Theory - Action Theories Flashcards
What are the action theories?
Believe in structures
- Weber: Social action theory
- Mead, Blumer, Labelling Theory, Goffman: Symbolic interactionalism
- Giddens: Structuration theory
Don’t believe in structures
- Schutz: Phenomonology
- Garfinkel: Ethnomethodology
What are Weber’s two levels of sociological explanations?
- The level of cause - the objective structural factors that shape people’s behaviours, such as Calvinism promoting work ethic and causing capitalism
- The level of meaning - the subjective meanings that individuals attach to their actions, such as Calvinists seeing work as a calling by God
What are Weber’s 4 types of actions?
- Instrumentally rational: actions that are the most efficient way of achieving a goal, regardless of the goal itself
- Value-rational: actions towards desirable goals, regardless of efficacy
- Traditional: customary, routine or habitual actions with no logical justification
- Affectual: actions that express emotions
Give 2 criticisms of Weber’s Social Action Theory
- Actions don’t always fit into single ‘types’, Malinowski’s Trobriand Islander tribes exchanging ritual gifts (‘kula’) could be traditional or instrumentally rational (cementing trade links)
- Schutz (1972): Weber is too individualistic and cannot explain the shared nature of meanings
What does Mead believe seperates us from animals?
We do not operate purely on pre-programmed instincts, rather we attach symbols to the world around us - instead of reacting purely to stimulus, we have an ‘interpretative phase’ where we interpret the meaning and respond accordingly, such as that of a shaking fist.
How does Mead believe we are able to interpret one another’s meanings?
By ‘taking the role of the other’ and attempting to understand their perspective; we do this as children with ‘significant others’ like parents, as practice, but later are able to see from the perspective of the wider community, the ‘generalised other’.
What were Blumer’s three key principles?
- Our actions are based on the meanings we assign to everything, unlike animals which automatically respond to stimuli
- These meanings arise from the interaction process, they are negotiable to some extent
- The meanings we give to situations are the result of the interpretive procedures we use – especially taking the role of the other
How does Blumer differ from structural theorists?
He takes the perspective that, although our actions are partly predictable as we internalise others’ expectations, they are not completely fixed and we always have a choice of action and how we perform our role, even within ‘total institutions’ like prisons
What is the contribution of Thomas (1966) to labelling theory?
Thomas (1966) argues that if people define a situation as real (whether or not it actually is), their actions will be affected and there will be consequences for those involved.
What is the contribution of Cooley (1922) to labelling theory?
Cooley (1922) uses the idea of definitions (true or not) affecting people to explain how we develop our ‘self-concept’ or identity, this is done through the internalisation of others’ definitions of us and create a ‘looking glass self’, thus creating a self-fulfilling prophecy whereby we become what they define us as due to their definition.
What is the contribution of Becker (1963) and Lemert (1962) to labelling theory?
To Becker (1963) and Lemert (1962), a career refers to the progression between different labels and statuses over the course of our life, with it possible for one label to be adopted as our ‘master status’ and for all other labels to no longer matter.
Outline the basics of Goffman’s dramaturgical model.
Goffman’s dramaturgical model compares the social world to a stage, where we are all ‘actors’, acting out ‘scripts’, using ‘props’, resting ‘backstage’ between ‘performances’ of the role we have adopted to ‘audiences’.
Outline Goffman’s ‘impression management’.
He argues that, as we aim to present a specific image of ourselves to others, we engage in ‘impression management’ to present convincingly, using language, tone of voice, gestures and facial expressions, as well as props and settings such as dress, make-up, equipment, furniture, décor and premises.
How does Goffman differ from structuralists?
He argues that the ‘front’ or the stage is where we are performing, whereas the backstage is where we can be ourselves and ‘drop the act’. Goffman argues that we do not fully internalise roles but that there is ‘role distance’ between ourselves and our roles and we do not always believe the roles where we act out.
Give 2 criticisms of symbolic interactionalism.
- Goffman assumes we don’t act as our own audience - Foucault’s Panopticon
- Blumer and Mead neglect the effects of structures on the meanings we have - Althusser’s idea of the Ideological state Apparatus
How does Giddens argue there is a ‘duality of structure’?
Giddens argues that there is a ‘duality of structure’, where structuralist and action theory can, and have to, coexist: through our actions we produce and reproduce structures over time and space, while these structures are what make our actions possible in the first place, he calls this ‘relationship structuration’. He uses language as an example, it has set rules but relies on action to exist.
What does Giddens believe are the two elements of strutures and why do we reproduce them?
He argues that structures have two elements:
- Rules: norms, customs and laws that govern actions
- Resources: both economic and power over others
Our actions can either change or (more likely) reproduce rules and resources for two reasons:
- Society’s ‘rules’ contain information about how we should live our lives, essentially perpetuating itself through us
- Our need for ‘ontological security’ (the idea that the world is as it appears to be) drives us to maintaining systems to maintain order and security
How does Giddens argue we can make change?
- We are reflexively monitoring our actions and seeing what works, with the ability to deliberately choose a new course of action
- Our adoptions of systems may have unintended consequences that change systems, like the adoption of Calvinism leading to capitalism
Give a criticism of Giddens ‘structuration theory’.
Craib: structuration theory isn’t a theory at all as it doesn’t explain what actually happens in society, rather the types of things we will find when we investigate it, like rules and resources.
Who is the base of phenomonology?
Husserl argues that the world only makes sense because we create meaning via mental categories used to classify information: the world as we know it is, and can only be, a product of our mind.
How does Schutz argue that society is created?
Schutz argues that society operates based on a series of ‘typifications’ (shared categories of meaning) and that we do, to an extent, have a shared ‘life world’ (a stock of shared typifications on what certain things mean) that amounts to ‘recipe knowledge’ or the idea that we are able to get desired results in everyday life without thinking too much about the definitions of things. This then becomes the world as we all impose a shared meaning onto it, the social world is a shared intersubjective world that can only exist when we share meanings.
What is Schutz’s idea of the ‘natural attitude’?
Schutz argues that we believe society is a real, objective thing is because we adopt a ‘natural attitude’ as our adoption of the ‘recipe knowledge’ naturally working leads us to believe that society is a solid, natural thing rather than the shared meanings
Give 2 criticisms of Phenomenology.
- Pre-globalisations: decay of ‘shared meanings’ with multiculturalism
- Berger and Luckmann (1971): they argue that once reality is socially constructed, it takes on a life of its own and becomes an external reality rather than an intersubjective reality, such as religion moving from the mind to being embodied in powerful structures.
How does Garfinkel differ from structuralists on order?
Garfinkel argues that order arises from the bottom-up, it is an accomplishment that we actively construct in our everyday lives through commonsense knowledge.
