On the Very Idea of Social Construction: Deconstructing Searle’s and Hacking’s Critical Reflections

The starting point of the following inquiry addresses John Searle’s and Ian Hacking’s most prominent critique of contemporary “constructionism” in the 1990s. It is stimulated by the astonishing fact that neither Hacking nor Searle take into account Peter Berger’s and Thomas Luckmann’s classical essay and sociological masterpiece The Social Construction of Reality in their contributions. Critically revisiting Searle’s and Hacking’s critique on the so-called constructivist approach, the article demonstrates that both authors have failed to put forth a sociologically valid understanding of the approach in question. The following analysis aims to deconstruct the conceptualizations offered by Searle and Hacking, and to reconstruct and defend the original sense of the term “social construction” as most prominently introduced by Berger and Luckmann to sociology, and social sciences in general.     

Social Constructionism as a Sociological Approach

This essay concerns itself with a detailed presentation of the contents of two works on the construction of reality in society. One is Berger and Luckmann’s well-known book (The social construction of reality. Penguin Book, Harmondsworth, 1966); the other is the somewhat less known book on the same subject by Holzner (Reality construction in society. Schenkman Publishing Company, Cambridge, 1972; orig. 1968). These works deal with the social construction of shared symbolic and cognitive universes of meaning, and partake of the same theoretical sources, namely, Symbolic Interactionism and Schutz’s phenomenological sociology. They differ in their theoretical pursuits, however. Berger and Luckmann deal with what is necessary for the construction of a shared symbolic world, as society is endowed with both an objective and a subjective reality. Holzner is more interested in the social distribution and control of reality construction, and in the different types of reality constructs.     

On <Emphasis Type="Italic">The Social Construction of Reality</Emphasis>: Reflections on a Missed Opportunity

The paper recalls my response to Berger’s and Luckmann’s book on reading it shortly after its initial publication. It seeks to convey why it was that I failed to make use of the book at that time, even though I recognised it as an outstanding contribution to my intended field of research, and how later I came to see that this may have been a lost opportunity. The story touches upon diverse important issues including the relationship between epistemology and the sociology of knowledge; the epistemic authority of the natural sciences; the relevance of causal accounting as topic and resource in sociology; the importance of Durkheim in the sociology of knowledge; and the great value of Berger’s and Luckmann’s book as a corrective to the undue individualism that has long been a feature of the social sciences in the English-speaking world. Even so, the paper is more recollection than analysis, and unreliable recollection at that, after many decades in which there has been time to forget, or even to reconstruct, a very great deal.     

Playing Chamber Music at a Rock Festival? <Emphasis Type="Italic">The Social Construction of Reality</Emphasis> in US Sociology

Starting from the metaphor of “playing chamber music at a rock festival” used by Peter L. Berger in 1992 to describe the impact of The Social Construction of Reality on US sociology, this article works out how the book’s somewhat puzzling legacy as a bestseller and a classic with remarkably rare direct follow-ups in the US discourse can indeed be conceived. I argue that one needs to take into account the theoretical-historical context in which Berger and Luckmann developed their ideas, including the specific forms of knowledge production in US sociology at the time, the institutional background of the book’s emergence at the New School for Social Research and the author’s biographical trajectories. On this basis, on can explain why Berger and Luckmann’s reformulation of the sociology of knowledge both perfectly met the 1960s Zeitgeist (which made it a bestseller) and at the same time remained theoretically marginal.     

Definition and hypothesis in Plato's meno (III)

With the publication of The Social Frameworks of Knowledge? the English speaking world has at last been given a serious opportunity to approach the complex sociological thought of Georges Gurvitch. However, as the author himself admits in the Preface, this book appears ‘abstract and schematic particularly to the uninitiated’.1 The aim of this paper will be to try to relate this translated work to the main body of Gurvitch's writing and particularly to his stance in the sociology of knowledge. First I will examine the intellectual origins of his sociology of knowledge and his attitude to his predecessors in the field. Secondly I will compare his approach to the sociology of knowledge to that of P. L. Berger and T. Luckmann.     

