Главная страница | Контакты | Случайная страница Автомобили Астрономия Биология География Дом и сад Другие языки Другое Информатика История Культура Литература Логика Математика Медицина Металлургия Механика Образование Охрана труда Педагогика Политика Право Психология Религия Риторика Социология Спорт Строительство Технология Туризм Физика Философия Финансы Химия Черчение Экология Экономика Электроника

The problems of social interaction and reality in sociology

Social reality is distinct from biological reality or individual cognitive reality, representing as it does a phenomenological level created through social interaction and transcending thereby individual motives and actions.

The product of human dialogue, social reality may be considered as consisting of the accepted social tenets of a community, involving thereby relatively stable laws and Social representations

Radical constructivism would cautiously describe social reality as the product of uniformities among observers (whether or not including the current observer themselves.^[2]

The problem of social reality has been treated exhaustively by philosophers in the phenomenological tradition, particularly Alfred Schütz, who used the term "social world" to designate this distinct level of reality. Within the social world Schütz distinguished between social reality that could be experienced directly (umwelt) and a social reality beyond the immediate horizon, which could yet be experienced if sought out.^[3] In his wake, ethnomethodology explored further the unarticulated structure of our everyday competence and ability with social reality.^[4]

Previously, the subject had been addressed in sociology as well as other disciplines, Durkheim for example stressing the distinct nature of “the social kingdom. Here more than anywhere else the idea is the reality”.^[5] Herbert Spencer had coined the term super-organic to distinguish the social level of reality above the biological and psychological.^[6

John Searle has used the theory of speech acts to explore the nature of social/institutional reality, so as to describe such aspects of social reality which he instances under the rubrics of “marriage, property, hiring, firing, war, revolutions, cocktail parties, governments, meetings, unions, parliaments, corporations, laws, restaurants, vacations, lawyers, professors, doctors, medieval knights, and taxes, for example”.^[7]

Searle argued that such institutional realities interact with each other in what he called “systematic relationships (e.g., governments, marriages, corporations, universities, armies, churches)”^[8] to create a multi-layered social reality.

For Searle, language was the key to the formation of social reality because “language is precisely designed to be a self-identifying category of institutional facts” - a system of publicly and widely accepted symbols which “persist through time independently of the urges and inclinations of the participants.”^[9]

Objective/subjective

There is a debate in social theory about whether social reality exists independently of people's involvement with it, or whether (as in social constructionism) it is only created by the human process of ongoing interaction.^[10]

Peter L. Berger argued for a new concern with the basic process of the social construction of reality;^[11] and in similar fashion, post-Sartrians like R. D. Laing stress that “once certain fundamental structures of experience are shared, they come to be experienced as objective entities...they take on the force and character of partial autonomous realities, with their own way of life”.^[12] Yet at the same time, Laing insisted that such a socially real grouping “can be nothing else than the multiplicity of the points of view and actions of its members...even where, through the interiorization of this multiplicity as synthesized by each, this synthesized multiplicity becomes ubiquitous in space and enduring in time”.^[13]

The existence of a social reality independent of individuals or the ecology would seem at odds with the views of perceptual psychology, including those of J. J. Gibson, and those of most ecological economics theories^{[citation needed]}.

Scholars such as John Searle argue on the one hand that “a socially constructed reality presupposes a reality independent of all social constructions”.^[14] At the same time, he accepts that social realities are humanly created, and that “the secret to understanding the continued existence of institutional facts is simply that the individuals directly involved and a sufficient number of members of the relevant communities must continue to recognize and accept the existence of such facts”.

9 Durkheim’s Study of Suicide.