-

the parts and the parts with the whole. But, as you'll see, functional-

a limited

kind of systems theory.

217

218

AND SYSTEMS

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

The second all

somewhat

characteristic of a system

is

we

familiar with this idea;

that

exists in

it

We

an environment.

are

about computer environments and

talk

"the environment" (meaning ecological systems). In terms of their environments,

systems can be more or

less

An important word of caution, however: A One of the major points of Luhmann's

open.

system cannol be completely open or closed.

theory

formed by boundaries between

that systems are

is

it

and the environment.

A completely open system would have no boundaries and would thus be part environment and not

ot the

systems are impossible as well.

a system. Totally closed

A

completely closed system would have to be a perpetual motion machine, with no loss

of energy. So

environments Basically,

as

we need

a

not.

about the relationship between systems and their

continuum.

open systems take

and closed systems do in

to think

running on

information or energy from their environment

in

A good example of an open

energy and information (food,

air,

sense data) and

system

your body.

is

body

the environment. If the environment changes too rapidly, your Relatively closed systems take in less information is

more

is

just sitting

closed than your body. At this

related to

somewhere.

It's

moment,

and energy. As

the chances are

takes

is

will die.

your car

a system,

good

inactive yet remains a system because

one another. Your body, on the other hand,

It

thus directly influenced by

is

that

your car

its

parts are

never inactive.

It is

always

taking in and processing information and energy from the environment. Third, systems are dynamic. processes.

course this

is

As we've already noted, systems take

The energy can be

tion.

Of

in the

form of food

but

in or process

all

systems involve

energy and informa-

for organic systems or electricity for

mechanical systems. Parsons actually touches on hierarchy of control. Energy

a variable,

this issue a little in his cybernetic

moves up the hierarchy from the organic system and

information moves down. However, there

more

is

to this idea of process than the

presence of energy and information.

Dynamic systems have feed-forward and feedback dynamics. The tion

is

the feedback of information.

ronment?

If so,

example of process.

is

is

some kind of feedback process

in place.

It's

Your car

is

a

good

primarily a feed-forward

doesn't feed back information from the environment so that

make adjustments. Considering

the advances in

probably a limited example, but you get

computer technologies,

the point. Your body, on the other

hand, has a number of feedback systems in place. For example,

changes

basic distinc-

the system adjust to changes in the envi-

without feedback mechanisms.

a system

The system

the car can this

there

Can

in the external

it

self-adjusts to

temperature. "Cold-blooded" organisms do not have this

feature.

The fourth defining

characteristic of a system

dumb. Generally speaking, feedback systems to feedback, a system

must have

a goal

and

is

that systems can be smart or

are smart, but not always. In addition explicit

mechanisms

in place to

make

adjustments based on incoming information and the system's goal. Obviously, your

body

is

a

smart system and your car

a

dumb

in

your

system. But mechanical systems can

be smart.

The heating and cooling system

mechanical system (Collins, 1988, pp. 49-50).

The thermostat has

home It's

is

a

good example of

smart because

it

a

smart

has a thermostat.

three important elements: a goal state (the temperature you set

Social

an information mechanism

at),

it

home), and

heater on and It

(its

Smart systems such

off.

ability to read the

mechanism through which

a control

as the

As

I

at a

systems theory. Below focused on the

temperature in your

thermostat tend toward equilibrium. its

control

mechanism

comfortable 73 degrees, or whatever temperature

mentioned, there are

first

is

few

a

number of

a short issues.

list.

And,

As

219

turns the air conditioner or

it

balances out the forces of hot and cold through

your house

Systems and Their Environments

differences

it

was

between functionalism and

Luhmann's concern

we'll see,

to keep

set to.

is

primarily

by the conclusion of the chapter,

as we'll see

the implications of using systems theory rather than structural-functionalism are significant.



Systems theory pays attention to the relationship between the system and

its

environment; structural-functionalism generally does not. •

There are no requisite needs

in systems theory; functionalism

is

defined by

the delineation of such needs. •

Systems do not necessarily tend toward equilibrium; functionalism generally

an equilibrated

posits

state.

For systems theory, a

state

of equilibrium

is

a

consequence of a system being smart. •

Systems theory

focused on processes; functional theory

is

theory thus tends to reify

tures. Functional

is

focused on struc-

concepts and systems theory

its

does not.

As we move through

this chapter,

keep the distinctive features of functionalism

and systems theory in mind. We'll see how Luhmann blends elements of each to form his

own brand of systems theory.

at society as a

In the end,

Luhmann

is

going to argue that looking

system has profound implications for the way we do sociology. We'll

finish the chapter

with a brief review of the gains of using systems theory.

Concepts and Theory: Self-Referencing Systems Environments and Complexity For Luhmann, the concepts of function and functional analysis no longer belong to the system

itself,

as

with functionalism, but, rather, "fo the relationship between

system and environment. The final reference of ference between system

added). tems.

It is

all

and environment" (Luhmann, 1984/1995,

Luhmann

sees systems as interdependent

easy to illustrate: Did the collapse of the Soviet

obviously did.

It

no longer

viable. In other

different than a

first

first,

States?

for the United States

and

second, and third world

words, with the demise of the USSR, the con-

cept of "third world countries" ceased to exist

something

emphasis

Union influence the United

changed the entire global environment

other nations as well. For example, the idea of is

p. 177,

the dif-

and thus mutually constitutive. This

It

countries

lies in

important to note that system environments are made up of other sys-

is

all

functional analyses

and the United

world country (the other

Soviet Russia) because such terms had

become

obsolete.

first

States has

become

world country was

220

AND SYSTEMS

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

Thus, for Luhmann, the important beginning point for functional analysis the system

itself,

but, rather, the

This idea has two implications, boundaries. there's

A

boundary between the system and first,

system exists only

it

means

if it is

some kind of boundary between

neither the system nor the environment relationship

and boundary

from

the problem of reification

objects

we saw

boundary means

shifting analysis to the

becomes extremely

difficult,

environment, that

the other

The second implication

that are important.

leads to a radical de-ontologizing of objects as such"

Remember

its

is, if

and the environment. This means

more important than

is

isn't

environment.

that systems are defined in terms of

different it

its

1?

Luhmann

is

that

it's

the

that "this

(Luhmann, 1984/1995,

Chapter

in

is



p. 177).

saying that

that treating social structures as real

because we cannot treat difference as an object

or thing. Thus, in Luhmann's neofunctionalism there are no objective, social structures (like the kind

That being

ronment

is

said,

we looked

Chapters

and

itself

the system being

its

systems.

and

8).

and

and the environment.

risk.

A

Risk

is

defined by the relation-

system must maintain a boundary

environment, and the boundary must reduce the

risk of

overwhelmed by the contingencies of the environment. System

boundaries also reduce complexity. Again,

complex than

6, 7,

argues that the boundary between system and envi-

created by reducing complexity

ship between the system

between

at in

Luhmann

their

this

is

by definition. Systems must be

less

environments because environments are composed of other

We should also

note that reducing complexity and risk are related. Systems

reduce the risk of being overwhelmed by their environment by reducing complexity.

And, the reduction of

are tied

reduce

up with risks;

risk

survivability.

and complexity

are active issues, both of

they do this by reducing the complexity of the environment so that

certain elements can be controlled. Let's use the lung ple again:

The lungs reduce the complexity of

extracting oxygen (a simpler

compound).

Meaning and

Systems

So

far

which

Systems survive in their environments because they

Social

we've been talking

our primary concern: the

at a

and respiratory system exam-

their specific

very abstract level and

social system.

it's

environment

time to bring

it

As we've seen, systems are defined

(air)

by

down

to

in

terms

of boundaries that reduce risk and complexity in the environment. The social

system evolved

a very specific

way of doing

this. In fact, this

evolution actually

involved two systems: the social system and the psychic system. In other words,

people and society need one another; society

is

impossible without people and

people are impossible without society. At any point, the one

ronment of the

other.

about because of a 'meaning'"

Luhmann

common

is

the necessary envi-

(1984/1995) argues that this co-evolution came

achievement:

"We

call this

evolutionary achievement

(p. 59).

Seeing communication and meaning as creating the boundary between the envi-

ronment and the system

is

unique

to

Luhmann. While Durkheim never

really

con-

sidered system-boundary issues, both Spencer and Parsons did. However, what they

saw were structures that negotiated the boundary rather than created the shift in primary interest:

from

it.

internal structures that function to

Notice again

maintain the

Social

system to the boundary that creates the system. This us to understand Luhmann's theory, which social system, not

The of

human

beings

is

extremely important for

shift is

based on the essential feature of the

on something derived from the system

system

social

is

(like structures).

created through meaning, which

— meaning

Systems and Their Environments

is

the elemental nature

what makes the human psyche and

is

social

system

unique. In terms of the system, meaning and communication are the ways in which

complexity and risk are reduced, thus producing the system boundary. In reducing risk

and complexity, there

space,

Humans

have to address these issues differently from any other species. Because

the social system less

are three central issues that social systems address: time,

and symbols.

and symbols have end-

created through meaning, time, space,

is

horizons. In other words, for humans, time, space, and signification are

potentially infinite. Take time, for example:

all

We not only can communicate with one

another about the beginning of the universe through physics, but through religion

we can

talk

that time

about before and

and space

after the beginning. Physics

The domain of God,

are related.

and

religion

for instance,

both

tell

us

eternal (outside

is

Of course, the infinite possibilities of time humans to use meaning, and meaning itself

time) and omnipresent (outside space).

and space are based on the

ability

of

(symbols) must be held back from are defined cific past,

its

endless possibilities. Thus, social systems

and produced when meanings

present,

and

are created that orient actors to a spe-

future; that delineate certain spatial relationships;

and

that

of symbolic worlds.

restrict the endless possibilities

Reflexivity

One

of the issues that meaning introduces

seen this in Chapters to think is flat;

1

and

about our past and

the earth

is

2, all

and

the center of the universe;

shaman and devour to

only to

again in Chapter 12). Take a

moment

we humans have believed: The earth gods live on Mount Olympus; the uni-

god

Nu and

This, according to

list is

Atum; hekura

the sun god

the souls of their enemies;

dominate the world. The itself.

it

reflexivity or self-reference (we've

the crazy things

verse was created by the water

man

we'll see

is

it's

endless and that's the point

Luhmann

live inside

the manifest destiny of the white

(1984/1995),

is

— meaning

refers

"the fundamental law of

self-reference" (p. 37).

Luhmann reference.

meaning

uses the term autopoiesis to talk about the issues surrounding

The word

is

made up of two Greek words:

creation. Autopoietic systems, then, are self-producing.

nated in the work of two Chilean biologists, Varela (1991).

A

logical cells are life,

auto meaning

clear

The term

origi-

in

biology

is

made up of biochemical components and bounded components and

of energy and molecules into their

elements of the biological society does the

poiesis

Humberto Maturana and Francisco

example of an autopoietic system

the cells use these

same

cell

self-

and

self,

the

cell.

Bio-

structures. In

structures to convert an external flow

own components and

structures. Thus, the

reproduce themselves. And, according to Luhmann,

thing.

Communication systems,

then, are self-referencing.

Meaning systems

are

completely closed; they refer only to themselves. The reflexive nature of the social

221

222

AND SYSTEMS

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

system implies three things. 1984/1995,

p. 37).

First,

"only meaning can change meaning" (Luhmann,

People exist in systems of meaning, and they

make

decisions that

influence the social system in which they are working. Actors in this sense are free agents: Their decisions are not constrained. However, people can only use to

make

decisions about meaning. This sounds circular because

decision about what courses to take or what major to have, you

education system. Even

working

lesbians are

do

people change the meaning of something

if

do with marriage

to



is

it

If

it is.

it



meaning

you make

a

within the

and

as gays

done within an already

existing

meaning system.

The second thing

that self-referencing systems imply

tinually remade. Specifically, the

that they

is

ment must be maintained. Think about an obviously human-made from

a recently

researchers

found ancient archeology

must attempt

site.

to

moment and

on the itself.

edly

third implication

Luhmann

is

Societal thematization

There's a

able to give

theme about you;

much

is

me

a clear

it's

ment); second,

it

gives

it

your

makes you

which you make decisions saw the decision

(for

as part of

the

clear

is

"system events disap-

is,

different

and

It's

if

I

asked,

who

and

are you?

the story line around which

This theme does a few

are.

from everybody

space);

based

thematization. You undoubt-

like individual

and coherent answer self-identity.

is

society can think about

else

(your environ-

you meaning (by reducing the complexity of your

riences through continuous time

it is,

came from.

(p. 177).

you organize ideas and experiences about who you things for you. First,

it

that societies self-thematize. Self- thematizat ion

idea that social systems can be reflective. That

would be

it,

what

This example

itself.

puts

that

subsequent events can be produced only via the

and environment"

difference between system

The

the object

isn't in

to us because of our perception of time. As

moment

and society

dug up

artifact

In order to figure out

to reconstruct the culture

Obviously, the meaning of the object

pear from

must be con-

boundary between the system and the environ-

third,

it

real

expe-

forms the basis upon

example, you decided to come to school because you

your understanding of

who you

are). Social

themes

function in the same way. Self-thematization implies that social systems are organizing: Using meaning, they organize their environmental

boundary

self-

as well as

the boundaries within the system (such as between religion and education).

Concepts and Theory: Social Evolution Three Societal Systems Luhmann

gives us three different societal systems: interactional, social (society),

and organizational. The foundation of

all

such, the basic unit of the societal system

social systems is

is

communication. As

the interaction, where two or

more

people meaningfully interrelate their actions: "As soon as any communication

whatsoever takes place p. 70).

among

individuals, social systems

emerge" (Luhmann, 1982,

For Luhmann, fact-to-face encounters provide the opportunity for an inter-

locking relationship of action through symbolic communication; speaking to one

another automatically

sets

up

a

boundary and

this

boundary reduces complexity

Social

from

all

possible communications. In addition, face-to-face

limiting in the sense that only

one person generally

Systems and Their Environments

communication

talks at a

is self-

time and only one

topic can be dealt with at a time.

The

movement

limitations of the interactional system force

to a system of

another type. In other words, there has to be a communication system that can

connect your face-to-face interaction with other interactions. Society, then,

"is the

comprehensive system of all reciprocally accessible communicative actions" (Luhmann,

communication with and

1982, p. 73, emphasis original). Society coordinates

among

all

possible actors missing

from

a single case (your interaction),

Society, then,

the

is

interactions. This

is

meaning system

that

this

as

of

language

interactions at

two

of interactions happened 600 years

ago,

works,

different times. We'll say that the first set

society

number

capable of embracing a

is

accomplished symbolically, through such things

and self-thematization. To see how

and

communication.

regulates or systematizes through the principle of possible

let's set

up three

with one interaction taking place in Tenochtitlan (the Aztec capital), one in York (England), and the third in Luoyang City (China). Each of these interactions would take place using different languages

and

different societal themes.

interactions taking place within those cities



constitute a society

Now

move

let's

a separate,

However,

the

would be meaningfully linked and thus

bounded system.

those interactions into our time. Since Tenochtitlan no longer

exists, we'll

use the Mexican city of Tecate, but both York and Luoyang

Now, what

are the differences?

Are the interactions

tuting different social systems? Chances are still

all

good

still

stand.

still

as separate, thus consti-

that the three interactions will

be in three different languages. But are there themes that link the interactions?

Chances are better today that there are such themes. And the chances increase as

we move

to greater population centers,

Kong. There are

two strong themes

will

only one societal system

is

come back

to this notion of a

numbers of

prompt Luhmann (1982)

capitalism and democracy. Such themes

"Today, there

such as London, Mexico City, and

that cut across large



society

is

a

Hong

interactions: to conclude,

world society"

(p. 73).

We

world society when we consider differentiation

and modernity. But for

now want you I

to notice

how unique Luhmann's idea of society is. Using Luhmann is able to give us a much

the ideas of system boundaries and meaning,

more

flexible

and robust definition of society. This definition escapes the limitations

of seeing society in terms of a territory, language, and state (the Weberian approach); the drawbacks of defining society in structural-functional terms (Spencer,

Durkheim, and Parsons); the limitations of defining society on the basis of economic relations (the set

Marxian approach); and the

restrictions of conceiving of society as a

of structures. In Luhmann's theory, society

ing as people redefine their

The societal

third social system

is

almost organic, moving and chang-

meanings and change is

their interactions.

organization. This system

is

"inserted" between the

and interactional systems. The purpose of organizational systems

tain artificial behaviors for long periods of time in order to goals.

The behaviors

is

to sus-

accomplish specific

are "artificial" in the sense that they aren't directly motivated

by either aesthetic values or moral demands. For example, most people working a

McDonald's kitchen do not do so

for the work's intrinsic value.

in

223

224

AND SYSTEMS

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

addition to motivating people to work by providing rewards

In

money

in capitalist societies

ance: role specification,

you

are

to

exit rules. All organizations

have explicit

members. For example, the university of which you

its

behave as

Further, the university counts

a student; that's

on you

your role

to internalize a

in the organization.

good portion of these

expectations, such as values for academic honesty and scholastic truth.

doctor

is

you are planning

more

Of

role

course,

commitment demanded vary by type of organization and

the specificity and position. If

generally

two other methods of obtaining compli-

and entrance and

behavioral expectations of are a part expects

— there



go on to medical school, for example, the role of

to

highly specified, and the attitudinal and motivational expectations

are greater, than your current role as student.

memhow

Organizations also have explicit entrance and exit rules that help manage bers' this

commitment

to

work.

continue to use the university example to see

Let's

works. The university that you are attending has demanding entrance rules. In

order to become a student, you had to meet several

The

organizations also have exit rules. specific

fulfill

criteria,

GPA and SAT roles. Many

such as

Entrance rules such as these create investment in organizational

scores.

university

is

again a good example:

You must

requirements concerning courses and quality of work to successfully

exit the university.

Note that these entrance and

exit requirements, as well as the

role expectations, carry over into

your next organizational position. In other words,

your documented performance

in

next organization (your boss

is

one organization

sets the expectations in the

going to expect you to think and act

like a college

graduate).

Evolutionary Processes As we saw with agrees.

classic functionalism, evolution

However, because Luhmann

tionship between a system and the differences as

we

talk

its

means

differentiation.

Luhmann

defines functional issues in terms of the rela-

environment, his concerns are different. We'll see

our way through

his theory.

Generally speaking, evolution occurs through three processes: variation, tion,

and

stabilization.

selec-

Systems increase the possibility of their survival by having

the ability to create variations. There are two important qualities that define the social system's ability to create options. First, social systems,

on meaning and communication,

now

because they are based

aren't limited to organic constraints.

evolve symbolically, by dreaming imaginary worlds and bringing

existence. Second, the "capacity for evolutionary variation

is

Luhmann

which have

p.

266, emphasis

argues that communication systems are based

a binary quality to them.

And

upon

its

"we can communicate new, surprising, and unsettling messages, and

understood"

codes,

binaries always contain opposites, such as

good/bad, male/female, and so on. Since every idea by definition contains site,

oppo-

will

be

(p. 266).

The next evolutionary

principle

is

selection.

Luhmann

talks

about

this in

terms

of the differences between language and media of communication. Language otters

into

guaranteed because

language always offers the option of saying 'no'" (Luhmann, 1982, original).

Humans

them

almost endless

possibilities.

Thus,

I

can say that "I'm a 6-toot

tall

itseli

rabbit with

Systems and Their Environments

Social

the ears of an elephant." But one of the things that selection does

some of what

is

possible.

is

to "de-realize"

can say almost anything, but not everything

I

say will be

I

understood, which is the basic requirement for communicative success and selection.