The Sociology of Knowledge Approach to Discourse (SKAD)

The article presents the sociology of knowledge approach to discourse (SKAD). SKAD, which has been in the process of development since the middle of the 1990s, is now a widely used framework among social scientists in discourse research in the German-speaking area. It links arguments from the social constructionist tradition, following Berger and Luckmann, with assumptions based in symbolic interactionism, hermeneutic sociology of knowledge, and the concepts of Michel Foucault. It argues thereby for a consistent theoretical and methodological grounding of a genuine social sciences perspective on discourse interested in the social production, circulation and transformation of knowledge, that is in social relations and politics of knowledge in the so-called ‘knowledge societies’. Distancing itself from Critical Discourse Analysis, Linguistics, Ethnomethodology inspired discourse analysis and the Analysis of Hegemonies, following Laclau and Mouffe, SKAD’s framework has been built up around research questions and concerns located in the social sciences, referring to public discourse and arenas as well as to more specific fields of (scientific, religious, etc.) discursive struggles and controversies around “problematizations” (Foucault).     

Reality construction at the family/society interface: the internalization of family themes and values

An important component of the socialization function of the family continues to be the preparation of the young for integration into society. Empirical data, particularly from therapeutic settings, indicate that some children are notably well prepared for the world outside their families, while others have hardly been prepared at all. Adolescence is typically the time when these coping skills are most obvious. This paper addresses the issue of socialization of the young for participation in society. Building upon the "family theme" motif, the family is viewed as a micro-society. The issue of congruence between family themes and societally shared meanings is considered, utilizing ideas from the social construction of reality theories of Berger and Luckmann (1966). Three ideal-types of family themes are developed relative to their external world meanings. Previous work on family themes typically has failed to deal with the interpretative function of family meanings. How the family "explains" the family-external meanings is addressed.     

“The Sleeping Army”: Necropolitics and the Collateral Consequences of Being a Sex Offender

The current study examines responses from 188 registered sex offenders to assess the impact of collateral consequences and situate such experiences within a framework of necropolitics. Two research questions are addressed: How can the experience of collateral consequences be explained through necropolitics; and, do sex offenders use necropolitics in resistive efforts? Results demonstrate that exclusion from social and political institutions results in a “death in life” for sex offenders. Last, this article discusses an alternative lens for conceptualizing policy initiatives towards sex offenders by juxtaposing Luckmann’s “life-worlds” with Mbembe’s “death worlds.”     

Schreber'sMemoirs: Myth or personal lamentation

Lucy Bregman's approach to Schreber'sMemoirs is scrutinized and found to be based on a number of fallacious and contradictory assumptions that call her interpretation of the book as personal religious myth into question. A social constructionist approach to mythology maintained by Berger and Luckmann is advanced, suggesting that at best Schreber's work qualifies as a quasi-mythical attempt to explain the source of his personal sociopsychic suffering. The family and interpersonal dynamics of Schreber's quasi-myth are investigated. Similarities to other cases of psychotic quasi-myths are noted and a general relationship between oppressive socialization and psychotic communications is advanced, as well as a specific alternative interpretation of Schreber's work to that proposed by Bregman.Nathan Church, M.S., is currently teaching at Douglass College of Rutgers University, where he is nearing completion of his Ph.D. in sociology.     

Introduction: Constructivism and social constructionism in the career field

The impact of constructivism and social constructionism upon vocational psychology has often been through the use of the more generic “constructivism.” In this article constructivism is distinguished by its focus on how the individual cognitively engages in the construction of knowledge from social construction which claims that knowledge and meaning are historically and culturally constructed through social processes and action. The considerable ambiguity in the use of these terms is also discussed. Their contributions, challenges, and opportunities to the career field’s dominant discourses are examined: the dispositions discourse, the contextualizing discourse, the subjectivity and narrative discourse, and the process discourse. Broader challenges and opportunities for the field are also noted. The historical construction of knowledge, concern with language, action, and process problematize traditional understandings of career. They raise opportunities to question fundamental assumptions, focus on context, culture, the person-environment interaction, and practice.     

Thomas Luckmann on the Relation Between Phenomenology and Sociology: A Constructive Critical Assessment

Human Studies - In the present paper, I intend to systematically revisit Thomas Luckmann’s account of the relation between phenomenology and sociology and to assess its strengths and...     

