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
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
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