Communicative

medium

a

is

success,

and thus

selection,

is

governed by recognized media.

means of effecting or conveying something. When we

a generalized

medium

of communication or exchange,

we

A

are talking about

are referencing such

things as the ideas and beliefs surrounding truth, love, money, political power, art,

and so on. These

are legitimate codes or discourses that

we

turn give a statement intelligible space. Thus, the things that

through a

medium

nicative success

medium

through a

formation of a system

media that

I

can



in

commu-

of "political power."

every social

mentioned above,

which

intelligibly say

of "faith" might be very different from what will have

third process in evolutionary change

The

reference, I

faith

stabilization,

is

and

this requires the

change must be systemically

and power, are understandable

The

stabilized.

to

you because

they are already a part of a system of communication. Faith exists within the com-

municative system of religion and political power within the system of government.

Patterns of Differentiation Sociocultural evolution occurs initially through separating the three systems

we noted above

— interaction systems, organizational systems, and

societal systems.

Thus, the greater the level of differentiation, the greater will be the independence of these systems. As differentiation between levels

more complex and off

is

achieved, social reality

assume separate functions and

the systems can

becomes

themselves

set

from one another. Differentiation also occurs within each system.

Luhmann

argues that differenti-

ation within a system takes place through replication. Systems differentiate internally along the

same path

that they used to differentiate externally. In other words,

systems replicate themselves internally. For instance, organizational systems will differentiate internally

by proposing,

zational forms. "Differentiation

of system building. results"

As

I

It

selecting,

and systematizing

same mechanism, using

it

to amplify

its

own

pp. 230-231).

Luhmann

earlier,

ments. Part of what this means references: (1) the external

is

asks us to look at systems

environment

common and

example, each state within the United States has a (the federal government),

is

tems), and each state has

its

and

their environ-

that every differentiated subsystem has three

to other subsystems within the larger system,

ments

different organi-

thus understood as a reflexive and recursive form

repeats the

(Luhmann, 1982, mentioned

is

to

all

subsystems, (2)

its

relation

(3) its relationship to itself.

common

For

external environment

differently related to each of the other states (subsys-

own unique

configuration of state and local govern-

(relation to self).

The implication

is

that

Luhmann's theory of evolutionary change

dynamic than the previous ones.

is

much more

Classic functionalism did not give sufficient

weight to issues of environment. Luhmann, however, recognizes the movements

between systems and their environments, both internally and

externally.

These

multiple relationships in the long run tend to increase the level of differentiation

225

226

SOCIAL STRUCTURES AND SYSTEMS

and system building exponentially. Initial differentiation will

In other

of systems to systems, differentiation

ronment

words, complexity breeds complexity.

be small. But because of the environmental relationships

for other systems,

in

one system makes

which then have

for a

more complex

envi-

which further adds

to differentiate,

to

the complexity of the environment, which again prompts system differentiation.

Luhmann 1.

argues that there are three primary patterns of differentiation.

Segmentary

differentiation,

which

differentiates society into equal

subsystems. In this case, a primitive society using kinship as organizational form will tend to duplicate or extend kinship tiation

which

2.

is

needed. This results in a system that

in the

differen-

large but not very complex, that the sys-

thus hampered).

is

Stratification differentiation,

which

The organization of

alike

principal

when

number and kind of variations

long run reduces the

tem can produce (evolution

tems.

is

its

and

society

differentiates society into

becomes

unequal subsys-

hierarchical, with

some

subsys-

tems having greater power or status than others. While segmentation only duplicates

its

systems, stratification creates diverse systems. This kind of dif-

ferentiation does ble variations

two

things:

It

increases the

and adaptive systems, and

it

number and

diversity of possi-

creates pressures for increased

communication and generalized media of exchange. A more needed to

is

facilitate

communication among

abstract

medium

different kinds of groups,

and

communication increases because of the diversity, both within and between strata.

3.

Functional differentiation, which organizes communication around special

functions to be fulfilled at the level of society. This tion with

which

classic

the type of differentia-

is

functionalism was concerned. In functional differen-

tiation, there are institutional fields that link

up

different organizations or

names of

subsystems. You are undoubtedly familiar with the

these institu-

tions, such as education, government, family, and so on. Let's use education

for

an

illustration.

"Education"

is

linked by a particular culture and

really a

group of

different organizations

communication system. In education there

are school districts, university systems, textbook

and journal publishers,

organizations that produce chalk and blackboards, and so on. These organizations are functionally related to one another fields

and

ing these institutional domains produces entirely

with

I've

its

own

set

new environments, each

outlined Luhmann's ideas about system evolution and differentiation in

should work to give us an idea of

and provide us with basis of society

am

creat-

of issues.

Figure 10.1. In comparison to the actual world, the diagram

I

to other institutional

(through more abstract means of communication). Notice that

is

at least a

fulfilled

through

this

one

is

fairly simple.

But

it

thinks about societal evolution

sense of the complexity involved. As you can see, the

the interaction.

noting with a thick

how Luhmann

It

forms

line. In this

a

system against an environment, which

"before differentiation" phase,

interactive grouping.

all

tasks are

Social

Before

Interaction.

Systems and Their Environments

1

Differentiation

Variation

Segmental

Interaction.

— Selection — Stabilization Interaction.

1

1

org.1

Differentiation

Variation

Stratified

(

Interaction.

(

Interaction. 2

1

\

\

— Selection — Stabilization (

Interaction.

(

Interaction. 2

1

1 org.1

-(

Interaction.

1

ft

( Interaction.

2

\

Interaction.

3

j

>

Differentiation

(

Interaction.

3

\

(

Interaction.

3

(

>

Variation

— Selection — Stabilization Interaction.

1

org.1

Interaction. 2

Functional Differentiation

Figure 10.1

Due ties

System Differentiation

to shifts in the environment, the interaction throws out different possibili-

of variation, selection, and stabilization. Society then differentiates, but seg-

mentally by duplicating

itself (the

interactions are

all

of the same type). The line

between two interactions (Org.1) represents an organization. These organizations could take place

among

almost any of the interactions. This

is still

a simple social

new environment has been created. There is still the genenvironment, but now there is an internal one as well, formed by the

system, but notice that a eral,

external

communicative Again, there

relations is

among

the interactions

variation, selection,

"stratified differentiation."

Notice that

and

now

and organizations.

stabilization,

which move society

to

there are different types of interactions

227

228

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

AND SYSTEMS

(Interactions

and

2,

1,

them. These lines of

3),

number of

with any

the box surrounding each type. This

among

organizations occurring

noted by

like interactions constitute different social strata, as

where society develops groups with

is

differ-

ent levels of resources to address different system concerns (in this case, there might

be religious and

political elites

stratified differentiation, there

There

plexity.

is

a

corresponding increase

in

a result of

environmental com-

the external environment, but the internal social environment

is still

has expanded to include

ment of

and lower-level economic workers). As

all

interactions. In addition, there

is

also a social environ-

(noted by the horizontal rectangles surrounding the

like interactions

dif-

ferent interactions).

With functional

environment among

social

like interactions still exists, as

tem and the external boundary. Added I've

noted two such environments,

that constitute a functional

parts of

change dramatically. Notice that the

differentiation, things

do the

larger social sys-

to these are the institutional environments.

A and

B,

and connected

domain. As you can

see,

the organizations

some of the organizations

two domains. An example of such an organization

of the airline industry as well as the military. The

all

is

Boeing, which

number and

is

are

part

diversity of these

crossover organizations increase as organizations include multinational, diversified corporations.

These patterns of differentiation roughly correspond to

social evolution

from

simple to complex societies: Archaic societies are differentiated primarily through

segmentation, high-culture societies through social strata or

by functional

societies is

that the complexity of society isn't

would have

as classic functionalists

forms.

Modern

society

What

differentiation.

is

is

and modern

class,

unique about Luhmann's approach

gauged simply by the degree of differentiation, but also by the incorporation of previous

it,

most complex because

it

incorporates the other two forms

in addition to functional differentiation.

Before for a

we look

moment.

at

modern

societies,

ferent times in different locations. But tant than

what

want us

I

to consider high-culture societies

In terms of historic epochs, high-culture societies occurred at dif-

it

did socially.

It's

when

at this

this social type

to truly self-thematize. In segmental differentiation, the

were

relatively undifferentiated.

That

occurred

is

less

impor-

point in social evolution that society began

is,

world and

all

it

contained

the physical, social, and spiritual worlds

were seen as derivations of the same essence. High-culture

societies,

on the other

hand, began to separate out different elements. Religion, for example,

moved from

spiritual presence to seeing a

Weber, 1922/1963).

and

its

conceptualizing the world as infused with

complete separation between heaven and earth (see

Politically, society

wrote

its

purpose, achievements, and future. Within

legitimating stories about those

who

on

itself

this political discourse

were

history as a story centered

could hold power and those

who

couldn't;

these political stories increased the levels of diversity that society could coordinate.

Economically, separating "nature" from

humankind and

the spiritual world allowed

society to begin to exploit natural resources to their fullest. acterizes this

profound

shift that

came with high

ization of nature" (p. 352); as nature

complex"

(p. 78).

is

Luhmann

(

1982) char-

culture as the "gradual desocial-

desocialized, "social reality

Thus, the very idea of society as a

human

becomes more

institution

is

based on

— Social

order for society to count as such, this and only this

stratified differentiation: "In

form of differentiation has

Systems and Their Environments

be recognized and accepted" (Luhmann, 1997,

to

p. 68).

Modernity To begin our discussion of modernity, we need

Luhmann

argues that

erful gains

modern

society

is

clearly frees us

from being constrained by

is

way

the

that

one of the theoretically pow-

global. Again,

from using Luhmann's theory

remind ourselves

to

it

conceptualizes society.

It

territories or political systems. Political

systems are certainly a type of social system, but in modernity they are a subsystem within the larger system of society. Keep this in

modern

tours of

social systems.

mind

we review

as

the general con-

These issues can be applied to any

level,

including

the global social system.

As we noted

earlier, initial differentiation

social systems: interactional, organizational,

means

the three system levels also

its

are differentiated, they are not disassociated.

impossible since

"all social

among

the three different

societal. Differentiation

among

that society can intervene in interactional or

organizational systems without threatening

els is

occurs

and

own

A

survival.

However, while they

total disjunction

of the three lev-

action obviously takes place in society and

ultimately possible only in the form of interaction"

(Luhmann, 1982,

is

This

p. 79).

implies that the three subsystems are nested within and functionally dependent

upon each also

other; this interdependency keeps conflict to a

minimum.

Conflict

minimized because of the tendency toward piecemeal involvement. As

eties differentiate, the individual

or he cannot completely

demands from

fulfill.

soci-

a nexus of diverse expectations that she

You've undoubtedly experienced this already, with

parents, significant others, peers, work, school, religious organiza-

and so on. The end

tions,

becomes

is

result

is

that overt conflict

between groups becomes

among

increasingly difficult because people are spread too thinly

their

emotional

involvements.

members mean less to

In addition, differentiation allows

others. Because our individual roles

and

irresolvable expectations,

we

to be indifferent to the roles of

us in an environment of complex

don't have the strength of

identity to take exception with others. In other words, a time

where there

comes about.

It isn't

is

greater equality

due

commitment

Luhmann

sees

to

modernity

and acceptance. However, notice why

to Utopian beliefs

about egalitarianism;

it is

an as

this

simply due to

the effects of the complex differentiation of society. In

the

terms of integration, one other important

autonomy of law: "The emergence of a

to possess special significance as

tion for

all

(Luhmann, 1986/1989,

communicative codes

that persons

understand and regulate relationships. In

medium

itself is a

is

a condi-

it is

pp. 129-130).

Law

rep-

and organizations can use

this sense, the

of exchange within society. Society

communication, and law

of differentiation remains

an achievement of social evolution:

further social evolution"

resents specific

effect

functionally specific legal system appears

law

is

a special

to

kind of

based on the constraint of acts of

way of constraining communication. The

sepa-

ration of law as a function serves as a kind of evolutionary catalyst accelerating differentiation by facilitating

communication across organizations and

societies.

229

230

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

AND SYSTEMS

For social evolution and integration, to reflexively in

produce

what I.uhmann

own

its

Before modernity, and even through the

calls positive law.

Enlightenment, law was seen as founded on

by God). The well-known

line

important that law become able

is

it

themes, apart from social ideologies. This results

a natural

order or theocracy (rule

from the Declaration of Independence

these truths to be self-evident, that

men

all

— "We hold

endowed

are created equal, that they are



by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights"

is

an expression of

deistic

natural law.

Natural law and divine law are absolute in every way: absolute truth and

hampers

absolutely enforced. However, in the long run, this basis of legitimation social evolution.

America provides

were not included

in the

Women

a case in point:

above quotation.

If

and people of color

the United States had continued to

women, people of rests solely upon

believe in the natural or divine truth of the above statement, color,

and so on would

still

not be considered citizens. Positive law

make

the legislative and judicial decisions that

law,

it

and thus

more

is

readily

adaptable to a rapidly changing society. In contrast to natural law, the validity of positive law rests is

the foundation

One of the eralized

and

on the

principle of variation: "It

and

for its stability

things to notice about

medium

flexible

modern

integration

thus orderliness does not hinge

upon

nationalism) centrality. There's a

in highly differentiated societies

shared value commitments

is

that

it

is

based on a gen-

of exchange and that systems are integrated as a result

of unintended consequences of differentiation:

tity,

the very alterability of law that

is

validity" (p. 94).

its



is

Modern

society has

no center and

structural (state, religion) or cultural (iden-

way

in

which the mechanism

for integration

What is not needed is a single set of become too complex. Modern society is a

avoidance.

society has

highly abstract communicative network that simply defines vague and lax conditions for social compatibility,

and

involves abstraction of

it

and indifference

to

multiple aspects of the lives of individuals.

However, modern society

modern

differentiation

is

that

isn't

without

its

problems.

An important

issue of

problems and issues can become displaced from the

level

of society to a subsystem. The result

may

not have the communicative tools (codes and themes) to deal with the

As an

illustration, let's think

is

that the societal subsystem responsible

and peripheral (or underdeveloped) nations municative scheme of capitalism

poor or the environment. The defining theme. Without Profit

is

it,

issue.

about modern capitalism, the ecological environment,

is at

(see

Luhmann, 1986/1989). The com-

odds with such humanitarian concerns

profit motivation

capitalism

is

intrinsic to capitalism

would not be



as the

it is its

capitalism.

accrued through expanding markets and increasing commodification,

both of which are objectifying and amoral.

We

should expect, then,

capitalist orga-

nizations to be oriented toward maximizing profit through expanding markets

and commodification. line considerations,

Capitalist

themes and codes are oriented toward bottom-

even in such global

Organization, which

is

assumed

capitalist organizations as the

to have oversight over ecological issues. This the-

matic value for profit ought not to be seen as bad in and of

of capitalism's self-thematization. But is

receiving so

little

World Trade

real attention:

it

does

tell

us

why

The organizations

itself. It is

the result

ecological destruction

that have

been given the

Social

responsibility for it

any

in

Web

the

Byte,

do not have the themes or communication systems

it

real way.

Systems and Their Environments

231

to address

(For another perspective concerning ecological destruction, see

James

O 'Conner: Selling Nature.)

Concepts and Theory: Changing Sociology's Question Leftover Vocabularies One

of the implications of viewing society in terms of segmented,

functional differentiation that statement in itself

is

argument

that class inequality

provides incentives for hard

approach has been severely see

as a

it

way

of justifying the status

As we've seen,

is

a

complexity of society so that

For exam-

functional because

is

Moore, 1945). This

conflict sociologists.

They

class oppression.

decidedly different from that of classic func-

Luhmann

is

part of the evolution of

type of differentiation that occurred to increase the

it

could reduce the complexity and risk of the envi-

ronment through communication. issue.

is

quo and

said.

and

Now,

"functional."

have

&

talent (Davis

by many, especially

stratification for

social forms. Stratification

parts-whole

is

work and

criticized

However, Luhmann's argument tionalism.

becomes

classic functionalists

ple, the classic functionalist it

that stratified inequality

is

something that

stratified,

Stratification

This way of looking

is

thus a boundary issue, not a

at differentiation

too presents us with a case of system formation on

implies that "stratification

the basis of equality"

(Luhmann,

1982, p. 263, emphasis original). Yes, stratification creates inequalities; that's

meaning of the term. But

the

subsystem of

equals that in

it

principally generates equality because

communication within the

increases

increased due to stratification, which Further, Generally,

is

archaic societies

ern societies

what "matters"

to the social system.

—segmentation, high-culture

— functional

segmentation

differentiation.

by

a specific type of differentiation:

societies



stratification,

in functionally differentiated societies;

each social type

isn't

is

what modern

dis-

soci-

based on, nor are we generally aware of stratification. In modern society,

"the predominant relation

and exclusion, and

(Luhmann,

is

this relates

no longer

a hierarchical one, but

one of inclusion

not to stratification but to functional differentiation"

1997, p. 70).

What, then, are we ity?

and mod-

While the previous forms continue, there

tinguished by a specific differentiation. Thus, stratification eties are

creates a

remember that Luhmann takes an evolutionary point of view. there is a move from simple to complex systems, with each major

step in societal evolution being characterized

is still

it



more communication stratification strata. Overall, then, communication is

turn produces

Luhmann

to

make of how conflict and

critical theories

think of inequal-

characterizes those theories as "leftover vocabularies."

societies reflexively

As we've seen,

produce themes around which interaction and organization

can take place. With increasing secularization, the theme of high-culture societies

became "happiness." Thus, among the reasons was

to guarantee "Life, Liberty,

shifted to the distinct

for the creation

of the United States

and the pursuit of Happiness." This theme soon

themes of modernity:

solidarity

and

equality.

232

AND SYSTEMS

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

Luhmann

thus arguing that, rather than analyses of

is

and equality

issues of solidarity

how

society works, the

that sociology concerns itself with are actually part

of political, ethical discourses. Further, even those societal self-themati/ations are outdated. Think about

how

social integration occurs in functionally differentiated

— systemically speaking,

and equality are no longer

solidarity

society

cerns, particularly in a world-system society that

"Sociology

may

well see a task in correcting

more urgent

to the

and

tradition

in shifting

outworn themes of stratification and compensatory

attention from the

con-

increasing in complexity.

is

own

its

social

its

social ideas

external problems" (p. 74).

Society as System As

said,

I

from

ferent

Luhmann's understanding of the function of stratification

the conflict theorists it

And,

that of classic functionalism.

turns out,

it's

who

interestingly,

claim that functionalism

the conflict and critical theorists

fodder for modernity's discourse. But what do

a value-driven perspective.

is

who

we

vastly dif-

is

he turns the tables on

As

have provided the ideological

gain by using Luhmann's systems

theory?

To begin

to

answer

we need

this question,

to revisit the idea of society as a

system. Typically, society has been viewed as a territory that cific

centralized state.

Luhmann

claims this approach

is

is

controlled by a spe-

wrong-headed. Systems are

defined by boundaries and boundaries by the reduction of environmental complexity

and

risk. Social

are the basic tools through

and language aries

and

systems do this through communication

order. If

Luhmann

is

right,

Sociology has been thinking about

Luhmann wants Recall that

modern

us to

then

itself

which human beings create bound-

we have been misrecognizing

more

recognize that

—communication

as

an organization than

modern

societies are characterized as

society

is

a

society.

a society.

world-system.

being functionally differentiated.

Regional or national boundaries are not functional in Luhmann's (1997) sense:

"They

are political conventions, relevant for the segmentary differentiation of the

political

subsystem of the global society"

(p. 72,

emphasis added). Luhmann

isn't

saying that national or regional borders aren't boundaries; they are. But they are part of the segmentary system, not the functional system, which lutionarily

is

becoming evo-

more dominant.

