Max Weber: social action theory PDF

Preview

Summary

Max Weber: social action theory...

Description

By Ryan Dale 3.8 notes Max Weber: social action theory -

The level of cause Level of meaning

Types of action -

Weber puts actions into 4 types: o Instrumentally rational action o Value-rational action o Traditional action o Affectual action

Evaluation of weber -

Weber criticised on many grounds: o Alfred Schutz (1972) – Weber’s view of action too individualistic and can’t explain shared nature of meanings o Weber’s typology of action difficult to apply o Webers advocated use of verstehen or empathetic understanding of actors subjective meaning – put ourselves in actors place.

Symbolic interactionism GH mead Symbols versus instincts -

Mead observed that human behaviour not shaped by fixed instincts but respond to world by giving meaning to thingsthat are significant. Don’t respond to stimulus in pre determined way

Taking the role of the other -

Ability to take role of other develops through social interaction

Herbert Blumer -

Herbert Blumer (1900-87) 3 key principles: o Actions based on meanings given to situations, events, people etc. o Meanings arise interaction process, not fixed at outset of interaction o Meanings we give situations are result of interpretive procedure we use

Labelling theory -

-

Labelling theorists use interactionist concepts in study of many areas. 3 concepts that underpin labelling theory: o Definition of situation  W.I. Thomas (1966) argued that people define situation as real then there’s consequences. o Looking glass self  Charles Cooley (1922) idea to describe how we develop our self concept Labelling theorists use definition of situation and looking glass self understand effects of labelling

Goffman dramaturgical model -

Erving Goffman (1963, 1967, 1968, 1969) describes how actively construct self by manipulating peoples impressions of us

By Ryan Dale -

Goffman approach described by dramaturgical as analogies with drama as framework for analysing social interaction

Impression management -

Goffman, we seek to present image of ourselves to audiences. As social actors, have many techniques for impression management. Language, tone of voice, gestures and facial expressions Goffman use dramaturgical analogy to describe different settings of interactions

Roles -

Goffman argue gap between real self and our roles Don’t believe in roles we play and role performance may be cynical and calculating

Evaluation of symbolic interactionism -

Interactionism largely avoids determinism of structural theories. Recognises people create society through choices and meaning More loose collection of descriptive concepts Larry Reynolds (1975) offers evidence showing interactionism lack idea of structure. Questionnaire to 124 interactionists, 84 responded. Asked which concepts are essential: role (38), self (37) and interaction (37). Ethnomethodology’s argue interactionism is correct in focusing on actors meanings

Phenomenology -

Used to describe things as appear to our senses.

Husserl’s philosophy -

Husserl argues world makes sense cuz impose meaning and order by constructing mental categories to classify and file information from senses. Can only obtain knowledge about world through mental acts of categorising and giving meaning to experiences.

Schmutz’s phenomenological sociology -

Alfred Schutz (1899-1959) applies idea social world, argues categorising and concepts not unique to ourselves

Typifications -

These enable us to organise experiences into shared world of meaning Meaning of any experience varies according to social context Typifications stabilise and clarify meanings by ensuring we all are agreeing on meaning of things Schutz believes members of society to large extent have shared life world

Natural attitude -

Society appears to us as objective things existing in outside of us Fact that get to book encourages us to adopt what he calls natural attitude. Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann (1971) argue Schutz’s view is rejected that society is inter-subjective really.

By Ryan Dale Ethnomethodology -

Harold Garfinkle (1967) – rejects idea society as real objective structure ‘out there’. Garfinkel interested in how social order possible by shared value system where socialised. Garfinkel says social order created from bottom up

Indexicality and reflexivity -

Ethnomethodology meanings always potentially unclear which Garfinkle call indexicality Indexicality is clearly a threat to social order because meanings are inherently unclear or unstable. Garfinkel – what enables us to behave as if meanings are clear and obvious is reflexivity which is use of common-sense knowledge in everyday interactions for meaning and order and stop indexicality Language – important in achieving reflexivity

Experiments in disrupting social order -

Garfinkel sought to demonstrate nature of social order by ‘breaching experiments’. aim was to disrupt people’s sense of order and challenge reflexivity

suicide and reflexivity -

Garfinkel interested in methods use to achieve reflexivity – make sense of world as orderly. Garfinkel – humans constantly strive impose order by seeking patterns. Garfinkel accuses conventional sociology of using same methods as ordinary members of society create order and meaning

Evaluation of ethnomethodology -

Draws attention how actively construct order and meaning. Craib argues findings are trivial – take time uncovering taken for granted rules that are no surprise. Ethnomethodology argues creates order and meaning by identifying patterns and give explanations that are fictions.

Structure and action -

Structural theories normally deterministic, see society as objective, existing outside individuals and constraining them. Action theories are voluntarist, society as creation of members through subjective actions and meanings.

Giddens structuration theory -

Giddens says duality of structure which means structure and action are two sides which cant exist without each other. Structure depends on action

Reproduction of structures through agency -

-

Giddens structure has 2 element: o Rules o Resources They can be reproduced or changed through human action. Giddens says actions reproduce structures. 2 reasons for this: o Societies rules contain stock of knowledge about how to live our lives o Reproduce existing structures through actin cuz have deep seated need for ontological security

By Ryan Dale

Change of structures through agency -

Action and agency can change structure in 2 ways: o Reflectively monitor own action constantly reflecting our action and their results, can deliberately choose new course of action o Actions may change the world, not always as intended.

Evaluation of Giddens -

Giddens implies actors change structures by deciding to. Margaret archer (1995) argues underestimates capacity of structures to resist change Craib says structuration theory isn’t theory at all doesn’t explain what actually happens in society just describes things we find when study society Craib argues Giddens fails to unite structure and action. Says Giddens work as thoroughgoing action theory that reduces idea of structure to rules governing routine everyday actions Giddens doesn’t explain how theory applies large scale structures....