Action theory Flashcards
(6 cards)
Intro
Social action theories focus on how individuals actively shape their behaviour and social reality, contrasting with structuralist approaches that view society as a determining force. Developed by thinkers like Howard Becker, Edwin Lemert, Alfred Schutz, Harold Garfinkel, and Max Weber, these theories explore how human interactions, labels, and meanings influence social order. This essay will evaluate the usefulness of social action theories in explaining human behaviour, examining key concepts such as labelling theory, phenomenology, ethnomethodology, and Weber’s study of religion and capitalism.
Labelling theory
P - Social action theories, particularly those by Howard Becker and Edwin Lemert, explain how labels are applied to individuals and the “career” that follows due to societal reactions.
E - For instance, Becker’s concept of “secondary deviance” shows how a person caught shoplifting may initially face little attention. However, when labelled as a “thief,” they may internalise this identity. A modern example is seen in the criminal justice system, where young offenders labelled as “criminals” often face exclusion and are pushed into deviant subcultures.
E - This process demonstrates how society’s reaction, rather than the deviant act itself, shapes behaviour. The label leads to further deviance as the individual is treated differently, reinforcing the label. For example, a teenager labelled as “trouble” may be pushed towards peers with similar labels, continuing the cycle of deviance. Thus, the “career” of a label involves ongoing social reactions that influence the individual’s identity and behaviour.
E - However marxist would criticise this by arguing that labels like “criminal” or “troublemaker” serve an ideological function by perpetuating stereotypes that reinforce social inequality. These labels can be used to demonise certain groups, particularly the working class or ethnic minorities, in order to maintain the status quo and divert attention from the structural causes of inequality. By focusing on the individual and their behaviour, labelling theories obscure the wider issues of exploitation, class struggle, and power that are central to Marxist analysis.
L - Therefore this social action theory by Becker and Lemert is mostly useful as it explains the career of a label from a micro approach as long as the evaluation from marxists saying labels sometimes demonise the lower classes.
Phenomenology - Alfred Shutz
E - Alfred Schutz’s phenomenology suggests that individuals share concepts and categories with others in society, which he calls typifications. These categories help individuals make sense of their social world and guide their interactions. For instance, when a person meets someone for the first time, they often categorise them based on typifications like “student” or “teacher,” which shape their expectations. In a modern example, when interacting in a workplace, we commonly categorise others as “managers” or “colleagues,” and these labels influence how we communicate with them.
E - These typifications allow individuals to understand others’ actions and intentions quickly, without needing to reassess every interaction. By relying on shared concepts like “parent” or “friend,” people can navigate social situations predictably and efficiently. Typifications help maintain social order, as they provide a framework for interpreting roles and behaviours across different contexts. For example, in schools, the typification of “teacher” carries specific expectations about authority and responsibility, influencing how students behave and how teachers manage the classroom.
E - However Feminists would criticise by arguing that typifications, such as categorising individuals as “managers” or “colleagues,” often reflect and reinforce traditional gender roles. For example, in workplaces, typifications of “managers” or “leaders” tend to be implicitly associated with masculinity, while roles like “nurse” or “teacher” may be typified as feminine. These categories perpetuate gender inequality by confining individuals to roles based on their gender, limiting opportunities for women and reinforcing patriarchal structures. Feminists would argue that Schutz’s idea of typifications does not account for how these gendered labels restrict opportunities and shape expectations in ways that disadvantage women.
L - Therefore, this sociological contribution of phenomenology to the social action theory needs to be mindful of the fact these typifications could categorise associating with masculinity, however is ultimately a useful contribution.
Ethnomethodology - Harold Garfinkel
E - Ethnomethodology, developed by Harold Garfinkel, challenges the idea of society as a fixed, objective structure and instead argues that society is actively constructed through everyday interactions. Key concepts in this theory include indexicality and reflexivity. For instance, in online communication, the meaning of phrases like “I’ll be there soon” can vary depending on context. To one person, it may mean a few minutes, while to another, it may mean much longer. The meaning is not fixed but depends on the shared understanding between individuals in the specific interaction, illustrating indexicality.
E - This highlights that social meanings are not universally stable but are instead dependent on the context in which they are used. Garfinkel’s concept of reflexivity suggests that our understanding of a situation is shaped by our interactions and that these understandings influence our behaviour. For example, a new employee in a workplace might adopt the communication style of their colleagues, which then affects how others perceive them and how they behave. Therefore, social reality is continuously created and modified through ongoing interactions, which Garfinkel’s ethnomethodology focuses on. While useful for understanding everyday behaviours, ethnomethodology is critiqued for not fully addressing larger social structures and inequalities.
E - However this is criticised by Durkheim who would argue that ethnomethodology’s focus on individual interactions and the subjective meaning-making process overlooks the objective social structures that shape those interactions. He would emphasize that large-scale structures, such as the family, education, and the economy, are critical in shaping human behaviour and maintaining social order. These structures exist independently of individual actions and serve to regulate behaviour and social norms.
L - Therefore although the functionalist criticism is useful as ensuring to keep in mind structural factors, overall, Garfinkel’s argument on the topic of ethnomethodology is useful as it helps us understand the way in which society is actively constructed through everyday interactions.
Max Weber
E - Max Weber argued that a complete understanding of society requires combining both structural and action approaches. He believed that social structures influence individual behaviour, but individuals also act purposefully, which can influence and change these structures. A key example of this is Weber’s study of Calvinism in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1905). Weber argued that Calvinist beliefs, particularly the doctrine of predestination, motivated followers to work hard and accumulate wealth, believing that material success was a sign of being among the “elect.” This attitude, Weber suggested, helped foster the development of modern capitalism.
E - Weber’s study demonstrates how individual actions, shaped by religious beliefs, intersect with and influence broader societal structures like the economy. The Calvinist work ethic led to behaviours that promoted capitalist values, such as frugality and hard work. This approach shows that individual motivations and beliefs can have a profound effect on social structures, in contrast to purely structuralist views.
E - However, some critics argue that Weber’s focus on religion oversimplifies the rise of capitalism, as other factors like technological advancements and global trade also played significant roles. This is criticised by Postmodernists who would argue that secularisation, or the decline of religion’s influence, challenges Weber’s focus on religious ethics as a key driver of economic change. In postmodern societies, religion no longer plays the central role it did in Weber’s time. Secular ideologies, such as individualism and consumerism, now shape people’s actions more than religious beliefs, making Weber’s religious explanation for capitalism less relevant in today’s world.
L- Therefore, although Weber’s ideas of how factors like religion influenced structure and action, ultimately it is not relevant as there has been a steep decline in religion and as a result is not as applicable
Conclusion
In conclusion, social action theories provide a valuable perspective for understanding human behaviour by focusing on the meanings individuals attach to their actions and the role of interaction in shaping identity and society. The work of theorists such as Becker, Schutz, Garfinkel, and Weber highlights how individuals are not merely passive products of structure, but active agents in the construction of social reality. These theories shed light on how labelling, typifications, and everyday interactions influence behaviour and societal norms. However, criticisms from structuralist perspectives, such as functionalism, Marxism, and feminism, point out that social action theories may overlook wider power dynamics and structural inequalities. Additionally, postmodern critiques question the relevance of older frameworks, such as Weber’s religious explanations, in today’s secular, individualistic societies. Despite these limitations, social action theories remain useful for understanding the micro-level processes that shape human behaviour, offering an essential complement to more structural explanations.