Recognizing society as a system changes sociology's questions. As before, stratification

and inequality are

I

mentioned

issues associated with differentiation

and

the evolution of society; they aren't a matter of "exploitation or suppression." Those

ways of looking

are ideological

suppression

isn't

at the issue.

simply ideological;

it

is

Thinking

based on

in

terms of exploitation and

a specific

society as a thing, an entity that has a

way of controlling

argument

it's

is

that society

is

not a thing;

a

itself.

concept of society:

Luhmann's (1997)

communication system

that

is

evolving

by becoming more complex. Society changes and evolves, "but cannot control itself" (p. 73).

tion. is

"But

We

who

can continue to make moral claims about society and

will

not in control of

hear these complaints and itself?" (p. 73).

who can

react to

them,

if

stratifica-

the society

Social

Luhmann

is

the ideas that nity."

Systems and Their Environments

One

asking us to consider looking at such problems differently.

we

will see repeated in the next

The hope of modernity was

few chapters

that rationality could

is

the "failure of

make human

existence bet-

and

Rationality could be used to control nature through technological advances

ter.

to ensure social equality, freedom, failed to

of

moder-

and happiness. Both of these modernities have

one degree or another. The unregulated use of technology

is

destroying the

ecosystem, and social equality and happiness have always been at the expense of others. But

maybe modernity

or succeeded, because in

Luhmann's point

didn't

this sense

fail;

maybe modernity could never have

tems don't decide to progress toward an ideological then, isn't the rational control of society; the issue

work. Thus, poverty, all

Luhmann

and inequality continue;

"Western world."

way of

would

has, seeing society as

what

it is:

how

understanding

issue,

systems

in fact,

new oppressed groups continue

to

iteration

is

appear

found

words

in "quotations" are

fall



if

terms based on the idea of

we adapted Luhmann's

perspective,

out of our vocabulary.) Sociology can continue as

it

an entity and attempting to find better ways of social integra-

around such ideas

tion

The

"on" the United States, Great Britain, and other "parts" of the

(All the

talking

is

and "out" of it. Perhaps the newest

society as an object or territorial identity this

goal, they evolve.

confronts sociology with a decision to make. Oppression,

the time, both "in" society

in the terrorist attacks

And sys-

that systems don't exploit or suppress, they neglect.

is

failed

only organizations can fail or succeed.

as

happiness and equality. Or, sociology can see society for

an evolving, complex system.

Complexity and Indeterminacy The

more

functional system requires a

idea of nation-states can give. Earlier

We

I

abstract

communicative system than the

gave you the example of three conversations.

saw that the interactions became more communicatively linked the closer we

got to what

we mean by modernity. This was one way for us to way to see this

global system, not just a national one. Another time. As dle

we noted

time. This

is

Social

memory

is

earlier,

one of the complexities

done communicatively through

(history)

is

selective,

and only uses

see that society issue

is

a

to consider

is

that social systems have to hansocial

memory and

certain events to

speculation. a

tell

meaning-

Luhmann puts it) allows movement across the time barriers that memory erects. Using memory and speculation, time has been clearly used to produce segmented identities. That's why we ful

story about society.

And

speculation (or oscillation, as

have had different calendars with different years and events, such as the Chinese, Jewish,

and Hindu calendars. But those segmented boundaries, though

are severely

weakened

The changes

in

in

modernity.

these identities and time

And

Anthony Giddens's theory (Chapter

to see that time has

society clearly used social

lent.

present,

time and space are a primary concern of theorists of modernity.

We'll see this issue prominently in

we simply want

still

is

memory

been relativized to

form

in

modernity. As

12). I

For

now

said, every

territorial identities; the link

between

seen in the diversity of calendars that used to be preva-

that's just the point:

These calendars are no longer used

in

any significant

233

234

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

way.

used

AND SYSTEMS

The world has

complexity) that

world tional

shifted to a universal clock

is

originally based

is

on

Common

and C.E.

Era)

Luhmann's point

However,

Christianity.

not using the calendar to understand

memory marking

and calendar. The calendar being

method of measuring time (and thus reducing

the Gregorian calendar, a

is

itself as

and

is

(Common

Era).

that as a result of system differentiation in modernity, the

is

more

thus

evolving and becoming

and speculation

clear that the

of "B.C." and "A.D." have given way to B.C.E. (Before

time boundary has become a global issue without segmented or aries

is

it

Christian. In fact, the tradi-

stratified

bound-

This strongly implies that the global system

reflexive.

more complex. Rather than keeping memory

in the future, "the distinction

of time re-enters

(Luhmann, 1997,

p. 71).

and divided more

abstractly, there isn't

In other words, because time

is

and we have

itself"

of all cultural forms and with

to "live with the historical relativity

is

in the past

a lack

of origins'"

being communicated

an origin (usually associated with national

boundaries) as a reference point. Again,

let's

use the calendars as an illustration. Each society that had a separate

calendar linked

its

time-telling to a culturally significant event.

The

society reduced

the complexity of time in that way, but did so in a segmented manner. Modernity is

differentiated functionally,

evolution

—changes

have an origin;

it

isn't

zodiac. Origins are a

now

the shift in calendar use

is

indicative of society's

and scope of differentiation. Universal time doesn't

marked by the

now

birth of Christ or the cycles of the Chinese

clearly seen as self-made, reflexive thematizations within

communicative system;

future, are

and

in the type

"selectivity of reconfirmations

unavoidable

facts

of social

life"

(Luhmann, 1997,

modern

words, because of system differentiation, the

and uncertainty of the

world-society

other

p. 71). In is

complex and

undetermined. System complexity means that sociology's causal explanations or policy plans are

no longer

possible.

As Luhmann (1997)

turbulent evolution without predictable outcome"

says,

we

are "in a phase of

(p. 76).

The Problem With Systems The problems

that sociology should be

problems that are produced out of lems that

Luhmann

Remember, systems equality for

how

are constituted by boundaries. If

forcing those in

The problem

is

systems, then,

that is

leftover vocabularies.

power

it is

to

isn't

For this idea of system closure,

There

isn't

it is

right."

It

isn't a

problem of

isn't

some-

rationality.

"whose very complexity depends upon

p. 73).

Luhmann

offers the

example of the human

arguably one of the most complex systems evolution has

radically shut off

anything

one of them.

as people want to pursue

of inclusion and exclusion, an inside and an outside.

operational closure" (Luhmann, 1997,

up with, and

we

the nature of systems to build boundaries. Intrinsic within

a process

is

the theoretical prob-

oppression and the solution

"do what's

Further, evolution has developed systems

The human brain

And

faces us with are not slight. Let's take a look at

then the problem

all,

concerned with are system problems, not

like

takes information in,

its

your brain survival

from

its

environment. Think about

in the entire

known

depends upon keeping

universe. all

it

brain.

come

this

way:

While your brain

but select data out. The

Social

only thing

like

your brain

heads." Here's the

is

bottom

human brains

other

that imply?

It

is

that society

is

more pronounced, which means

is

part of

how

I

is

If

growing

its

environment

boundary function

its

work of

something

is

so radical.

is

What does

going to become more and

become

inclusion and exclusion will

is

excluded from the system,

theory, the theoretical questions shift

Given the

rationality to issues related to systems. is

and

part of

it is

either usable or unusable.

Under Luhmann's systems tem

it

said earlier, systems neglect but they don't exploit. Neglecting

systems work.

the environment and

really can't "get into their

exponentially increasing in complexity.

implies that society's

more pronounced. As

235

Your brain can be the most complex system we know

line:

of precisely because the boundary between

The problem

— and you

Systems and Their Environments

and given

in complexity,

become more bounded,

fact that the

that as systems

from

worldwide

grow

in

issues of

social sys-

complexity they

how can we expect to include all And what can we expect when we know that

the question becomes,

kinds of concerns within the system?

upon

the very success of the system depends

an answer, and the question

is

meant

neglect? "But this

is

a question

to redirect sociological research"

and not

(Luhmann,

1997, p. 75, emphasis added).

Summary Luhmann system

is

uses systems theory to argue that the primary issue for a social

boundary between

the

should take place

and

it

boundary

at this

its

environment. Functional analysis

point, not internal structural relations (as

functionalism argues). This means that every system its

environment and that

at least part

is

different according to

of a system's environment

made up

is

of other systems. Systems theory pays attention to processes, not structures; systems vary by their degree of complexity.

Environmental

risk

and complexity are reduced

become more complex

themselves.

The

risk

as systems differentiate

and complexity

that social sys-

tems must deal with revolve around time, space, and symbols. System entiation

an evolutionary process that

is

Human

stabilization.

and

differ-

entails variation, selection,

and

systems are created through communication; thus,

communication (provided by

social evolution involves variation in

linguistic

new communicative forms (recognized media), and through creating new systems of communication.

opposition), selection of stabilization

Because social systems create their environments through meaning, they are inherently self-referencing.

The

reflexivity

that systems are self-organized (principally

of the social system implies

through self-thematization),

self-

produced, and are continuously remade. Societal systems have three distinct subsystems: the interaction system, the social system,

and the organization system. Interaction systems are made up

of face-to-face communication. Social systems (society) are comprehensive

communication systems

that link

all

reciprocally accessible

communicative

actions. Organizations are formal collectives with specific entrance rules, roles,

and goals

and

exit

that sustain artificial behaviors for long periods of time.

236

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

AND SYSTEMS

Societal (.'volution differentiates

among and

within these subsystems through

three different patterns: segmentation, stratification,

and function. These

pat-

terns roughly correspond to increasing complexity in societal types: archaic,

high-culture, and modern.

Through each phase of

differentiation, societies

become more complex, first because each pattern increases the amount and diversity of communication and second because each evolutionary type contains the previous differentiation pattern.

has a dominant pattern: archaic

and modern

However, each evolutionary type

— segmentation, high-culture—

stratification,

— function.

Differentiated societal systems integrate because society can influence interactional

and organizational systems without endangering

different subsystems are nested,

and because of positive

itself,

because the

law. Integration prob-

lems include interactional bottlenecks and problem dispersal to subsystems without the necessary communicative

Modern

society

is

tools.

becoming an increasingly complex world-system. This has

several implications for sociology

and

social policy.

Modern

society

is

a com-

plex communication system. As such, the central problems for sociology and

theory center around o

The increasing complexity and thus indeterminacy of society

o

The

o

The tendency of complex systems

necessity of system

boundary work of environment/system, inclusion/

exclusion to

become closed

Building Your Theory Toolbox Learning More

— Primary Sources

See the following works by Niklas Luhmann: •

The differentiation of society, Columbia University



Social systems, Stanford University Press, 1995.



Observations on modernity, Stanford University Press, 1998.



The

reality

Learning More •

Niklas

of mass media, Stanford University

Press,

Press,

1982.

2000.

— Secondary Sources

Luhmann's modernity: The paradoxes of differentiation, by William

Rasch, Stanford University Press, 2000.

Check

It

Out

—James O' Conner:



Web



Functionalism:

Byte

For

a

good

of functionalism, see Turner

Cummmgs,

1979.

Selling

Nature

historical

overview of the

development

and Maryanski, Functionalism, Benjamin-

Social



Luhmann

Neofunctionalism: To

functionalist.

more about

out

find

Alexander's Neofunctionalism •

generally

is

and

after,

Systems and Their Environments

categorized

as

a

see

perspective,

this

neoJ.

C.

Blackwell, 1998.

Complexity/Chaos theory: For a good introduction

in

the social disciplines,

see D. Byrne's Complexity theory and the social sciences, Routledge, 1998.

Seeing the World •

After reading and understanding this chapter, you should be able to

answer the following questions (remember to answer them o

According to

o

In

Luhmann, what makes

terms of reducing

human

risk

society address?

a system a

theoretically):

system?

and complexity, what three things must

Why

are these specific problems for social

systems? o

and how they work

Explain the three processes of evolution

specifically

in society.

o

Why

is

modern

society

more complex than

either archaic or high-

culture societies? o

Through what processes are modern

societies integrated?

What

prob-

lems are associated with modern societies? o

In

what ways does Luhmann's systems theory change the way we

understand inequality? o

What

are the central issues with

which sociological theory ought to be

concerned?

Engaging the World •

How do Internet

improvements

and

cell

in

communication? Are there Internet chat

communication technologies (such as the

phones) affect the limitations imposed by face-to-face different

boundary

rooms reduce or remove the

issues?

Do such

things as

limitations of turn-taking

and

topic? •

Given Luhmann's theory,

how do you

think worldwide ecological con-

cerns can be addressed?

Weaving the Threads •



Compare and

How

How do

Wallerstein

cal

can these two perspectives be reconciled?

and Luhmann conceptualize the problem of ecologi-

destruction? Given their theories, can environmental issues be suc-

cessfully •

contrast Wallerstein's and Luhmann's ideas about a world-

system.

addressed?

Compare and tional

If

so,

how?

If

not,

why

not?

contrast Luhmann's systems approach with the classic func-

approach to

differentiation.

What does each

perspective sensitize

you to see? •

Each theorist that we've covered so far has a specific definition of society. Prepare a

list

of the different definitions.

that there are so think society

is?

many

Why?

What do you make of the fact What do you

different understandings of society?

237

INTRODUCTION TO SECTION

III

Modernity and Postmodern ity

As

book correspond roughly

three sections of the

W.

Mills attaches to the sociological imagination. In

we

entertained Mills's question of structure and con-

In a building,

by various

are circumscribed

we can walk

doors to enter or not. feet into the

social factors.

And

freely

through the

the building

may

restricts us.

and

can't

only

if

please.

do

And

in a

Rather

many hunwe so choose.

also enable us to ascend

Not only

will there

if

be some doors that are

moving

in

any direc-

the size, shape, and actual structure will determine what

fundamental yet unnoticed way.

the building has that

through doors only

if

many

floors.

they're there. In the

I

like

choice.

and have the choice of various

halls

locked, the walls themselves will also prevent us from really

we

saw that

movement and

sky or to descend several floors under ground,

But the building also

tion

We

the effects of living in social structures and systems.

walking through a building, we have a sense of freedom of

dreds of

to

the previous section,

and situations

lives

last

the questions that C.

some of

sidered

our

mentioned, the

I

I

can go up to the third

we can

floor,

can look through windows or

same way, we

but

move

are both restricted

and

enabled by the social structures that develop out of exchange, the contours of society's population, the

We

also

dynamics of race and gender, and the habitus of our

saw that the building that

through forces larger than it's

dynamic.

All the

itself.

rooms and

is

our society

is

walls

and hallways of society,

interconnections, mutually influence one another. Yet,

house

exists in a global

and becoming more

itself built

But unlike a building, a society all

and transformed

isn't a static

more profoundly, our

about social systems, Wallerstein

introduced us to the effects of history, sociological imagination:

Where does

which brings us

this society

to Mills's

stand in

thing;

of its structures and

system of interconnected societies. This system

so. In talking

class.

human

is

social

complex

in particular

question of the history?

239

240

CONTEMPORARY SOCIAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY

This

question that occupied most ot our classical theorists. They lived and

a

is

thought during

a

period of time

when tremendous changes were comparison

these people were driven to understand them. In

modernity urban

movement from

defined by the

is

settings; a high division

taking place, and

to traditional society,

communities

small, local

to large,

of labor; high commodification and use of rational

markets; and large-scale integration through nation-states. Rather than traditional

and

religious authority,

modernity

characterized by individualism, rationality,

is

bureaucracy, secularization, and alienation. In general, the defining this

modernity are the

rise

urbanization, and mass media; the social

movements

that set the stage for

nity are the Renaissance, Enlightenment, Reformation, American tions,

moments of

of nation-states, capitalism, mass democracy, science,

moder-

and French Revolu-

and the Industrial Revolution.

Some elements

of the Enlightenment were extremely important for setting the

The Enlightenment was

stage for modernity.

when Western

a

period of time in European history

ideas fundamentally changed. Perhaps the

most profound

shift

captured by the ideas of progress and rationalization. In traditional societies, gion was an important,

if

not the most important, social institution. Traditional,

Things only changed

religious culture did not really contain the idea of progress.

God

is

reli-

revealed something new, which

God

wasn't in the habit of doing.

The

of progress came with a philosophy called positivism and the hope of

if

idea

human

rationality.

In a nutshell, positivism posit ivism, life

is

is

human beings can control their world. In

the belief that

no longer ruled by destiny, fate, or God. The hope of positivism is that

humankind can take the helm by making rational choices based on scientific inquiry. Science assumes that the universe ples,

is

empirical, operates according to law-like princi-

and human beings can discover those laws and use them

Chapter 9, modernity

is

based on the application of these ideas

and the physical world. The hope for the physical world and use raw resources through technology

The

social

physical

One

hope was centered

is

that

in

in

two realms: society

humanity could control

to levels never before

in the ideas of happiness,

As we saw

dreamed

possible.

freedom, and equality. The

and social/behavioral sciences were founded on these hopes. of the main questions of contemporary social theory has been whether

we

or not

rationally.

outlined.

are

Our

still

first

(or ever have been)

two theorists

Giddens, both believe that we are in particular

modern

in

any or

in this section, Jiirgen still

holds out the hope of

all

of the ways

I've just

Habermas and Anthony

under modern conditions. Habermas

living

modern reason and

progress through specific

kinds of speech acts and the revitalization of the public sphere. Giddens, on the other hand, while maintaining that society

by

its

nature

is

it

is

like a

runaway

train:

decidedly

is

is

that

modernity

legitimated as progress. As such,

Humankind might

also threatens to rush out of control

There

modern, argues

uncontrollable. For Giddens, the principal earmark of modernity

continual and accelerating change that nity

is still

be able to steer

and break

it

to

some degree but

itself apart.

an important point o\ comparison to bring out here. Habermas

modern

in that

is

moder-

is

he adheres to and theorizes about the hope ot social

progress through reason. Giddens, on the other hand, continues to think that society

and technology might be controlled

in

some measure, but decidedly

not

Modernity and Postmodernity

through reason or emancipatory

Giddens argues that "sweet

In fact,

politics.

reason" and rational knowledge are part of the processes that produced a runaway

world rather than a managed world. As of social change

more akin

is

to

Giddens's idea of the possibility

we'll see,

Luhmann's and

Wallerstein's notions of

complex

systems and small inputs.

Our

next two theorists are neither

poststructuralists. Yet

icant ideas to the

modern nor postmodern, per

both theorists and poststructuralism

itself

They

se.

modern/postmodern debate. With poststructuralism and

modernism we have reached beginning. Remember,

important reasons:

It

that point in the

book

that

you about

told

I

are

contribute signifpostat

the

began our journey with symbolic interaction for some

I

set us

up

to think

turalism and postmodernism, both

about meaning and the

meaning and

In poststruc-

self.

seen as fragmenting to the

self are

point of nonexistence. Poststructuralism argues that there are

determined or caused by anything. or

iors, society,

and mirrors.

no

reality.

All

we

as

It

nor

structures,

denies that there

are discourse

and

behavior

any firm base for behav-

is

Using our building analogy, structure

humans have

human

is

is

nothing but smoke

text. Further,

while there

is

or meaning behind them, texts and forms of knowledge exert tremen-

reality

dous power over every aspect of our ous part

no

is

that

we

control, limit,

lives,

and

primarily through discourse.

The

insidi-

objectify ourselves through discourse. In

response, poststructuralism deconstructs the text or produces a counter-history of

knowledge, which reveals the underlying and subtle all

histories

In

political

some ways, the postmodern argument

is

like that

of Giddens: Modernity con-

dynamics that continually push for change. The difference

tains

ernists say that there has

two

and the individual

and

some

Culture as culture

major reason for

this

is

postmod-

my

reading of the

Both are seen

as simultaneously

becoming more impor-

in

postmodernity than

the fact that postindustrial capitalism

in

modernity.

sells

virtually coextensive with the

economy

itself.