The (social) construction of the world – at the crossroads of Christianity and Humanism

Abstract

In early modem philosophy the motive of logical creation emerged in reaction to the Greek-Medieval legacy of a realistic metaphysics. The dominant nominalistic trends of thought since Thomas Hobbes and Inimanuel Kant explored its rationalistic implications. The latter drew the radical (humanistic) conclusion that the laws of nature are present in human thought a priori (i.e. before all experience). The irrationalistic side of nominalism emphasized the uniqueness and individuality of events - thus leading to the historicism of the 19th century and the subsequent linguistic turn. Kant influenced Husserl who, in turn, provided the point of departure for the ideas of Schutz, Berger and Luckmaim - compare the joint work of Berger and Luckmann: Social construction of reality (1967). The contemporary “postmodem” idea that we create the world in which we live (either through thought, through language or through social practices) merely continues core elements of (early) modem philosophy.

The underlying idea of autonomy highlights the difference between modern Humanism and a Christian view of reality, for in the latter human subjectivity is appreciated as being correlated with universal and constant principles that can only assume a positive shape through human activities of positivization (form-giving). The autonomy ideal of modern Humanism reifies the typical human freedom to positivize underlying principles. At the same time this reification on the one hand collapses the distinction between conditions and being conditioned and on the other it does not provide a basis for supra-individual standards of behaviour.     

Doctored Images: Enacting “Pain-Work” in John Berger and Jean Mohr’s A Fortunate Man (1967)

Journal of Medical Humanities - This essay argues that Berger and Mohr’s A Fortunate Man (1967) – comprising social observation and photographs of the rural practitioner, Dr. Sassall...     

Investigating Psychology and Transcendence

Psychology has not fully engaged with the possible reality of transcendence, spirit, or the divine, largely due to unexamined assumptions that prevent taking religious experience and transcendence seriously. Eugene Long’s reflections on experience and transcendence, key ideas from hermeneutic philosophy, including Brent Slife’s conception of “strong relationality,” Peter Berger’s analysis of modern dilemmas and “many realities,” Louis Dupré’s discussion of an ingrained “objectivism” that has long colored and probably distorted Western philosophy, theology, and the social sciences, and Vaclav Havel’s suggestion of a “need for transcendence” in a postmodern world roughly cohere and go a long way toward dismantling the “encapsulated self” that must either reject transcendence altogether or reach it only by way of a blind and indefensible “leap” out of the modern situation.     

A Millennial Mistake: Three Arguments Against Radical Social Constructivism

Recent scholars have argued that counseling has begun to embrace social constructivism as a paradigm for counseling. However, this commitment to social constructivist tenets may be both premature and undesirable. This article provides a critique of a dominant branch of social constructivism: radical social constructivism. Three arguments are presented establishing that radical social constructivism leads to logically impossible conclusions, violates counseling's moral convictions, and denies secure scholarship in related fields.     

Alfred Schutz’ Theory of Communicative Action

This paper addresses the notion of communicative action on the basis of Alfred Schutz’ writings. In Schutz’ work, communication is of particular significance and its importance is often neglected by phenomenologists. Communication plays a crucial role in his first major work, the Der sinnhafte Aufbau der sozialen Welt from 1932, yet communication is also a major feature in his unfinished works which were later completed posthumously by Thomas Luckmann: The Structures of the Life World (1973, 1989). In these texts, Schutz sometimes refers to “communicative action,” and he comes to ascribe a crucial role to communication within the domain of the life world he calls everyday life. Based on Schutz’ texts, I shall first attempt to critically reconstruct the defining features of his notion of communication and communicative action. As a result, it emerges that Schutz’ notion of communication, particularly in its early incarnation, seems to be, at first glance, characterized by a dichotomy between virtual communication, that is communicative action in a narrow sense, and non-virtual communication. As I want to show with respect to the seemingly established dichotomous distinction between “mediated” and “immediate social action,” Schutz himself started to overcome this dichotomy. Based on this thesis, I will try to sketch a basic outline of a theory of communicative action, a theory less formulated by Schutz’ than built on Schutz’ writings. As the idea of communicative action, and particularly the transgression of the distinction between mediated and immediate action, affects the very structures of the life-world described by Schutz and Luckmann, I will ultimately demonstrate that any mundane phenomenology of the life-world requires a triangulatory method.     