.

.

A

image more

than product. Thus, "culture has necessarily expanded to the point where

become

field

fashion.

more important

is

that

postmodernists are most concerned with: culture

effects that

subject.

less real in

is

been a breach or rupture and we're no longer modern.

Different theorists emphasize different social factors, but in

there appear to be

tant

power found within

and discourses.

it

has

as every material object

and immaterial service becomes inseparably tractable sign and vendible commodity"

(Anderson, 1998,

seem

less real

Quite

a bit

because

p. 55). it

has

But

little

at the

same time, these processes make culture

or no link to social networks.

of what postmodern capitalism

older industrial order

is

sells

churned up, traditional

are identity images. Thus, "as an

class

formations have weakened,

while segmented identities and localized groups, typically based on ethnic or sexual differences, multiply" (Anderson, 1998,

p. 62).

However, these segmented

relationships "pull us in a myriad directions, inviting us to play such a variety of roles that the very

recedes from view. p. 7).

The

concept of an 'authentic self with knowable characteristics

The

fully saturated self

saturated self that Gergen

with media images.

is

becomes no

talking about

is

self at all"

one

that

(Gergen, 1991,

is

overwhelmed

241

CHAPTER

11

Modernity and Reason Jurgen Habermas (1929-)

Photo:

©

Corbis.

243

244

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

I

245

labermas's Perspective: Critical Theory Critical

Theory and

246

Praxis

248

Concepts and Theory: Capitalism and Legitimation Liberal Capitalism

and

the

Hope of Modernity

Organized Capitalism and the Legitimation

248

Concepts and Theory: The Colonization of Democracy Colonization of the Lifeworld

252

252

256

Colonization of the Public Sphere

Concepts and Theory: Communicative Action and

Summary

250

Crisis

257

Civil Society

260 261

Building Your Theory Toolbox

Societies

change

debate about



there's

how

no doubt about

that.

But there

is

a great deal

of

societies change. In this book, for example, we've consid-

ered theories that say that society changes incrementally through each inter-

human

action or reproduction of

culture

and

reality.

And

we've looked

at theories

that argue that society changes as the result of massive systemic pressures. Jurgen

Habermas confronts us with that society can

a different

understanding altogether. Habermas argues

change because people choose

This vision of social

of democracy and a major reason

why

extent,

Immanuel

it.

fact,

it is

the idea in back

it

might seem. Niklas Luhmann and,

to

Wallerstein have alerted us to the idea that the social sys-

tem may be too complex

for us to actually guide.

Anthony Giddens (1990)

similarly argues that

with no one at

change

people vote. But we've already begun to see

that this idea isn't as straightforward as

some

to

change seems simple enough. In

the helm; he asks,

produced a world subject

to

"Why

And

looking ahead in the book,

modernity

is

like a

runaway

train,

has the generalising of 'sweet reason' not

our prediction and control?"

(p. 151).

In fact,

from

this

humans to control their The modern world is perhaps

point on in our book, reason and the audacious attempt of

world

will

be called into question again and again.

"not one in which the sureties of tradition and habit have been replaced by the certitude of rational

knowledge" (Giddens, 1991,

In response to such critiques, Erich

theory

when he

said,

"But

all

p. 3).

Fromm

(1955) pointed the

these facts are not strong

enough

way

for critical

to destroy faith in

alternatives, we we can consult together and plan together, we can hope" (p. 363). In many ways, Habermas is one of the last, great modernists. Can we take control of society and move it to become better, more humane, and truly free? Can

man's reason, good

will

and

sanity.

As long

as

we can think of other

are not lost; as long as

reason prevail in the face of the alienating forces of modernity? so,

and gives us theoretical reasons

for

our doing the same.

Habermas

thinks

Modernity and Reason

The

Essential

245

Habermas

Biography Jurgen Habermas was born on June years

were spent under Nazi

drive for

1

8,

control,

freedom and democracy.

929,

in

Dusseldorf, Germany. His teen

His educational

German

philosophy, but also includes

1

which undoubtedly gave Habermas

background history,

literature,

is

his

primarily

in

and psychology.

In

1956, Habermas took a position as Theodor Adorno's assistant at the Institute of Social Research

in

Frankfurt School of

critical

Frankfurt,

which began

thought.

In

his

formal association with the

1961, Habermas took a professorship at

the University of Heidelberg, but returned to Frankfurt

in

1964

as a professor of

philosophy and sociology. From 1971 to 1981, he worked as the director of the

Max

Planck Institute,

action.

In

remained

where he began

to formalize his theory of

1982, Habermas returned to the institute until his

retirement

in

in

communicative

Frankfurt,

where he

1994.

Passionate Curiosity Born out of the

political

oppression of Nazi Germany, Habermas

to produce a social theory of ethics that

economic power and would be

hope

sees humankind's

would not be based on

universally inclusive.

He

is

was

driven

political or

a critical theorist

who

of rational existence within the inherent processes of

communication.

Keys to Knowing critical

theory, liberal capitalism, lifeworld, public sphere, organized capitalism,

legitimation

crisis,

colonization of the lifeworld, colonization of the public sphere,

communicative action,

civil

society

Habermas's Perspective: Conflict theory began with Karl

Marx focused on

Marx and was significantly modified by Max Weber.

the dynamics surrounding class, while

cutting influences of class, status, in society. is

Weber also introduced

a further distinction

Weber argued that the cross-

and power significantly impact conflict and change a

key element in stratification: legitimacy. But there

between Marx and Weber. While Weber was disheartened and

had grave concerns about modern

life,

especially related to bureaucracies

nalization, he did not have the critical, revolutionary edge that

Marx

Critical

and

Marx did. As a

ratioresult,

has had a unique influence on contemporary social theory.

Marx spawned two conflict logical

and

distinct theoretical approaches.

class as general features

approach

is

One approach

focuses on

of society. The intent with this more socio-

to analytically describe

and explain

Olin Wright (see the Web Byte introducing his work)

is

conflict.

a clear

The work of

Erik

example of such an

Theory

246

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

approach, and, though perhaps to a

lesser degree, Pierre

Bourdieu'swork

analytical

is

sense as well.

in this

The other approach

that

Marx

inspires

is

more

critical

and

is

focused on eman-

cipatory politics. Rather than maintaining analytical distance, the intent here

expose the oppressive elements system

understood

is

in

to

in the capitalist system. In this case, the capitalist

terms of

all

connections and effects capitalism has on the

state, education, mass media, and society ical

is

at large.

Though

many

there are

theoret-

approaches that find inspiration here, perhaps the most influential has been the

Frankfurt Institute for Social Research.

Theory and Praxis

Critical

Frankfurt School began in the early 1920s

Briefly, the

Frankfurt in Germany. ironically,

It

was formed by a

tight

group of

financed by Felix Weil, the son of a wealthy

University of

at the

radical intellectuals and,

German merchant

Marx's work was partially financed by Friedrich Engels, son of a wealthy

(Karl textile

baron). Weil's goal was to create "an institutionalization of Marxist discussion

beyond the confines both of middle-class academia and the ideological narrowmindedness of the Communist Party" (Wiggershaus, 1986/1995, Nazis gained control in Germany, the Frankfurt School

moved

first

p. 16).

in

1935 and eventually to California. In 1953, the school was able to

its

home

university in Frankfurt.

The various

Fromm, and

Jiirgen

Max

Herbert Marcuse, Eric

and synthesized ideas from

Karl

Weber, and Sigmund Freud, and focused on the social production of

knowledge and

its

human

relationship to

consciousness. This kind of

Georg Wilhelm Hegel. Marx

focuses

on Marx's indebtedness

Hegel's

argument from an emphasis on ideas

to

The Frankfurt School reintroduced Marx's

to

Habermas.

In general, the Frankfurt School elaborated

Marx,

move back

and scholars associated with

leaders

Max Horkheimer,

the school include Theodore Adorno,

As the

to Switzerland

critical

basically inverted

to material relations in the

Hegel's concern with ideas

evaluation of capitalism and the

School focuses on ideology; but, unlike Marx,

state.

Thus,

critical

like

Marxism economy.

and culture but kept Marx, the Frankfurt

theory sees ideological pro-

duction as linked to culture and knowledge rather than simply class and the material

relations of production. Ideology, according to these theorists,

more broadly

is

based and insidious than Marx supposed.

Max Horkheimer became continued

the director of the Frankfurt School in 1930 and

in that position until

Western belief that

1958.

positivistic science

Horkheimer

criticized the

contemporary

was the instrument that would bring about

necessary changes, arguing instead that the questions that occupy the social sciences

simply

reflect

and reinforce the existing

social

and

political orders.

believed that the kind of instrumental reasoning or rationality that

with science is

the

is

Horkheimer is

associated

oriented only toward control and exploitation, whether the subject

atom or human

ent kind of perspective

beings. Science is

needed

is

thus intrinsically oppressive, and a differ-

to create

knowledge about people.

Modernity and Reason

Habermas, the director of the Frankfurt School from 1963

Jiirgen

to the early

up Horkheimer's theme and argues that there are three kinds of knowledge and interests: empirical, analytic knowledge that is interested in the 1990s, picked

technical control of the environment (science); hermeneutic or interpretive knowl-

edge that critical

interested in understanding

is

knowledge that

one another and working together; and

interested in emancipation. Because scientific

is

is

bound. That

historically

is, it

only sees things as they currently

human

the case, scientific knowledge of

institutions

knowledge

phenomenon,

seeks to explain the dynamic processes found within a given

exist.

That being

and behaviors can only

describe and thus reinforce existing political arrangements (since society

As such, science

"as is").

Critical theory,

in sociology

tive social relations

and thus

isn't

is

taken

ideological.

is

on the other hand,

science

norma-

situates itself outside the historical

susceptible to the

same

limitations as science.

Truly important social questions must be addressed from outside science and the

The

historical confines of present-day experience.

get rid of the distortions, misrepresentations,

intent of critical

and

knowledge

political values

found

is

in

to

our

knowledge and speech. Critical theory takes this idea of

and material

interests

an inseparable relationship between knowledge

from Marx, who argued

between the material world of labor connection

is first

and the

his

community

product. Alienation comes as the worker



in this,

work

is

an intrinsic relationship

false

human

and

work process and

the

creation and the fundamental

as alien objects to the person.

of commodities

what allows

are directly related to production

separated from the

is

both the world of

humanness of labor stand adrift in a sea

is

and purely made under conditions of primitive communism,

where the worker and her or

end product

that there

ideas that people hold to be true. This

The worker

is

not only

set

—consumerism — but the break between worker and

consciousness and ideology to take hold. This ideology of

course comes from the bourgeoisie: "The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas" (Marx, 1932/1978c, class participates in their

duced by the ruling

own

p.

172).

Under

capitalism, then, the

working

oppression by holding and believing in ideas pro-

elite.

we hold and see the world through are Our minds have a false consciousness about them. Seeing that this is the case, how can we think outside the box that capitalism has given us? How can we think outside our own thoughts (which are, in fact, ideological thoughts)? If we are caught up in false consciousness, how will we ever Now, think about

this.

The

ideas that

based on alienation and ideology.

become mind



truly aware? it

is

tantly, praxis

The answer

is

founded on the desire is

practice.

It is

praxis. Initially, praxis

for equality

practice that

is

aimed

the individual. Praxis, or critical consciousness,

examination of

which the

self

social

and current

of emancipatory work and analytical thought.

but,

more impor-

changing both the world and

is

thus a penetrating, reflexive

class conditions. Praxis

real critical

an attitude of the



at

world can be changed, beginning

extending to others. In the end, then,

is

and freedom

first

is

the practice through

with the

self

and then

theory comes through the process

247

248

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

Concepts and Theory: Capitalism and Legitimation Drawing on

Karl Marx's theory of capitalism,

Edmund

legitimation,

Max

Weber's ideas of the

Husserl's notion of the lifeworld,

and

state

and

Talcott Parsons's view

of social systems, Habermas gives us a model of social evolution and modernity.

You

now

are by

generally familiar with Marx's theory of capitalism and Parsons's

argument concerning the ways

in

which system components are integrated through

media of exchange (Chapter

a generalized

But

10).

me

let

moment

take a

to talk

about Weber's and Husserl's contributions to Habermas's theory.

We came across

and moral

institutionalized cally,

a

though not

basis.

stories

on power,

like the state to

reason behind this need believe in authority to

is

through which

A Weberian

exclusively, focused

system of domination

human

reality

and the

work, people must believe

in

power requires high

it.

If

given an

is

state. In

degree, they will have to be forced to

coercive

is

concern with legitimacy authority,

the cost involved in the use of power.

some

The use of

coercive power.

Luckmann.

the idea of legitimation in our review of Berger and

There we saw that legitimations are

specifi-

order for

Part of the

people don't

comply through

of external social

levels

control mechanisms, such as monitoring (you have to be able to watch and see

people are conforming) and force (because they won't do a system of

domination not based on legitimacy costs

willingly).

it

use of coercion by either rebelling or giving up

terms of tech-

a great deal in

nology and manpower. In addition, people generally respond

— the end

in the

result

is

if

To maintain

long run to the

thus contrary to

the desired goal. In contrast to coercive power, authority implies the ability to require perfor-

mance which

that is

is

based upon the performer's belief in the Tightness of the system,

where legitimacy comes

in.

Legitimacy provides people with the moral

basis for believing in the system. So, for example, will

be taking a

test in 2

weeks.

And

has to force you; you simply do to give tests.

And

that's

it

in 2

your professor

weeks you show up

you

that

you

No one

because you believe in the right of the professor

Weber's point: Social structures can function because of

belief in a cultural system.

The

terms of power,

dependent upon legitimacy.

is

tells

to take the test.

especially

state,

because

it

is

almost exclusively defined

We've also seen the concept of the lifeworld with Berger and Luckmann well. But,

because

it

Habermas

uses

it

to refer to the individual's everyday

rienced immediately by the person, a world built

and thus

filled

lifeworld

is

tices, values,

their

as

me refresh came from Edmund Husserl.

holds an important place in Habermas's theory,

your memory. The concept of lifeworld originally

in

life

upon

let

— the world

as

it is

expe-

culture and social relations,

with historically and socially specific meanings. The purpose of the

to facilitate

communication:

languages, and so

on

to provide a

common

meanings, practices, and goals into a shared fabric of

Liberal Capitalism

set

of goals, prac-

that allow people to interact, to continually

weave

life.

and the Hope of Modernity

Drawing from Marx and Weber, Habermas argues

that there have been

two

phases of capitalism, liberal capitalism and organized capitalism. Each phase

is

Modernity and Reason

defined by the changing relationship between capitalism and the capitalism, the state has

state. In liberal

involvement with the economy. Capitalism

little

is

thus able

to function without constraint. Liberal capitalism occurred during the beginning

phases of capitalism and the nation-state.

came

Capitalism and the nation-state

earlier,

into existence as part of sweeping changes

much

Western Europe and eventually the world. Though they began

that redefined

these changes coalesced in the 17th

and 18th

centuries. Prior to this time,

the primary form of government in Europe was feudalism, brought to Europe by the

Normans

in 1066.

Feudalism

based on land tenure and personal relationships.

is

These relationships, and thus the land, were organized around the monarchy with

and peasants. Thus, the lifeworld of the

a clear social division between royalty

everyday person in feudal Europe was one where personal obligations and one's relationship to the land were paramount.

The everyday person was keenly aware word

her or his obligations to the lord of the land (the origin of the

was seen

kind of familial relationship and

as a

fidelity

was

its

of

landlord). This

chief goal. Notice

something important here: People under feudalism were subjects of the monarchy, not citizens. Capitalism came about out of an institutional Protestantism, and the Industrial Revolution.

vide the necessary uniform

The

money system and

field that

included the

state,

nation-state was needed to pro-

strong legal codes concerning pri-

vate property; the Protestant Reformation created a culture with strong values

centered on individualism and the to capitalism the level

Habermas argues

work

of exploitation

it

and the

ethic;

Industrial Revolution gave

needed.

that together the nation-state

and capitalism depoliticized

proposed equality based on market competition, and contributed

class relations,

strongly to the emergence of the public sphere.

The term

class first

came

into the

English language in the 17th century (see Williams, 1985, pp. 60-69). At that time, it

had reference mainly

to education;

the term class

came

classic

and

this application.

The

our use of

works of study came from

authoritative

into existence between 1770

and 1840,

a

classical to refer to

true

modern

use of

time period that cor-

responds to the Industrial Revolution as well as the French and American political revolutions.

Almost everything about society changed during ideas of individual rights

tem.

The modern word

position

is

a

this time, in particular the

and accountability and the primacy of the economic class,

then, carries with

it

sys-

the ideas that the individual's

product of the social system and that social position

is

made

rather

than inherited. "What was changing consciousness was not only increased individual mobility,

which could be

largely contained within the older terms, but the

new

sense of a society or a particular social system which actually created social division,

including

Thus,

new kinds of divisions"

class

is

no longer seen

no longer in

(Williams, 1985,

a political issue,

it is

p. 62).

an economic one

as the result of free

class relations are

market competition. Under capitalism and the

brought by the nation-state,

all

members of

civil liberties

society are seen equally as citizens

and economic competitors. Any differences among members believed to



terms of personal relations and family connections, but rather

come from economic competition and market

in society are thus

forces, rather

than

249

250

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

birthright

and personal relationships.

tous changes to the lifeworld:

and

Clearly, liberal capitalism

became

It

responsibilities. Social relationships

The

rational.

a

were no longer familial but rather

chief goal for the person in this lifeworld

pation. According to

momen-

brought

world defined by democratic freedoms

Habermas, the mechanism

was

and

legal

democratic

full

partici-

for this full participation

the

is

public sphere.

The combination of the

ideals of the

government from feudalism

Enlightenment, the transformation of

to nation-state

democracy, and the

of capitalism

rise

The public

created something that had never before existed: the public sphere.

sphere

is

a space for democratic, public debate.

Under feudalism,

obviously complain about the monarchy and their way of did. But

grumbling about

and

was the

this

first

The

one

is

is

vastly differ-

expected to exercise control.

time Europe or the Americas had citizens, with rights

was robust

civic responsibilities; there

the citizen.

and no doubt they

which one has no control

a situation over

ent than debating political points over which

Remember,

life,

subjects could

ideals of the

belief

and hope

Enlightenment indicated that

new

in this

person,

would

this citizenry

be informed and completely engaged in the democratic process, and the public sphere

is

sees the public sphere as existing

and practices on the one hand and public sphere are

democracy could take

the place where this strong

Habermas

is

to

place.

of cultural institutions

a set

power on the

this public sphere: access to

The public sphere thus

The function of

other.

mediate the concerns of private citizens and

two principles of

participation.

state

between

state interests.

the

There

unlimited information and equal

consists of cultural organizations such as

journals

and newspapers

political

and commercial organizations where public discussion can take

that distribute information to the people;

it

contains both place,

such as public assemblies, coffee shops, pubs, political clubs, and so forth. The goal

of

this public

sphere

Thus, during

is

pragmatic consensus.

liberal capitalism, the relationship

can best be characterized as

assumption undergirding successfully to the

laissez-faire,

between the

is

if left

far

state

and capitalism

French for "allow to do." The

was that the individual

this policy

good of the whole

of government, then, should be as

which

to her or his

own

away from capitalism

will contribute

most

The

place

aspirations.

as possible. In this

way

of thinking, capitalism represents the mechanism of equality, the place where the best are defined

through successful competition rather than by family

liberal capitalism, then,

pletely free

it

was

felt

that the marketplace of capitalism

from any interference so

In this sense, faith in the "invisible

that the

most successful could

fittest

and natural

rise to

stand or efforts

feudalistic fall

were

the top. to the

Crisis

world of capitalism and democracy coming out of the

Enlightenment. The central orienting belief was progress; humankind was

from the

com-

selection.

Organized Capitalism and the Legitimation ideal

During

to be

hand" of market dynamics corresponded

evolutionist belief in survival of the

Such was the

ties.

had

set tree

bonds of monarchical government, and each individual would

based on her or his to be focused

on

own

full

efforts. In

addition to economic pursuit, these

democratic participation, bach citizen was to be

— Modernity and Reason

fully

and constantly immersed

education

in

—education

came not only from

that

schools but also through the public sphere. The hope of modernity was thus invested in each citizen

discourse

and that person's

would

lead to decisions

Two economic state,

full

participation

—people

believed that rational

made by reason and guided by egalitarianism.

changed the relationship between the economy and the

issues

which, in turn, had dramatic impacts on the lifeworld and public sphere.

rather than producing equal competitors

on an even playing

First,

markets

field, free

tend to create monopolies. Thus, by the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century, the United States'

businessmen capitalists

is

who came

economy was

essentially

run by an

group of

elite

to be called "robber barons." Perhaps the attitude of these

by the phrase attributed to William H. Vanderbilt, a

best captured

road tycoon: "The public be damned." These

men emphasized

rail-

through

efficiency

"Taylorism" (named after Frederick Taylor, the creator of scientific management)

and economies of

The

scale.

monopolies weren't

result

was

large-scale

restricted to the market; they

as well.

With

supply

lines.

One example

owned

wells

and

vertical integration, a is

refineries,

domination of markets. These

extended to "vertical integration"

company controls before-and-after manufacture

Standard Oil,

who

and controlled the

at this

time dominated the market,

railroad system that

moved

its

prod-

uct to market.

The response of the U.S. government antitrust laws.

The

first

to

widespread monopolization was to enact

legislation of this type in the

United States was the Sherman

form

Antitrust Act of 1 890. In part the act reads, "Every contract, combination in the

of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade several States, or with foreign nations, shall

is

declared to be

or commerce among

illegal.

.

.

.

Every person

the

who

monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other

among

person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce several States, or with foreign nations, shall be

However,

capitalists

deemed

the

guilty of a felony."

fought the act on constitutional grounds and the Supreme

Court prevented the government from applying the law for

a

number of

years.

Eventually the Court decided for the government in 1904, and the Antitrust Act was

used powerfully by both Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and William

Taft.

regulatory power of the U.S. government was further extended under

Woodrow

This

Wilson's administration and the passing of the Clayton Antitrust Act in 1914.

The second economic state

issue that

modified the economy's relationship with the

was economic fluctuations. As Karl Marx had indicated,

are subject to periodic oscillations,

harsh.

By the

late 1920s,

the capitalist

economic system went

creating worldwide depression in the decade of the thirties. "classic its

economics"

fell

economies

capitalist

with downturns becoming more and more into severe decline,

What came

to be called

out of favor and a myriad of competitors clamored to take

place. Eventually the ideas of

John Maynard Keynes took hold and were expli-

cated in his 1936 book, The General Theory of Employment, Interest

and Money. His

idea was simple, and reminiscent of Marx: Capitalism tends toward overproduction

the capacity of the system to produce and transport products

demand. Keynes's theory countered the then popular

the market and argued that active government spending and

economy would reduce

the

is

greater than the

hand of management of the

belief in the invisible

power and magnitude of the business

cycle.

251

252

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

Keynes's ideas initially influenced Franklin the depression, and after

demand produced accepted.

Governments began

keep

to

I).

Roosevelt's belief that insufficenl

WWII

statistics

Keynes's ideas were generally

about the economy, expanded their

control of capitalism, and increased spending in order to keep

demand

up. This

new

approach continued through the 1950s and 1960s. While the economic problems of

upon Keynesian economics, new economic

the 1970s cast doubt

tinued to include

some

level

Thus, due to the tendency of completely

and periodic fluctuations, the

state

free

I

markets to produce monopolies

became much more involved

of the economy. Organized capitalism, then,

nomic

policies have con-

of government spending and economic manipulation.

a

is

in the control

kind of capitalism where eco-

practices are controlled, governed, or organized by the state. According to

[abermas, the change from liberal to organized capitalism, along with the general

dynamics of capitalism (such

commodification, market expansion, advertising,

as

and so on), have had three major

effects.

and arena of crises. As we've seen,

there has been a shift in the kind

First,

capitalism suffered from

economic

Under organized

crises.

liberal

capitalism, however, the

economy is managed by the state to one degree or another. This shift means that the crisis, when it hits, is a crisis for the state rather than the economy. It is specifically a legitimation crisis for the state

and

for people's belief in rationality.

There are two things going on here

economy: The scientific

state

knowledge

is

attempting to organize capitalism, and the state

to

do

so.

economy

is

state is

and the

employing

Together, these issues create crises of legitimation and

rationality rather than simply

that the

between the

in the relationship

economic

disasters. Nevertheless,

Habermas argues

the core problem: Capitalism has an intrinsic set of issues that

continually create economic crises. However, due to the state's attempts to govern the

economy, what the population experiences are

from the

state rather

economic and

social

than economic

crises.

ineffectual

and disjointed responses

More significantly,

in

attempting to solve

problems, the state increasingly depends upon scientific knowl-

edge and technical control. This reliance on technical control changes the character of the

problems from

social or

economic

issues to technical ones.

Concepts and Theory: The Colonization of Democracy The other two important

effects

concern the lifeworld and the public sphere. In our

discussion of legitimation and rationality crises, the lifeworld.

The

that believed in progress through science

was expected

to

eral malaise that

we can begin

lifeworld of liberal capitalism

to see the

changes

was constructed out of

and reason. In

in

a culture

this lifeworld, the

person

be actively involved in the democratic process. However, the gen-

grows out of the

and the meaning they attach

crisis

to social

of legitimation reduces people's motivation

life.

Colonization of the Lifeworld In

addition, according to Habermas, the lifeworld

is

becoming

increasingly

colonized by the political and economic systems. To understand what Habermas

Modernity and Reason

means, we have to step back a

little.

As

I've already

noted,

Habermas

gives us

a theory that involves social evolution. In general, social evolutionists argue that

society progresses by

and become more

becoming more complex: Structures and systems

The evolutionary argument

specialized.

and complexity produce

a

system that

is

that this specialization

more adaptable and

is

better able to survive

changing environment.

in a

One

of the problems that comes up in differentiated systems concerns coordi-

Habermas

nation and control, or what to this idea in

Chapter

10.

Remember,

refers to as "steering."

problem

the

is

You were introduced

one of trying

to guide social

structures that have different values, roles, status positions, languages,

own

Differentiated social structures tend to go off in their that Talcott Parsons

important, so

is

guage

is

a

is

form of media:

consider

let's

Merriam-Webster (2002) defines medium (media or by which something

direction.

and so

We

forth.

have seen

problem was solved through generalized media of

felt this

exchange. The idea of media

is

differentiate

is

it

plural) as

again for a minute.

"something through

accomplished, conveyed, or carried on." For example, lanthe principal

It's

medium through which communication

organized and carried out. Different social institutions or structures use different

media. In education, for instance,

it's

knowledge and

government

in

power.

it's

These are the instruments or media through which education and government are able to perform their functions.

For Parsons, the solution to the problem of social integration and steering the different social subsystems to create that

all

other institutions could use

boundary

this like

media

them

crossings. Visualize a

tures or subsystems, such as the

as

that are general or abstract

economy and education

boundary between

economy and

talk to

for

means of exchange. We can think about

when

each other

different social struc-

How

education.

between economy and education be crossed? Or, using the

is

enough

can the boundary

a different analogy,

how can

they have different languages

and values?

Habermas and the state

is

and economy.

state

concerned with the boundaries between the lifeworld In

Habermas's terms, Parsons basically argues that the

and economy use power and money

the lifeworld. in

specifically

If

you think about

this for a

media of exchange with

respectively as

moment,

it

seems to make sense. You

your lifeworld, so what does the economy have that you want? You might

list

of

all

boil

all

the cars, houses, and other commodities that you want, but what

down

to?

Money. And how does the economy entice you

world and go to work? Money. So, lifeworld

and the economy. The same

world and the

state:

the state. However,

I

want

money

Power

is

what the



the

medium

logic holds for the

to leave

start a

do they

your

life-

of exchange between the

boundary between the

and what induces us

state has

Habermas (1981/1987)

to argue against this

is

exist

life-

to interact with

sees a problem:

that in the areas of

life

tions of cultural reproduction, social integration,

that primarily

and

fulfill

socialization,

func-

mutual

understanding cannot be replaced by media as the mechanism for coordinating action



that

is,

it

— though

cannot be technicized

it

can be expanded by

technologies of communication and organizationally mediated

be rationalized,

(p. 267, emphasis original)



that

is, it

can

253

254

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

Habermas

arguing that there

is

cannol be reduced to media, such

consequences" having

is

.is

give

something

medium

of

sociopathologica]

you an easy example from

a different issue:

that

you cannot "technicize"

money without fundamentally changing

ing sex with a prostitute.

Habermas

the nature of

it;

there-

humanity and communication

making the same kind of argument about

is

in general,

lor him, the sphere of mutual under-

standing, the lifeworld, cannot be reduced to

Yet

behavior

this

between making love with your significant partner and hav-

a clear distinction

changing

about the lifeworld that

intrinsic

money and power, "without

Most people would agree

sex.

using the

me

(p. 267). Lei

is

power and money without

essentially

it.

Habermas

arguing that Parsons

isn't

made

Parsons saw

a theoretical mistake.

himself as an empiricist and merely sought to describe the social world. So in this

was

sense, Parsons

right:

There

is

something going on

mediate the lifeworld. Habermas takes

imposing

their

changing

it.

media on the

The

lifeworld,

power without deeply

this idea

lifeworld, the state

altering

that tries to

from Parsons and argues

that in

and economy are fundamentally

money

or

it.

same thing

basically the

is

modernity

by definition, cannot be mediated through

According to Habermas, the lifeworld This

in

is

naturally achieved through consensus.

Remember,

that symbolic interactionists argue.

interactions

emerge and are achieved by individuals consciously and unconsciously

negotiating

meaning and action

in face-to-face encounters.

This negotiation, or

money

consensus building, occurs chiefly through speech. Thus, using

fundamentally changes the lifeworld. In Habermas's (1981/1987) words, nized:

"The mediatization of the lifeworld assumes the form of

(p. 196,

emphasis

known and most

a colony

is

"a

body of people

is

perhaps one of Habermas's

settled in a

new

territory, foreign

retaining ties with their motherland or parent state ... as a

upon

modern

colo-

provocative concepts. Using Merriam-Webster (2002) again,

established occupation that the

it is

a colonization"

original).

This idea of the colonization of the lifeworld best

or power

state

and [governance] by the parent

state."

and often

means of

the lifeworld. In this sense,

means through which

money and power

facilitating

Habermas

and economic system (capitalism) have imposed act just like a

is

arguing

their

colony

these distant social structures seek to occupy

distant,

media

—they

are

and dominate

the local lifeworld of people.

Habermas (1981/1987, set the stage for the

p.

356) argues that four factors in organized capitalism

colonization of the lifeworld.

first,

the lifeworld

is

differenti-

ated from the social systems. Historically, there was a closer association between the lifeworld

and

society; in fact, in the earliest societies they

were coextensive,

in

other

words, they overlapped to the degree that they were synonymous. As society increases in differentiation

from

different social subsystems

mind roles priest

and complexity, the lifeworld becomes "decoupled"

institutional spheres. Second, the

become

boundaries between the lifeworld and the

regulated through differentiated roles. Keep in

that social roles are scripts for behavior. In traditional societies,

were related to the family. So,

—the family and

for

most

social

example, the eldest male would be the high

religious positions

would be

tilled

and scripted by the same

Modernity and Reason

role.

made

This kind of role homogeneity

and society

the relationship between the lifeworld

nonproblematic, and, more importantly,

relatively

it

served to connect

the two spheres.

Third, the rewards for workers in organized capitalism in terms of leisure time

and expendable cash

offset the

demands of bureaucratic domination. "Wherever

bourgeois law visibly underwrites the demands of the lifeworld against bureaucratic

domination,

it

loses the

ambivalence of realizing freedom

And

destructive side effects" (Habermas, 1981/1987, p. 361).

Worker protection

vides comprehensive welfare.

at the cost of

fourth, the state pro-

laws, social security,

and so

forth

reduce the impact of exploitation and create a culture of entitlement where legal subjects

actualization

sumer and

pursue their individual interests and the "privatized hopes for

self-

... in the roles of

con-

and self-determination are primarily located

client" (p. 350).

For simplicity's sake, first

two

we can group

factors are generally

the

two and

first

concerned with the

last

effects

two items together. The

of complex social environ-

ments. The more complex the social environment, due to structural differentiation, the greater will be the

number and

diversity of cultures

and

with which any

roles

individual will have to contend. This in turn dismantles the connections

among

the

elements that comprise the lifeworld: culture, society, and personality.

The second two

factors

concern the

effects

of the

position under orga-

state's

nized capitalism. Under organized capitalism, the state protects the capitalist sys-

tem, the capitalists, and the workers. In doing issues that

would otherwise produce

so, the state mitigates

social conflict

importantly, the state further individualizes the person. client,

some of

the

and change. But perhaps more

The

roles of

consumer and

both associated with a climate of entitlement, overshadow the role of demo-

cratic citizen.

As

a result of these factors, everything in organized capitalism that

lifeworld, such as culture

enced by

money and

and

power.

social positions,

comes

Money and power

have a certain logic or rationality to

them. Weber talked about four distinct forms of tinent here: instrumental

behavior that action in

is

coming

to the university

means

is

behavior

action that

is

rationality,

two of which

might be considered instrumentally rational

to the goal of obtaining a is

good job or

based upon one's values or morals.

be instrumentally rational for you to do desired end. However, is

is

if

you don't do

is

is

If

there

is

no way you



easiest

you believe

way

it is

it

would

to achieve a

dishonest, then

a

and instrumental

rationality

good deal of what happens when the

lifeworld

the ever-increasing intrusion of instrumental rationality and the

emptying of value

mechanisms

would be the

specifically tied to the lifeworld

and economy. Thus,

colonized

so. It

that because

if

being guided by values or morals.

Value rationality to the state

is

career. Value-rational

could get caught paying someone to write your term paper for you, then

your behavior

are per-

rationality. Instrumental-rational action

determined by pure means and ends calculation. For example, your

being here

a

and value

informs the

to be defined or at least influ-

for

rationality

example,

from the

money



social system.

The

result

is

that "systemic

steer a social intercourse that has

disconnected from norms and values. ... [And]

been largely

norm-conformative attitudes

255

256

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

and identity-forming

social

(Habermas, 1981/1987, In turn,

p.

Money

is

,\nd

arc

necessary nor possible"

neither

154).

kind of modern social system

in this

money and power

power;

ties

people

memberships

used to purchase commodities that are

come

to value

money and

means of success and happiness.

are seen as the principal

turn used to construct identi-

in

impress other people. Rather than being a humanistic value, respect

becomes something demanded rather than

power rather than

given, a ploy of

a

place of honor.

To see the significance of

When

this, let's recall

the lifeworld changed in the

on new

priorities

the ideal of the lifeworld of modernity.

move from

traditional to

and importance. The lifeworld was

modern

ideally to be

society,

dominated by

democratic freedoms and responsibilities and occupied by citizens in

reasoning out the ways to

equality

the goals of the Enlightenment

fulfill

— through communication and consensus

1987) says,"the burden of social integration

anchored consensus

As you can antithesis of

using

see,

money

fully



As Habermas (1981/

formation in language"

religiously

(p. 180).

or power as steering media in the lifeworld

open communication and consensus building. One of the

this situation

is

social system, in

that the lifeworld decouples

terms of

its

engaged

progress and

more and more from

[shifts]

to processes of consensus

building.

A

is

the

results

from or becomes incidental

integrative capacities.

took

it

lifeworld colonized by

of

to the

money

and power cannot build consensus through reasoning and communication; people in this

kind of lifeworld lose their sense of responsibility to the democratic ideals of

the Enlightenment.

Colonization of the Public Sphere This process

is

further aggravated by developments in the public sphere. As

we've seen, the public sphere and

its

citizens

came

into existence with the advent of

modernity. Citizens "are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights." This phrasing in the U.S. Declaration of Independence

is

interesting because

implies that these rights are moral rather then simply legal. There

is

a

it

moral oblig-

ation to these rights that expresses itself in certain responsibilities:

Whenever any Form of Government becomes it

is

destructive of these ends,

the Right of the People to alter or to abolish

Government, laying ers in

its

it,

and

foundation on such principles and organizing

such form, as to them shall seem most

new

to institute its

powand

likely to effect their Safety

Happiness.

Thus the most immediate place In that space

citizens are

for

involvement for citizens

between power on the one hand and

meant

to

engage

that space that discussion

in

free

is

the public sphere.

information on the other,

communication and consensus formation.

It is

and decisions about any "form of government" are

to

in

be

made. However, the public sphere has been colonized

in

much

which began

in

the 18th century with the

lifeworld. Specifically, the public sphere,

the

same way

as the

Modernity and Reason

257

growth of independent news sources and active places of public debate, trans-

formed

something quite different

into

of public opinion

—something

that

is

in the 20th century.

measured through

It

polls,

became the place

used by politicians,

and influenced by a mass media of entertainment. There are two keys here. through social science.

public opinion

First,

we saw earlier about how

consensus. Recall what

science, even social science



The second key

issue

I

want us

that results in

is

to control.

Transforming con-

makes controlling public sentiment much

statistic

both subjectively and

easier for politicians,

manufactured

Habermas views the knowledge of

purpose

specific

its

sensus in the public sphere into a

is

forum or debate

something that

is

a statistic, not a public

It's

to see

objectively.

is

the shift in

news

Most of the

sources.

venues through which we obtain our news and information today are motivated by profit. In

other words, public news sources aren't primarily concerned with creat-

ing a democratic citizenry or with nificant.

of the time. In a society

more

making

As such, information that like

available information that

given out

is

is

is

socially sig-

packaged as entertainment most

the United States, the consumers of mass media are

infatuated with "wicked weather" than the state of the homeless.

Concepts and Theory:

Communicative Action and When we

began our discussion,

promise of modernity. This hope

and

civil society.

ing

them

is

mentioned that Habermas

I

is

anchored

Civil

holds out the

still

two arenas: speech communities

in

Both of these are rather straightforward proposals, though achiev-

under the conditions created by organized capitalism, where

difficult

the possibility and horizon of moral discourse are stunted.

about ideal speech communities. These communities or situations

Let's talk first

are the basis for ethical reasoning cation. Before

we

communicative the point that

Habermas's social

get to those guidelines,

we need

action: action with the intent to

all

social action

intent,

it

communiconsider what Habermas calls

and occur under certain guidelines to

to

communicate. Habermas makes

based on communication. However, to understand

is

might be beneficial to consider something that looks

communication but

We can call this strategic

isn't.

associated with instrumental rationality,

and

it is

like

speech. Strategic speech

is

thus endemic within the lifeworld

of organized capitalism as well as the social system. In this kind of talk, the goal

is

not to reach consensus or understanding, but

rather for the speaker to achieve his or her

own

personal ends. For example, the

stereotypical salesperson or "closer" isn't trying to reach consensus; she or he

ing to

sell

something

or he missed the

(a

test).

more immediate example

trary to the function of

related to

of

one another

the student explaining

is

being used to achieve egocentric ends, which

communication: "Reaching understanding

human as

is

try-

why she

In strategic talk, speech isn't being practiced simply as

munication; communication

telos [ultimate end]

is

is

com-

is

con-

the inherent

speech. Naturally, speech and understanding are not

means

to

end" (Habermas, 1981/1984,

p.