‚Was Ist Begründung?’ Schwierigkeiten durch den Primat der Pragmatik vor der Semantik am Beispiel des Erlanger/Konstanzer Konstruktivismus

‘What is justification?’-Constructivism of Erlangen/Constanceschool as an example for problems resulting from priority of pragmatics to semantics. - R. Brandom's ‘Making it explicit’ is an attempt to work out how semantics is rooted in pragmatics: meaning in use and conceptual content in social functional roles. A philosophy that also focuses on reconstructing those norms that are implicit in pragmatics and constitutive to semanticsis developed by Constructivism of Erlangen/Constance school. This enquiry tries to work out that a discussion of constructivism might be useful for a comprehension of Brandom's ‘theory of expression’, because both philosophical positions meet themselves in a pragmatic way of justification that makes it impossible to justify claims to all rational beings but only to members of those communities that share the same interests and institutions.     

Phenomenological Life-World Analysis and Ethnomethodology’s Program

This paper discusses ethnomethodology??s program in relation to the phenomenological life-world analysis of Alfred Schutz. A recent publication of Garfinkel??s early writings sheds new light on how he made use of phenomenological reflections in order to create a new sociological approach. Garfinkel used Schutz??s life-world analysis as a source of inspiration, called for ??misreading?? in the sense of an alternate reading and developed a new, empirical approach to the analysis of social order which he called ??ethnomethodology??. Ethnomethodologists usually acknowledge the historical importance of Schutz but emphasize that Garfinkel succeeded to overcome the limitations of phenomenological analyses and moved beyond. This view has spread above all in the Anglosaxon countries. In German sociology, Schutz??s life-world analysis still has a much stronger standing than ethnomethodology and is interpreted as a systematic whole. Following Luckmann, it is discussed as a protosociological foundation of the methodology of social sciences or, following Srubar, as a philosophical anthropology with two poles: a subjective and a social, pragmatic pole. Both versions claim to analyze the meaningful constitution of the social world, to serve as a foundation of sociological methodology and to provide guidelines for an ??adequate?? sociology. While Garfinkel used phenomenological concepts for sociological analysis, Luckmann clearly distinguishes the two: you either do phenomenology (protosociology) or you do sociology (a theoretically guided, empirical sociology of knowledge). This paper describes the present-day debate in German sociology and compares ethnomethodology??s program with these interpretations of Schutz??s life-world analysis.     

试论后现代视野下社会治疗的二重属性

社会治疗兴起于上个世纪70年代的美国,它有别于传统心理学领域内的各种心理治疗。社会治疗的后现代属性主要源于后现代人本主义与建构主义在心理治疗领域内的应用,要准确把握社会治疗的后现代属性必然离不开对其后现代人本主义与建构主义二重性的研究。     

Bodies as open projects: reflections on gender and sexuality

Abstract

This article argues that the social constructivist paradigm falls into the same dualistic trap as biological essentialism when attempting to respond to questions of gender and sexuality. I argue that social constructivism, like biological determinism, presumes a ‘split’ world, where subjective lived experiences are separated from the world of socio-cultural forces. Following a phenomenological approach, grounded in Merleau-Ponty’s ontological view of the body, this article attempts to move beyond the dualistic metadiscourses of social constructivism in maintaining that identity is a fully embodied process. I see gender and sexuality as necessarily embodied and corporeally constituted. In the light of this, I propose an understanding of gender and sexuality that focuses on the centrality of the body as open project. This approach sees gender and sexuality as embodied processes that are enmeshed with the complex fabric of lived everyday experiences and concurrent socio-cultural and historical processes. Drawing on real-life examples, I conclude that gender and sexual embodiment are not one-dimensional according to a binary system of male versus female. Rather, given the documented experience of the indeterminacy and ambiguity of human existence, there are a variety of possible embodiments of humankind.