287).

Society

258

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

Communicative action within an

speech situation

ideal

is

based upon some

important assumptions. As we are reviewing these assumptions, keep

Habermas

that

making the argument

is

communication

that

key and power to reasoned existence and emancipatory has intrinsic properties that form the basis of

Habermas points out

ing.

we assume

natural speech act, it

that

human

communication

bit different.

deeper than

this.

With

words you are

intersubjectivity,

cant part of our inner world

A

third

—our

assumption we make

with someone, in every

talk

We also

possible.

we assume

speech acts

is

that there

is

we

and experiences.

a truth that exists

making

are

validity

claims.

We

This

an extremely important point for Habermas and forms the basis of

is

we

are saying has the strength of truth or Tightness.

course ethics and universal norms. All true communication tains claims to validity,

assume

these claims

which inherently

validity

is

is

that others can share a signifi-

apart from the individual speaker. In this part of speech,

claim that what

that

saying. Sharing intersubjective states

feelings, thoughts, convictions,

in

assume

involves your assuming that your

Communication simply

friend can understand the

Communication

two assumptions sound similar

possible to share intersubjective states. These

is

but are a

is

mind

connection and understand-

we simply

that every time

politics.

in

holds the

itself

call for

built

is

dis-

upon and con-

reason and reflection. Further,

possible; that truth or Tightness can exist indepen-

dent of the individual, which implies the possibility of universal norms or morals;

and

that validity claims can be criticized,

sense active

and accountable

tivity in that

which implies that they are

in

some

to reason. Validity claims also facilitate intersubjec-

they create expectations in both parties.

The speaker

is

expected to

be responsible for the reasonableness of her or his statement, and the hearer

is

expected to accept or reject the validity of the statement and provide a reasonable basis for either.

These assumptions are basic to speech:

We

assume

share intersubjective worlds;

ments

What Habermas draws out from

are possible.

speech

is

ple but

that

it is

feasible to reasonably decide

profound point:

It is

we can communicate;

on

that valid state-

these basic assumptions of

collective action. This

way humans communicate

Intrinsic to the

decisive collective action.

that

and we assume

we assume we can

possible for

humanity

is

is

the

a sim-

hope of

to use talk in order to build

consensus and make reasoned decisions about social action. This

is

both the

promise and hope of modernity and the Enlightenment. Ethical reason

enough

theorists,

and substantive

rationality are thus intrinsic to speech, but

terms of making a difference

in

Habermas has

a praxis

in

organized capitalism. As with

component. Praxis

communication and the creation of ideal speech a skill,

the

one

that as democratic citizens

civil society.

how many

we need

more with

Habermas

situations.

is

isn't

centered in

Here communication

is

to cultivate in order to participate in

As we consider these points of the

of them have to do

for

it

all critical

ideal speech

community, notice

listening than with speaking. In an ideal

speech situation,



Every person conversation

who



full

is

competent

equality

is

to

speak and act

is

allowed to partake

granted and each person

source of legitimate or valid statements

is

in the

seen as an equal

Modernity and Reason

There



no sense of coercion; consensus

is

not forced; and there

is

no

is

recourse to objective standings such as status, money, or power

Anyone can introduce any



topic;

everyone

Each person



Let

me

allowed to express opinions and feelings about

is

point out that this

If

an ideal against which

speech acts can be com-

all

to this ideal; the greater

is

human

that the

of

activities

its

members and .

.

.

that this coordination has to be

then the reproduction of the species

also requires satisfying the conditions of a rationality that

municative action.

Ideal speech

social

closer a

species maintains itself through the socially

communication

established through

(Habermas, 1981/1984,

p.

movements

is

is

made up of voluntary

rise to civil society. Civil

associations, organizations,

society

civil

is

and

communicative

that are in touch with issues that evolve out of

action in the public sphere. In principle,

com-

inherent in

397)

communities are based upon and give

Habermas

society for

The

strive.

the possibility of consensus

action.

we assume

coordinated

is

democratic communication must

all

community's speech comes

topics

all

keep her or his speech free from ideology

strives to

pared, and toward which

and reasonable

anyone can disagree with or question any

topic;

independent of any

social

system, such as the state, the market, capitalism in general, family, or religion. Civil

midpoint between the public sphere and

society, then, functions as a

tions.

The elements of

developed

in a robust

civil

society provide a

social interac-

way through which

speech community get expressed to society

the concerns

at large.

One

of

to continually challenge political

and

cultural organizations in order to keep intact the freedoms of speech, assembly,

and

the

more important

things

civil

society does

press that are constitutionally guaranteed.

is

Examples of elements of

civil

society

include professional organizations, unions, charities, woman's organizations, advo-

cacy groups, and so on.

Habermas to evolve



It

gives us several conditions that

and

must be met

must develop within the context of

emphasizes equality for

all,

and an

active

liberal political culture,

and integrated



Within the boundaries of the public sphere,



A

influence based civil

for a robust civil society

exist.

men and women may

on persuasion but cannot obtain

political

society can exist only within a social system

limited.

The

to bring

all

no way occupies the position of the

society

under control. The

must by

indirect

and

state's

that

obtain

power.

where the

state in

political steering

one

lifeworld.

state's

power

is

social actor designed

power must be limited and

leave intact the internal operations of

the institution or subsystem.

Overall, nity's birth.

hope

that

Habermas

rekindles the social vision that was at the heart of

Modernity began

in the fervor

humanity could be the master of

moder-

of the Enlightenment and held the its

own

fate.

There were two primary

259

260

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

branches of

many

society. In ical

movement, one contained

this

ways, science has proven

developments

Habermas

in science

its

that have occurred over the past

democratic

200 years or

so.

However,

argues that the hope of democracy has run aground on the rocks of

to a fully involved citizenry reasoning out

gives us

is

exemplar vision. In

must

in

worth through the massive technolog-

organized capitalism. In communicative action and

Habermas

and the other

an ideal



his theory,

he points the way

civil society,

and charting

their

own

not in the sense of fantasy, but is

it

strive if they are to fulfill the

course. But what

in the

sense of an

the goal toward which societies and citizens

promise of modernity. Habermas, then,

we could have

before us a challenge, "the big question of whether

have, modernity without the less attractive features of capitalism

had, or can

lays

now

and the bureau-

cratic nation-state" (Outhwaite, 2003, p. 231).

Summary Habermas's theory of modernity critical theory.

ism and the

His intent while

state,

Enlightenment, that life

it is

is

in the tradition

of the Frankfurt School of

to critique the current

is

at

the

same time

possible for

arrangements of

hope of the

reestablishing the

human

capital-

beings to guide their collective

through reason.

Habermas argues these two forms

is

modernity has thus

that

forms of capitalism:

liberal

far

been characterized by two

and organized. The principal difference between

the degree of state involvement.

Under

liberal capitalism,

the relationship between the state and capitalism was one of laissez-faire.

hand of mar-

and would

result in true

hands-off policy

ket competition

would draw out the

equality based

on individual

The

in the belief that the invisible

state practiced a

effort.

best in people

However,

laissez-faire capitalism pro-

duced two counter-results: the tendency toward monopolization and

signi-

ficant economic fluctuations due to overproduction. Both unanticipated

prompted

results

greater state involvement

and oversight of the

capitalist

system.

Organized capitalism

management of

is

characterized by active government spending and

the economy. This involvement of the state in capitalism

facilitates three distinct results, all

of which weaken the possibility of achiev-

ing the social promise of modernitv: 1.

A

crisis

in ills

of legitimation and rationality. Because the state

managing the economy, are perceived as

When

fluctuations,

problems with the

is

now

downturns, and other economic state rather

than the economv.

they occur, these problems threaten the legitimacy of the state in

general. In addition, because the state uses social scientific forecast

These

involved

and control economies,

crises in turn

the citizenry.

belief in rationality

is

methods

to

put in jeopardy.

reduce the levels of meaning and motivation

fell

by

.

Modernity and Reason

2.

the lifeworld.

and economy,

media of power and money replace communication

and consensus 3.

The

The colonization of as the

lifeworld

is

colonized by the state

as the chief values of the lifeworld.

The reduction of

the public sphere to one of public opinion. This occurs

principally as the

media have

from information

shifted

to entertainment

methods

value and as the state makes use of social scientific

to

measure

and then control public opinion. However, Habermas argues that the hope of

social progress

and equality can

be embraced once again through communicative action and a robust society.

Communication

tant of

which concern

reflection. Together,

is

validity claims

—these inherently

us warrant to believe

itself gives

reach consensus and rationally guide our collective

Communicative action full

equality

reason and

call for

such assumptions lead Habermas to conclude that the

process of communication

when

is

is

also a practice.

possible to

it is

lives.

True communicative action occurs

granted and each person

is

seen as an equal source of

legitimate or valid statements; objective standings such as status,

power

civil

based upon several assumptions, the most impor-

are not used in

anyway

to persuade

members;

all

topics

money, or

may be

intro-

duced; and each person strives to keep her or his speech free from ideology.

Communicative action society social

and

based upon a robust

is

civil society. Civil

mid-level voluntary associations, organizations, and

movements. Such organizations grow out of educated, rational, and crit-

communicative actions and become the medium through which the pub-

ical lic

made up of

is

results in

sphere

revitalized.

is

following conditions: cation,

A

society

civil

is

most

likely to

develop under the

A liberal political culture is present that emphasizes eduequality; men and women are prevented from

communication, and

obtaining or using power in the public sphere; the

state's

power

is

limited.

Building Your Theory Toolbox

— Primary Sources

Learning More

See the following works by Jurgen Habermas: •

The theory of communicative action, tion

of

society,

Beacon

Press,

tique of functionalist reason,

1

984;

vol. vol.

Beacon

1:

Reason and the

2: Lifeworld

Press,

The philosophical discourse of modernity: Twelve



The structural transformation of the public sphere:

Learning More

society,

MIT

Press,

cri-

1987.



egory of bourgeois

rationaliza-

and system: A

lectures,

An

MIT

Press,

1990.

inquiry into a cat-

1991.

— Secondary Sources SUNY



Habermas's



Habermas and the public sphere, edited by Craig Calhoun, MIT Press, 993. Habermas: A critical introduction, William Outhwaite, Stanford University



critical

theory of society, by Jane Braaten,

Press,

1991 1

Press,

1995.

261

262

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

Seeing the World •

After reading and understanding this chapter, you should be able to

answer the following questions (remember to answer them theoretically): o Define the Frankfurt School's critical theory and explain its view of

knowledge and

culture,

and how

o

Explain praxis

o

Explain the differences

it

is

associated with

between

liberal

critical

knowledge,

and organized

capitalism. Pay

changing relations between the state and

particular attention to the

economy, o

Define the lifeworld and

how

purpose, and explain

its

became

it

colonized, o

Define the public sphere and explain

o

What

and

how

it

came about,

purpose,

its

colonization,

its is

communicative action and

how does

it

form the

basis of value-

rational action? o

Define ideal speech situations (or communities) and explain give rise to

o

What

civil

is

survive?

How

how

they

society,

civil

society? is

it

What

are the conditions under which

it

can

important to a democratic society?

Engaging the World •

Using your favorite Internet search engine, look up "participatory democracy"

How would

Habermas's

ideal

Does the Internet provide greater to develop? •

How

Racial, ethnic,

could Internet communities be linked to

in

modern

situation "enfranchise" these groups?

speech situation do away with the



What

social

fit

society. In

How

civil

does the

other words,

model?

this

speech situations

gender, sexual identity, and religious groups have

are being disenfranchised



speech community

possibilities for ideal

society?

all

been and

ideal

how does

possibility of disenfranchised

speech

the ideal

groups?

group do you belong to that most nearly approximates the

ideal

speech community?

How

can you begin your

own

praxis?

CHAPTER

12

The Juggernaut of Modernity Anthony Giddens (1938-)

Photo: Courtesy of Anthony Giddens.

263

264

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

266

Gicldens's Perspective: Recursive Structures

266

Structuration Theory

Moda lities

268

of Structuration

271

Giddens's Perspective: Reflexive Actors Levels of A wareness

271

272

Unconscious Motivation

273

Concepts and Theory: The Contours of Modernity Radical Reflexivity 274

Emptying Time and Space Institutions

275

276

and Disembedding Mechanisms

Cloba liza tion

277

279

Concepts and Theory: The Experience of Modernity 2 79

The Reflexive Project of the Self

280

Pure Relationships

Choice and

Summary

283

Building Your Theory Toolbox

Have

282

Life Politics

you ever ridden

rollercoaster fun

is

284

a rollercoaster?

the

way danger and

wouldn't ride the rollercoaster rollercoaster wouldn't be fun

the curves and

but

it is

plummet over

if

if

we

we didn't have

a

hundred

tempered by our sense of trust

Anthony Giddens

One

feet

mixed

security are

didn't believe

it

a sense of danger.

down, we

feel

was

much

the

We

together.

but the

safe;

When we slam

into

the possibility of death,

machine and the experts who

in the

pictures modernity in

of the things that makes riding a

built

it.

same way, but with some impor-

tant differences.

According to Giddens (1990), modernity

enormous power which,

collectively as

is

human

a juggernaut, "a

beings,

we can

runaway engine of

drive to

some

extent

but which also threatens to rush out of our control and which could rend

asunder"

which

(p. 139).

The word

juggernai4t

refers to a representation

verse. Every year the god's

of the god Vishnu or Krishna

believers

drums and cymbals.

It's

the lord of the uni-

streets

amid crowds

thought that

would throw themselves under the wheels of the massive

crushed to death force that



image would be paraded down the

of the faithful, dancing and playing

in a bid for early salvation.

demands

its

A

juggernaut, then,

is

an

at

times

cart, to

be

irresistible

blind devotion and sacrifice.

This image of an coaster, with

itself

comes from the Hindi word, Jagann&tha,

irresistible force

conjures up the thrilling ride of the roller-

twin sensations of trust and danger, but the juggernaut of moder-

nity isn't as controllable or predictable as a rollercoaster.

Here we can see

a chief

The Juggernaut of Modernity

difference between

Giddens and Habermas: For Habermas, rational control

is

modernity

is

modernity and imminently

central to

possible; but for Giddens,

almost by definition out of control. The intent of modernity effect

of modernity

is

the creation of

runaway engine of change. And we,

progress

is

mechanisms and processes

like

—but the become

that

the devotees of Jagannatha, are

drawn

a

to

modernity's power and promise.

The

ride

arating

is

by no means wholly unpleasant or unrewarding;

and charged with hopeful

modernity endure, we

shall

anticipation. But, so long as the institutions of

because the terrain across which

The

Essential

p.

can often be exhil-

never be able to control completely either the path

or the pace of the journey. In turn,

quence. (Giddens, 1990,

it

we it

shall

runs

never be able to

is

feel entirely secure,

fraught with risks of high conse-

139)

Giddens

Biography Anthony Giddens was born January

1938,

18,

in

Edmonton, England. He

received his undergraduate degree with honors from Hull University

1959,

in

studying sociology and psychology. Giddens did his master's work at the London

School of Economics, finishing

then

his thesis

on the sociology of sport

1961

in

From

.

the early 1970s, Giddens lectured at various universities including the

until

University of Leicester,

Simon

Fraser University, the University of California at Los

Angeles, and Cambridge. Giddens finished his doctoral work at Cambridge

in

1976. He remained at Cambridge through 1996, during which time he served as

dean of

tor of the

and

Social

Political Sciences. In

1997, Giddens

London School of Economics and

was appointed

Science. Giddens

Political

direcis

the

author of some 34 books that have been translated into well over 20 languages.

Giddens

also a

is

Policy Research

minister Tony

member

of the Advisory Council of the Institute for Public

(London, England) and has served as advisor to

British

prime

Blair.

Passionate Curiosity Giddens

is

a political sociologist, driven by both political questions

and

political

involvement. While his early work certainly contained a typical Marxian interest in class, his later

work

of globalization and

is

much more concerned with

what he

the

political ramifications

characterizes as the juggernaut of modernity or

how

are inter-

can people become

politically

the runaway world. Given the juggernaut of modernity, he asks, actions and behaviors patterned over time?

involved?

In

How

order to answer those questions, Giddens must

essence of society. kinds of things

go

In this,

first

Giddens seeks an ontology of the

into the

making of society?

Precisely

how

understand the

social world:

does

it

What

exist?

265

266

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

Keys to Knowing structuration, reflexive monitoring, time-space distanciation, modalities of struc-

disembedding mechanisms,

turation, ontological security,

lifestyle politics,

pure

relationships

Giddens's Perspective: Recursive Structures Structuration Theory The simple version of structuration theory from symbolic

interaction,

As we review Giddens's

ological idea of structure.

and

forth with these theories. So keep

structures in mind. this

book so

Giddens

far, is

that

is

Giddens unites the insights

phenomenology, and dramaturgy with the

Giddens uses

you are ready

ideas,

you

will see

classic soci-

him work back

what we have covered about interactions and

a lot of

to think

new words, but

through these

after all you've learned in

issues.

arguing that the subject-object divide (or agent-structure)

is

a false

dichotomy,createdtoexplainawaythecomplexityof human practice. Giddens (1986)

some self- reproducing items in nature, are recursive"(p. 2). It'slikethechicken and eggquestion, which in some ways isasillyone.When

says,"Human you have the

social activities, like

egg,

you have the chicken. They

phases. So, to follow the analogy,

are

one and the same, just produce

like this: Social actors

it's

in different

social reality,

but

the mere fact that you have"social actors"presumes an already existing social world.

The primary and agency

insight of Giddens's structuration theory

are recursively

into existence at the

proposes a duality

reflexively

as a dualism, as

— two

two mutually exclusive elements, Giddens

duality of structure indicates that structure

just did.

is I

it

is

both the

first

medium and

me give you

a sentence,

we do

is

a

recreate the rules through

little

tricky, so

which the sentence was made

to follow the rules. If we don't, the sentence won't

according to the

in

You might

say,

And it

I

is

obvious thing we

in the first place. a sentence,

make any sense and

it

This

we have

won't really

order to exist as a sentence, the line of words must be formed

rules. Yet, at the

recreate the rules through

You learned the

outcome of

an example."

less

pay close attention. In order to put together

be a sentence. Thus,

The

a couple of things. First,

and most obviously, we create the sentence. The second and

is

the

thing.

sentence of this paragraph in quotation marks because

our example. Anytime we write or speak

do

same

reflexively organizes.

a difficult concept to understand, so let

put the

that social structures

analytically distinguishable parts of the

the social activity or conduct that

"This

is

produced: They are continuously brought

same moment through the same behaviors. Rather than seeing

and agency

structure

and

same moment we

create the sentence,

which the sentence was made

we

also

in the first place.

"Wait a minute, the rules existed before the sentence." Did they?

rules in school

and those

rules are

found

in

English

grammar

texts,

The Juggernaut

school as

But

is

often refer to the grades between the primary levels and high

we

right? In fact,

"grammar school" because

that really

could form sentences well before you

shown rules

where you learn the

that's

where you learned the

rules? If

it

was,

it

But the

in school are the rules

the rules found in

grammar

already exist in the language

you

that

fact

you

is

"learned the rules"; further, studies have

and 6-year-olds make use of very complex grammars.

that 5-

you learned

grammar.

rules of

would imply

a sentence before reaching that point in school.

couldn't form

Modernity

of

In truth, the

you already knew. The difference

is

that

texts are formalized interpretations of the rules that itself;

grammars and

dictionaries are

produced by aca-

demics based on the study of language. Note that grammarians study the language to discover the rules

making

—the

The

rules are already there in the language.

rules for

—the expression and the structure are

the sentence are in the sentence itself

same moment. According

created in the

same

to Giddens, the

is

true about social

agents and structures. In order to talk about the duality of agency

and

structure,

Giddens changes the

definition of social structure. In structuration theory, social structures consist of rules

and

There are two kinds of

resources.

tion.

Keep

practices.

may be

in

mind

normative rules and codes of

rules:

They don't

exist abstractly or independently.

significa-

embedded

that in both cases these "rules" are fluidly

Giddens

in social

also notes that rules

consistently or rarely invoked, tacit or discursive, informal or formal,

weakly or strongly sanctioned. You should be familiar with normative rules are rules that govern behavior, such as the

codes require a

bit

norm

which meaning

tence illustration above, the signification code

One example

writing.

against littering. But signification

of explanation.

Signification codes are rules through

and

is

is

produced. In our sen-

lodged in the practices of speaking

of the consequence of these codes or rules

of political spin-doctors. Spin-doctors want to guide us so that in a specific

manner; but

in

we

is

the rhetoric

interpret events

doing so they must abide by generally accepted rules of

interpretation. If they don't, then chances are

good

that

we won't buy

their "spin."

important to mention that these rules are historically and culturally

It's

That's

why

and

— they

specific.

interpretations can change over time.

There are also two kinds of resources are

made up of such

resources: authoritative

and

allocative. Authoritative

things as techniques or technologies of

organizational position, and expert knowledge. Allocative resources

management,

come from

the

control of material goods or the material world. Resources, then, involve the control

of people and supplies.

I've

pictured the duality of structure in Figure 12.1. As we've seen, Giddens

argues that structure and agency are mutually formed in the same

act. lust as in

our

sentence example, the rules and resources that are used in social encounters both create is

and

are

found

in the interaction

and

structure.

possible only through the use of social rules

The

act of social co-presence

and resources

—and the

rules

and

resources only exist in the act of social co-presence. Thus, structure and agency are

mutually constructed through the use of the exact same rules and resources, as

noted by

all

the two-headed arrows in the figure.

267

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

268

Time-2

Time-1

Time-Space

Distanciation:

Co-presence

stretched across time and space

r

>

r

%

Co-presence

Co-presence

Structure

*

>.

i

[

t

H

Figure 12.1

Jse of rule s

Use

Globalization

World Capitalism

Figure 12.3

complex

Dynamism

of Modernity

also implies international relations. Thus, the institutional

modernity are

explicitly tied

ization as "the intensification of ities in

relation

In

social relations

vice versa" (p. 64). Globalization

between the

time and space.

labor,

worldwide

which

link distant local-

such a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring

away and

world

dimensions of

up with globalization. Giddens (1990) defines global-

local

and the

miles

a dialectic

distant that further stretch out co-presence through

The four dimensions of globalization, according

capitalist

many

thus defined in terms of

is

to Giddens, are the

economy, the world military order, the international division of

and the nation-state system. order to help us get a handle on what Giddens

is

arguing, I've

chief processes that we've been talking about in Figure 12.3.

on the

far left

of the model are interrelated in

drawn out the

all

of the factors

way. For example, the use of

management increases in the presence of world capitalism But to draw out all the relationships at that level would defeat

bureaucratic, rational

and expert systems.

some

Most

The Juggernaut of Modernity

the purpose of the at

model

as a heuristic device.

the next level. All of these dynamics

space, disembedding, globalization



I

have indicated the mutual

effects

radical refiexivity, separation of time

— mutually imply and

279

and

one another. For

affect

example, as time and space are separated from the actual, institutions can further

remove the

social

from the

the global level. These

all

which

local,

in turn allows

of modernity. Collectively, this figure and

"Why

more

abstract connections at

mutually reinforce one another and build the dynamism that

all

implies answers the question,

it

change and discontinuity endemic in modernity?" Use Figure 12.3 to

are

think through that question and Giddens's theory of modernity.

Concepts and Theory: The Experience of Modernity It is

extremely difficult to see the effects of modernity in our

lives as if

sonality

they are essential, as

there were nothing

and experiences. Yet sociology teaches us

and out of

for

if

social relations.

And

modern

tive

individual

and asks us

experiences and understand

and

to look

them

and her or

ual

social

distanciation.

What

society.

behind

we

lives.

We live our

than our inner per-

are social beings created

Giddens paints our

(or in front of)

a portrait of

own

subjec-

as finding their roots in a particular social

organization called modernity. Modernity

and time-space

that

own

to us

the sociological imagination encourages us to

see the intersections of biography, history,

the

more

characterized by endemic refiexivity

is

this implies for the person

his subjective experiences have

been

lifted

is

that the individ-

out of densely packed

networks and required to do increasing amounts of personal work. This

personal work centers on the reflexive project of the

self, life politics,

and intimate

relations.

The Reflexive Project of the

Self

Giddens means more than the basic about. In times previous to modernity,

Mead (Chapter

refiexivity that

the self

was deeply embedded

1)

talked

in the social.

People were caught up in and saw themselves only in terms of the group. The

was an extension of the group body. The individual

was

also plotted

life

just as certainly as

was not only seen

and marked

socially. So, for

he had changed from a boy to a

man

your arm

as part

is

self

an extension of your

of the group, but

its

trajectory

example, a boy knew for certain when

—he went through

a rite of passage.

Such

is

not the case today. In

modernity, the individual stands alone. The individual

example, are free to express yourself in any

number of

of potential identities and experiences open to you. But

is

"free."

You, for

ways. You have a plethora at the

same time, you no

longer have any institutional markers to guide you or to define your "progress," and there are

of the

no

self,

institutions that are directly responsible for you. In the reflexive project

you have

to reflexively define

regard to social and personal change.

your

The

own

self

is

options and opportunities with

no longer an

entity

embedded

in

280

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

known and

firm social and institutional relationships and expectations. This shift

traditional, social self with clear institutional guidelines to the individual

from the

reflexive project

was brought about because of the dynamics of modernity

that

we

reviewed in the previous section.

The body

body was,

the

drawn

is

for the

into this reflexive project as well. Before radical modernity,

most

medium through which work

part, seen as either the

was performed or

a vehicle for the soul. In either case,

and received

attention unless

little

it

was of

became an obstacle

to

on the other hand, the body becomes

radical modernity,

and helps

it

little

consequence

work or

salvation. In

part of self-expression

to sustain "a coherent sense of self-identity" (Giddens, 1991, p. 99).

body becomes wrapped up with the

ways: appearance, demeanor, sensuality, and through bodily regimes. the

first

last

two.

two ways

The body

our chapter on Goffman, so

in

We

covered

time to review the

will just take

involved in the self-project through bodily regimes. In radical

is

modernity, "we become responsible for the design of our

The body

1991, p. 102).

The

reflexive project of the self in four possible

is

no longer

own

bodies" (Giddens,

work but can

a simple reflection of one's

become a canvas for a self-portrait. Capitalism, mass media, advertising, fashion, and medical expert knowledge have produced an overabundance of information

how

about

the

body images.

body works and what kinds of behaviors

We

are called

upon

what kinds of

result in

to constantly review the look and condition of

our body and to make adjustments through various body regimes of

as necessary.

The adjustments

are carried out

diet, exercise, stress-reducing activities (yoga,

meditation), vitamin therapies, skin cleansing and repair, hair treatments, and so forth.

With the organization of sensuality, Giddens has sensual feeling of the body, but the idea

is

mind

in

the entire spectrum of

particularly salient for sexuality. Together,

mass education, contraceptive technologies, decreasing family

size,

and women's

political

and workforce participation created the situation where "today,

time

human

in

Giddens

links

history,

women

claim equality with

men" (Giddens,

uality" (pp. 1-2).

The

into existence as sex

ity

is

an

1).

women's freedom with the creation of an "emotional order" that con-

tains "an exploration of the potentialities of the 'pure relationship'"

uality

for the first

1992, p.

and "plastic

idea of plastic sexuality captures a kind of sexuality that

was separated from the demands of reproduction.

explicit characteristic

of modernity. For the

could become part of self-identity.

part of the reflexive project of the

self,

We it is

first

time

sex-

came

Plastic sex-

in history, sexual-

should also note that since sexuality subject to reflexive scrutiny

is

and inten-

tional exploration.

Pure Relationships To begin our discussion of pure relationships,

Giddens points out

we use

it

today.

most near and

that early

think about friendship.

Greeks didn't even have a word for friend

The Greeks used

dear, but this

let's

the

word

philos to talk about those

term was used for people

who were

in the

who were

way the

in or near to family.

The Juggernaut of Modernity

And

was pretty well

the Greek philos network

there was

little

way of friends

in the

word

In languages that did have a

set

by the person's status position;

we think of them,

as

as personal choices.

for friend, these friends

were seen within the

context of group survival. Friends were the in-group and others were the out-

group. The distinction was between friend and enemy,

mind

more important then than they

that groups were far

are

now

were honor and

in

because indi-

A

vidual survival was closely tied to group affiliations and resources.

someone you turned

Keep

or, at best, stranger.

friend

was

time of need; thus the values associated with friendship

to in

however, because of disembedding mechanisms

sincerity. Today,

and increased time-space distanciation, not

all

friends are understood in terms of

in-group membership and actual assistance. The individual can have distant friends

and

is

A

enabled and expected to take care of her- or himself (the reflexive project).

fundamental change has thus occurred

honor based on group

identity

on

self-disclosure.

a

mutual process of

networks and

which ticity

this

and

is

is

in friendships:

from friendship with

to friendship with authenticity based

Rather than trust being embedded in social

modernity has to be won, and the means through

rituals, trust in

done

and survival

self-evident

warmth and openness. By implication,

self-regulation provide the personal, emotional

this

authen-

component missing

in

trust in the abstract systems of modernity.

Intimate relations in modernity are thus characterized by pure relationships friendships and intimate

ties that

can bring to each person.

and

existing networks social,

are entered into simply for

Remember

what the relationship

that traditional relationships

were

first set

by

and the motivation behind them was usually

institutions

not personal. For example, most marriages were motivated by politics or

economics (not by love) and were arranged

for the couple

by those most responsi-

by the couple themselves). This

ble for the social issues in question (not in



is

the

which modern relationships are pure: They occur purely for the sake of the

tionship.

Most of our relationships

politically or

are not

anchored

in external conditions, like the

economically motivated marriage. Rather, they are "free-floating." The

only structural condition for a friendship or marriage near enough to

make

contact. But with

tion technologies, our physical space

and we have

quite far-ranging,

is

modern

also reflexively organized, based

is

proximity:

our

is,

on commitment and mutual

how

Daytime

relationships; the

it's

and be is

in

filled

magazine rack

and advice on how relationship);

to act

television

relations, they are trust,

self,

and focus on

relationships are

they are continually worked at by the individuals,

tend to consult an array of sources of information. The for telling us

have to be

communica-

fingertips.

and pure nature of these

intimacy and "self" growth. Like the reflexive project of the reflexively organized; that

We

transportation and

almost constantly in motion and can be

"virtual" space at

In addition to the free-floating

endless.

way rela-

at

to have the best

number of possible

our friendships and sexual relations

is

who

sources

almost

with programming that explores every facet of the local supermarket (fill

in the

estimated that over 2,000

is

a

cornucopia of surveys

blank with any aspect of an intimate

new

self-help

book

titles

are published

every year in the United States; and the Internet resources available for improving relationships are innumerable.

Most of us have taken

a relationship

quiz with our

281

282

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

partner

sonic point

at

someone

ol

everything

Is

(if

you haven't, just

wait,

it's

coming), and

of us have asked

all

the essential question for relationships that are reflexively organized: right?" This kind of

all

communication

is

moral obligation

a

pure

in

gamut of communication covers everything from the mundane low was your day at work?) to the serious ("Do you want to break up with me?").

relationships; the (

I

Choice and

Life Politics

Along with the accelerating changes emancipatory

ating individuals

some ways, hope

the

And,

some

in

and groups from the constraints

this type

how many groups

based on group membership and it is

based on personal

dom we

gation. Choice is

is

a

But

We

it is

fundamental element

Mass media

politics

and

contemporary

in

of the

whom

which you have absolutely no

and

real

stories that

we

receive via the

with one another. The picture

we

and

is

comes

by

facilitating

mediated experi-

you are exposed

many

The

also creates a collage effect. reflect

any

essential or

do

are juxtaposed that have nothing to is

to

other features

a collage of diverse

what happens

is

not so

much

words, what becomes important

It

creates "a

span can be understood as (Giddens, 1991,

p.

on personal

political equality (as

world that

becomes important

such grounding.

to us as individuals?

that the plurality of lifestyles presented to us not only allows for

as inner authenticity. In a

effects

it

equality, but rather, the insistence

issue in this milieu

it

Part of that project

get of the world, then,

necessitates choice. In other

group

uprooted,

obli-

cultures, not a direct representation.

implication

issue of

self.

media do not

a result of being faced with this collage,

it

a free-

become an

This principality

living.

connection. Like so

and images



has

they have no direct association through time

social elements. Instead, stories

choice

it

television or read a newspaper,

of modernity, this stretches out co-presence but

One



in contrast to social experiences that take place in

and space. Every time you watch

As

that

not

politics; rather,

are created as people are exposed to multiple accounts

of situations and others with

lifestyles

all.

ever

lifestyle. It is

emancipatory

have come to think of choice as

also plays a role in creating choice

face-to-face encounters

pictures

more than

are

of choice.

Mediated experiences are

lives to

was

it

based on disembedding mechanisms and time-space distanciation, and

be centered on the

ences.

is

more than

results in, as we've seen, the reflexive project

to

We

failed.

the politics of choice and

characteristics, as

States.



could bring equality and justice for

are disenfranchised. is

lifestyle choices.

have in the United

of choice

states

by way of contrast,

Life politics,

from liber-

that adversely affect their lives. In

respects, this theme of modernity has

painfully aware of

is

of political activity has been the theme of modernity

democratic nation

that

shift

concerned with

modernity, there has been a

in

Emancipatory politics

politics to life politics.

to

is

choice.

is

not the

What

at

with emancipatory politics)

perceived as constantly changing and

be grounded

framework of

in one's self. Life politics creates

basic trust by

a unity against the

means of which

backdrop of

the

life

shifting social events"

215). Life politics, then, helps to diminish the possibility

of ontological insecurity.

is

and

The Juggernaut of Modernity

A good

example of life

or meat byproducts.

politics

Not only

know summed

up

it

nicely

a cruelty- free lifestyle."

and

for

some

it is

—the

practice of not eating any

when

any goods involving animal she said, veganism

"is

One vegan

testing.

an integral component of

a political statement against the exploitation of animals,

It is

condemnation of capitalism

clearly a

— capitalism

particularly

is

responsible for the unnatural mass production of animal flesh as well as cial

animal

meat

eating flesh avoided, but also any products with

is

dairy, eggs, fur, leather, feathers, or I

veganism

is

283

most vegans,

testing. Yet, for

between the outside world and inner

it is

beliefs,

a lifestyle,

commer-

one that brings harmony

and not necessarily part of a

collective

movement. However,

it

would be wrong

to conclude that

politics are

life

they do not result in a social movement. Quite the opposite springs from and focuses attention

What

represses.

politics

life

referential systems of

does

is

on some of the very

to "place a question

modernity" (Giddens, 1991,

that these things are so,

p.

was provided by the

Modernity has wiped away the

social base

based. Life politics "remoralizes" social

against the internally

ought we

this

kind of morality was

and demands "renewed

than asking for group participation, as does emancipatory

moral commitment to a

specific

being impotent in comparison to emancipatory

to be?" In

institutions, especially religion.

questions that the institutions of modernity systematically dissolve"

for self-realization, a

modernity

issues that

mark

women

upon which

life

true. Life politics

223). Life politics asks, "Seeing

what manner of men and

traditional society, morality

powerless because

is

sensitivity to

224). Rather

(p.

politics, life politics asks

way of

Rather than

living.

politics, life politics "presage[s]

future changes of a far-reaching sort: essentially, the development of forms of social

order 'on the other

side'

of modernity

itself" (p. 214).

Summary According to Giddens, the central issue for social theory

how

actions

and interactions

are patterned over time

Giddens's terms, social theory needs to explain

how

to explain

is

and space;

or, to

use

the limitations inherent

within physical presence are transcended through time-space distanciation.

There are two primary ways through which

this occurs: the

dynamics of

structuration and routinization. o

Structuration occurs

when people

use specific modalities to produce

both structure (rules and resources of signification, domination, and imation) and practice (physical co-presence). Thus, the very structuration reflexively and repeatedly links structure facilitates

o

method

of

and person and

time-space distanciation.

Routinization cal security.

is

psychologically motivated by a diffuse need for ontologi-

The

reality

structuration, which

is

of society

reflexive

and

is

precarious because

it

depends on

recursive. In other words, the process

of structuration doesn't reference anything other than

on

legit-

itself

ceaseless interactional work. This precariousness

is

and

it

depends

unconsciously

284

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

sensed by people, which,

and interactions and tional orders,

motivates them to routinize their actions

in turn,

to link their routines to physical regions

which further add

and

institu-

stability,

Routinization was unproblematically achieved in traditional societies.

o

People rarely

and the

their regions

left

were slow to

institutional orders

is characterized by dynamism and increasing Dynamism and time-space distanciation are

change. Modernity, however,

time-space distanciation.

both directly related to radical place, the

reflexivity,

extreme separation of time and

disembedding work of modern

These factors are related

institutions,

and

globalization.

of science and progress,

to the proliferation

bureaucratic management, the mechanical clock and universal calendar,

communication and transportation technologies, symbolic tokens and expert systems of knowledge, the military complex, and world capitalism.

As

a result

of radical modernity, the individual

works and institutions that tities,

knowledge, and

life

is

lifted

socially situated the self

course markers. The

reflexive project of the self that

is

out of the social net-

by acquiring certain iden-

modern

individual

is

given the

only internally referential. As part of the

reflexive project of the self, the individual involves her- or himself in strate-

gic life

ences,

of the

planning using expert systems of knowledge and mediated experi-

all

of which are permeated with pervasive doubt. The reflexive project

and

constant evaluation and reevaluation based on possible

self involves

new information

(ever revised by experts

self- reflection

(How am

and

reflexive project includes lifestyle politics in ively

work her or

his

available through

doing? Should

I

I

mass media)

be feeling this way?). The

which the individual must

reflex-

way through continuously presented and expanding are-

nas of social existence. Individuals, then, they reflexively order their

life

in

become hubs

for social

change as

response to a constantly changing political

landscape.

Building Your Theory Toolbox Learning More •

To learn

— Primary Sources

more about Giddens's theory

The constitution of •

of structuration, you should read

society, University of California Press,

identity: Self and society in the late

1986.

recommend Modernity and selfmodern age, Stanford University Press,

For Giddens's theory of modernity,

I

1991.

Learning More •

An

— Secondary Sources

excellent encounter with Giddens's theory (not just a review)

Gabriel Mestrovic's

Anthony Giddens: The

last

is

Stjepan

modernist, Routledge, 1998.

The Juggernaut of Modernity

Check •

It

Out is neither modern nor postmodern, Zygmunt Bauman, especially Liquid modernity, 2000; and Postmodernity and its discontents, New York

Fluid modernity: For an

recommend you

I

Press,

Polity

approach that

read

University Press, 1997.

Seeing the World •

After reading and understanding this chapter, you should be able to

answer the following questions (remember to answer them o

What

o

What

time-space distanciation and

is

How

Giddens?

why

is it

theoretically):

the central question for

does modernity affect time-space distanciation?

are social structures,

in

Giddens's scheme?

How do

they exist

and what do they do? o

o o

What What What What in

o

are the three institutional orders are practical

and

What

the unconscious motivation

is

What

come about due to What are their effects?

are they created?

and

how do

What

is

alized?

they

fit

How

is

the body involved and

in this

What

How

does each

dynamic of modernity?

how

it

con-

How

did

it

why do you

become

individu-

think the body

is

project?

Explain the differences is

What

interaction?

motivation?

dynamic character of modernity.

the reflexive project of the self?

important

Why

human

in

this

Define each process and explain

least four.

tributes to the

o

how

are the main processes that produce the

There are at

o

and

discursive consciousnesses

with reflexive monitoring?

process vary?

o

are the three modalities?

the function of modalities of structuration?

is

specific processes

o

What

are modalities of structuration?

lifestyle politics

between emancipatory and lifestyle politics. more prevalent today than emancipatory?

are pure relationships?

Engaging the World •

Giddens "third

is

one

way"

of the architects

in politics.

"third way."

can you see

What it

is

and proponents of what

is

known

as the

Using your favorite Internet search engine, look up the third

way and how

is

Giddens involved?

How

related to his theory?

Weaving the Threads •

Compare and

contrast Giddens's theory of structuration with Bourdieu's

constructivist-structuralism approach.

behavior replicated

in

the long run?

object-subject dichotomy? suasive? •

Why

or

why

Do you

Specifically,

How

find

how

are patterns of

does each one overcome the

one approach to be more

per-

not?

Compare and contrast Wallerstein's, Luhmann's, and Giddens's views modernity recommend you start with their defining characteristics I

of of

285

286

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

modernity and review the issues that are implied you've worked your

and

its

way through

in

the definitions. After

these comparisons, define modernity

chief problems.

Both Giddens and Wallerstein explain the ramifications of their version of

modernity

in

terms of personal,

political

involvement.

Compare and

contrast their politics.

Check the index

in this

book and look up the

different definitions

and

explanations of "social structures." Evaluate each of these approaches

and create what you

feel to

be a

clear,

robust,

and correct

explanation of social structures. Justify your theory.

definition-

CHAPTER

13

Defining the Possible and Impossible Michel Foucault

Photo:

©

(1

926- 1 984)

Bettmann/CORBIS.

287

288

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

Games

Foucault's Perspective: Truth

290

Foucault's Method: Counter-History

291

292

Foucault's Critical Perspective

Concepts and Theory: The Practices of Power

and Order

Epistemes

293

294

295

Discourse

Making an Object Out of a Subject 296 Concepts and Theory: Power Over the Body 298 Concepts and Theory: Power Over the Subject 302 302

Creek Sexuality

Western Modern Sexuality

Summary

305

307

308

Building Your Theory Toolbox

Power It

comes

to this:

dwarf-throwing contests,

dwarfs for centuries given away as gifts, at

and the dwarf-jokes

which we laugh

And

people so

fat

our

in

big,

proper bodies.

they can't

scratch their toes, so fat

you have to get

to cut

them

away whole

to the

sides of their

homes

morgue.

Don't we snicker, even as the paramedics work?

And imagine of a

fat

the small political base

dwarf. Nothing to stop us

from slapping our knees, Let's

apologize to

at the spirited

all

rolling

on the

floor.

of them, Roberta said

dinner

table.

we could hardly contain

But by then

ourselves.

-Stephen

'SOURCE: "Power," from

Dunn

Loosestrife by Stephen Dunn. Copyright

Used by permission of W. W. Norton & Company,

Inc.

©

(1996,

p.

61)*

1996 by Stephen Dunn.

Defining the Possible and Impossible

Power.

It's

an uneasy word, a word we don't

company. Perhaps we may even shy away from

because to speak

it is

to

make

crass.

it

And

it

it

or determining where

it

exists.

One

of the reasons

proper

word

that social

understand that

scientists

power makes the human world go round, but they have

in

improper company,

in

certainly a

it is

are uncomfortable yet obsessed with. Social

scientists

acknowledge

like to

a devil of a time defining

hard to define

it is

that

is

it is

present in every social situation.

Some

power

theorists see

as

an element of

power

to a position within the structure, like the

of the United States. In this scheme, power use.

Other theorists have defined power

power more

in

power, because

as

terms of influence. This

many

social structure

is

is

—something attached

comes with being the president

that

something that a person can possess and

an element of exchange. Others have seen a

more

types of social relationships

general

way

in

and people can

which

to think of

exercise influence.

Michel Foucault defines power differently from most that have come before him. Foucault asks us to see power in knowledge. That in

power and knowledge; he

a connection between

called

unusual.

ideology and

it

Weber

specifically

saw that knowledge could be used

as

power the more

found

Marx or Weber. For

in truth

The

and

discourse,

false

con-

society

became

much

further

bureaucratized. Foucault takes this idea of power and knowledge

than either

Marx saw

knowledge and power are connected. He

sciousness.

also recognized that

itself isn't

Foucault,

power

and carried out

is

hidden and treacherous. minds, and

in bodies,

It is

subjectivities.

Essential Foucault

Biography

We

should begin

idea that his

work. Further,

that

we

this brief

we need

to

biography by noting that Foucault would balk at the

know

anything about the author

Foucault would say

in

order to understand

that any history of the author

is

something

use in order to validate a particular reading or interpretation. Having

said that, Foucault

was born on October

15, 1926, in Poitiers, France. Foucault

studied at the F_cole Normale Superieure and the Institut de Psychologie In

1960, returning to France from teaching posts

Hamburg, Foucault published Madness and France's highest

academic degree, doctorat

in

Civilization, for

d'Etat. In

in Paris.

Sweden, Warsaw, and which he received

1966, Foucault published

The Order of Things, which became a best-selling book

in

France.

1970,

In

Foucault received a permanent appointment at the College de France (France's

most prestigious school) as chair of History of Systems of Thought. published

Foucault California,

Discipline

and Punishment and took

which came to hold an important place

San Francisco.

In

1976, Foucault published the

in

first

Foucault's

volume of

work, The History of Sexuality. The two other volumes of Pleasure and The Care of the

death

in

1984.

Self,

were published

his

life,

1975,

In

first

trip

his last

this history,

to

especially

major

The Use of

shortly before Foucault's

289

290

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

Passionate Curiosity In

a

own

Foucault's (1984/1 990b)

curiosity—the only kind of

words, "As for what motivated me. ...

curiosity, in

any case, that

is

degree of obstinacy: not the curiosity that seeks to assimilate what

one to know, but that which enables one to get free of what would be the value of the passion for knowledge if it

amount

the extent possible, Foucault

how

though his

was

they

own

it

was

what

in

how

ideas

and

proper

or another

all,

in

a

and to

(p. 8). In brief,

come into existence and was not simply academic,

subjectivities

possible. But Foucault's search

is

As the above quote

that.

one way

not, in

it is

resulted only

the knower's straying afield of himself?"

in

interested

limit

and

of knowledgeableness

was

oneself. After

for

certain

It

worth acting upon with

tells us,

Foucault sought to understand

practices "in relationship of self with self

and the forming

of oneself as

a subject" (p. 6).

Keys to Knowing power, knowledge, order, games of truth, discourse, counter-history, archaeol-

ogy and genealogy, episteme,

human

ticon,

historical rupture, subject objectification,

panop-

and

disciplines, governmentality, microphysics of power, sexuality

subjectivity

Games

Foucault's Perspective: Truth Foucault

is

a

complex thinker and

writer.

As

a result, trying to

summarize Foucault's

theory can be a frustrating experience. In writing this chapter, sense of incompletion.

The more

mention

know

this

because

I

version of Foucault. Yet points,

I

that

wrote, the

more

believe that in focusing

I

I

on

felt

that

in this

I

a continuing

was leaving

book

is

a

pared

out.

I

down

a select few of Foucault's major

can convey some sense of what he was trying to accomplish.

Stated succinctly, Foucault

edge or "truth" and

we can

I

what I'm presenting

had

I

how

truth

is

interested in

is

how power is exercised through knowl-

formed through practice (note

that with Foucault,

use knowledge and truth interchangeably). His interest in truth

or philosophical. Rather, Foucault

is

interested in analyzing

what he

isn't

abstract

calls truth

games.

His use of "games" isn't meant to imply that what passes as truth in any historical time is

somehow false or simply a construction

of questions can only be answered, tions are

let

is

involved in uncovering

Foucault's interest in truth concerns the

The

feels that these

made. In other words, something can only be "false" once

assumed; Foucault

tices that

of language. Foucault

kinds

alone asked, after historically specific assump-

how

truth

is

a specific truth

assumed.

is

Specifically,

game of truth: the rules, resources, and prac-

go into making something true for humans.

idea of practice

is

fairly

broad and includes such things

organizational practices as well as those of academic disciplines

as institutional



and

in these practices,

— Defining the Possible and Impossible

truth are

is

formed. The idea also refers to specific practices of the body and

where power

exercised.

is

we engage

behaviors

practice has another

medical practice.

Most of us use the word

in to prepare for

meaning

When you

an event,

to

is



practice for a show. But

is

the kind of practice in which Foucault

when we talk about a someone who is "prac-

choreographed

sets of behaviors that together define a

—these

clear

your physician, you see

ticing" medicine. In this sense, practice refers to

with bodies

band

meaning

as well. This

go

like

self

practice to talk about the

acts that interact

way of doing something. This

interested.

is

Method: Counter-History

Foucault's

Foucault uncovered truth games by constructing what he called counterhistories.

from the

which

cized,

States

When most of us think of history, we think of a factual telling of events past. We are aware, of course, that sometimes that telling can be politi-

—we

is

one reason we have "Black History Month" here

are trying to

make up

for having

left

getting a few tweaks. Foucault wants us to free history

He or

really doesn't say less true; that's

not an issue for him. History in

What Foucault wants different point of

is still

intact;

to

produce for us

is

is

forms

all its

how the

is

part of



linear,

just

a history told

memory

more

is

and gen-

idea of true history

a counter-history

view from the progressive,

it's

from the model of memory.

anything directly about whether any particular history

erated by discourse. Thus, Foucault's concern

United

people of color out of our telling

memory model

of history. But most of us also think that the

in the

used.

is

from a

model.

The important questions then become, why is one path taken rather than another? Why is the present filled with one kind of discourse rather than others?

And what ties?

has been the cost of taking this path rather than

all

the other potentiali-

Thus, a counter-history identifies

the accidents, the minute deviations the errors, the false appraisals,

—or

and the

conversely, the complete reversals

faulty calculations that gave birth to

those things that continue to exist and have value for us; truth or being does not

lie at

the root of

it is

to discover that

what we know and what we

are,

but

the exteriority of accidents. (Foucault, 1984, p. 81)

Foucault uses two terms to talk about his counter-history, archaeology and genealogy.

Though

the distinctions are

sometimes unclear, archaeology seems

oriented toward uncovering the relationships

among

to

be

social institutions, practices,

come to produce a particular kind of discourse or structure of thought. Genealogy may be better suited to describe Foucault's (1984) work that is concerned with the actual inscription of discourse and power on the mind and and knowledge

that

body: "Genealogy, as an analysis of descent, of the body and history.

Its

task

is

to

expose

the process of history's destruction of the

ology

is

to text

what genealogy

is

is

a

thus situated within the articulation

body

body"

to the body. In

totally

(p. 83).

imprinted by history and

We

could say that archae-

both cases, there

is

an analogy to

291

292

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

digging, searching, and uncovering the hidden history of order, thought, madness, sexuality, a

and so on. The hidden history

counter-story that

necessarily

isn't

more

constructed

is

in

more accurate

mode

an archaeological



it's

simply

than an histor-

one.

ical

Foucault's Critical Perspective What

Foucault's point in constructing counter-histories? Part of what he

is

wants to do

Many

end?

expose the contingencies of what we consider

is

based on assumptions of what would make

critical perspectives are

must be something

better society. In other words, there

tion

compared

is

For him, the

demonstrate what

to

would argue

sufficient because

is

examining

critically

their

it

opens up

it

scheme only attempts

that a Utopian

system of impoverishment with another. The point open, to keep people

which the current

to

lacking. But Foucault sees

it is

critical perspective in itself

In fact, Foucault

but to what

reality,

otherwise.

possibilities.

to replace

one

to keep possibilities always

is

and knowledge system so

life

a

situa-

they can perpetually be open to the possibility of something

that

else.

According to Foucault's scheme, an important part of what creates knowledge, order,

tures

and discourse

knowledge

egories, like

is

the presence of "blank spaces." Foucault (1966/ 1994b) pic-

as a kind of grid.

mammal,

flora,

The boxes

mineral,

in the grid are the actual linguistic cat-

human,

However, there

is

actually a

that creates the order

more important

blank spaces of this grid that order manifests

moment

discourse or knowledge system

is

of

its

We are

part of the grid: the part of the grid

— the blank spaces between the

waiting in silence for the

and female.

black, white, male,

form part of our everyday language.

familiar with those parts of the grid; they

itself in

expression"

in the spaces

categories. "It

depth

as

(p. xx).

only in the

is

though already

The

true

there,

power of

a

between the categories. As Eviatar

Zerubavel (1993) notes, "separating one island of meaning from another entails the introduction of

among

void

and

its

some mental void between them.

these islands of

magnitude

reflects the

meaning

that

...

It

is

our perception of the

makes them separate

we

degree of separateness

perceive

in

our mind,

among them"

(pp. 21-22).

These spaces are revealed most think about a

little

boy of about

toys he's been given

clearly in transgression.

3 or 4 years of age.

and emulating the

neighborhood children. But one day with

dolls.

role

He

models he

his father

His father grabs the doll away and

is

As an

sees

on

TV

comes home and tells his

illustration, let's

playful, playing with the

and among the

finds

him playing

son firmly that boys do not

play with dolls. In this instance, the category of gender was almost invisible until

young boy unwittingly attempted

the

the categories.

of

its

to cross over the boundary or space between The meaning and power of gender waited "in silence for the moment

expression."

This idea of space categories

is

provocative.

Using the idea of boundary ful:

A more Durkheimian way

would conceptualize the space between them to think

as a

of thinking about

boundary or

about the division between categories

is

wall. fruit-

Walls separate and prevent passing. The young boy in our example certainly

came up

against a wall,

and many of us have

felt

the walls of gender, race, or

— Defining the Possible and Impossible

sexism. But the idea of walls objective, as if they in

somehow

293

makes the use of categories and knowledge seem

exist apart

from

and

us,

this

is

not what Foucault has

mind. Notice that the boy in our example was unaware of the "wall" until his father

showed

it

him. From Foucault's position, the wall of gender was erected in the

gendered practices. Foucault's idea of space helps us think about the prac-

father's tices

to

of power. Space, in this sense,

categories rather than a wall there. calls

Space

until

to see

it is

filled

what

will

undetermined. Something can be built

is

our attention to potential. Foucault's research,

that potential

way

empty

is

makes us wait

—he

tells

us

how

that space

became

— seeing space between

go there and how

in space

his critical archaeology,

goes

it

but the space

itself

in

fills

one

historically constructed in

rather than any of the other potential ways.

Foucault's counter-history actually creates a space of

its

own.

On

one

side,

Foucault's archaeology of modernity uncovers the fundamental codes of thought that establish for

all

of us the order that

Foucault sets the sciences

such an order

wherein a

exists.

we will

use in our world.

Between these two domains

critical culture

On

the other side,

and philosophical interpretations that explain why is

a space of possibilities, a space

can develop that sufficiently

frees itself "to discover that

these orders are perhaps not the only possible ones or the best ones" (Foucault, 1

966/ 1994b,

p. xx).

In other words, through the archaeology of knowledge, Foucault wants to not

only expose the codes of knowledge that undergird everything we do, think; he also wants to set loose the idea that things

wants to thought fied, as is

free the possibility

He

as they are.

of thinking something different. That possibility of

exists in the critical space

it is

might not be

and

feel,

between

—but

in this case the space isn't speci-

in already existing orders. Foucault doesn't necessarily

have a place he

taking us; he doesn't really have a Utopian vision of what knowledge and practice

ought

to be. His critique

aimed

at creating

is

aimed

at freeing

an empty space that

is

knowledge and creating

possibility;

it's

undetermined.

Concepts and Theory: The Practices of Power According to Foucault, power

something that

is

isn't

something that

person possesses, but

a

part of every relationship. Foucault

tells

it

is

us that there are three

types of domains or practices within relationships: communicative, objective, and

power. Communication

is

directed toward producing meaning; objective practices

are directed toward controlling

and transforming things

—science and economy

two good examples, and practices of power, which Foucault of actions upon other actions"

and

(p.

(

are

1982) defines as "a set

220), are directed toward controlling the actions

subjectivities of people. Notice

where Foucault

locates

power

within the

it's

actions themselves, not within the powerful person or the social structure. Foucault

uses the double

meaning of "conduct"

to get at this insight:

Conduct

leading others (to conduct an orchestra, for example) and also a (as in

"Tommy

conducted himself

in a

conduct others through our conduct.

manner worthy of

is

a

way

of

way of behaving

his position.").

Thus, we

294

MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY

However, Foucault's intent organization of that

power

then,

human

not to reduce power to the mundane, the simple

is

behavior across time and place. Rather, Foucault's point

many

exercised in a variety of ways,

is

becomes

Power

insidious.

normalcy of everyday

acts in the

is

of which we are unaware. Power, life.

by

acts

It

imperceptible degrees, exerting gradual and hidden effects. In this way, the exercise

of power entices us into cised?

Where does

it

a

snare that feels of our

own

and discourses turn are

felt

The

potential

is

—the way we

feel

what

is

power

possible

exists in these

exer-

power

that

and discourses found

and practice of power

that set the limits of

and expressed through

subjectivities

how

and how are we enticed? Foucault argues

exist

exercised through the epistemes (underlying order)

passes as knowledge.

doing. But

is

what

in

epistemes

and impossible, which

in

a person's relationship with her- or himself, in

about and

relate to

our inner

self

— and the disposi-

tion of the body.

Epistemes and Order an interesting idea. We order our days and lives; we order our homes we order our files and our bank accounts; we order our yards and shopping centers; we order land and sea in short, humans order everything. How do we order things? One of the ways is linguistically: "Indeed, things become meaningful only when placed in some category" (Zerubavel, 1993, p. 5). But a deeper and

Order

and

is

offices;



more fundamental question can be

asked:

How do we order the order of things?

In

other words, what scheme or system underlies and creates our categorical schemes?

We may

use categories to order the world around us, but where do the categories

get their order?

To introduce us

to this question, Foucault

(1966/1994b)

tells a

delightful story

of reading a book that contains a Chinese categorical system that divides animals

embalmed,

into those "(a) belonging to the Emperor, (b)

(i)

frenzied,

cetera,

(j)

tame, (d) sucking pigs,

innumerable, (k) drawn with a very fine camelhair brush, (1)

(m) having

like flies" (p. xv).

just

broken the water

The thing

the limitation of his

emphasis

(c)

included in the present classification,

(e) sirens, (f) fabulous, (g) stray dogs, (h)

own

pitcher, (n) that

from

a long

thinking

— "the

original). In response, Foucault asks

an important

set

of questions:

What

Where do

these

possible

boundaries originate? What

is

the price of these impossibilities

and impossible

is

a

fundamental code

language, perception, values, practices, and

He

calls

knowledge

way

in

in

—what

is

gained

any

age.

Episteme

which thought organizes

makes thought undoubtedly

all

to culture, a

code that orders

that gives order to the

world around

these fundamental codes epistemological fields or the cpi