On Thu, 23 Sep 2010, Torgeir Fjeld wrote as per below, and asked, about Palma's name dropping of Hacking > no, that an event or object is socially constructed does not merely mean that we can't get at the 'an sich'-ness of the thing, it means that there are structured (and structuring) ways in which we render objects and events. whether someone is rendered freedom fighter or lewdachris isn't a function of the non-determinate character of the thing itself, but an effect of structured dispositions to 'think, percieve and act' in those who produce meaning. > > the suggestion that there should be objects or events outside any meaning prodcution is unbridled idealism -- Cfr. the 3rd edition, annotated by J. Michael G., of "The Social Construction of Reality" is a book about the sociology of knowledge written by Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann and published in 1966. "The work introduced the term social construction into the social sciences and was strongly influenced by the work of Alfred Schutz. The central concept of The Social Construction of Reality is that persons and groups interacting together in a social system form, over time, concepts or mental representations of each other's actions, and that these concepts eventually become habituated into reciprocal roles played by the actors in relation to each other. When these roles are made available to other members of society to enter into and play out, the reciprocal interactions are said to be institutionalised. In the process of this institutionalisation, meaning is embedded in society. Knowledge and people's conception (and belief) of what reality is becomes embedded in the institutional fabric of society. Social reality is therefore said to be socially constructed." A sample: "Society as Subjective Reality Socialization is a two-step induction of the individual to participate in the social institutional structure (in its objective reality). "The individual… is not born a member of society. He… becomes a member of society. In the life of every individual… there is a temporal sequence, in the course of which he is inducted into participation in the social dialectic" (p. 129) “By ‘successful socialization’ we mean the establishment of a high degree of symmetry between objective and subjective reality” (p. 163) => Primary Socialization takes place as a child. It is highly charged emotionally and is not questioned. Secondary Socialization includes the acquisition of role-specific knowledge (taking one’s place in the social division of labor). It is learned through training and specific rituals, and is not emotionally charged (“it is necessary to love one’s mother, but not one’s teacher”). Training for secondary socialization can be very complex (full-time teachers and expert training), and depends on the complexity of division of labor in a society (e.g. educational and university system). Primary socialization is much less flexible than secondary socialization (e.g. shame for nudity comes from primary socialization, adequate dress code depends on secondary: “A relatively minor shift in the subjective definition of reality would suffice for an individual to take for granted that one may go to the office without a tie. A much more drastic shift would be necessary to have him go, as a matter of course, without any clothes at all”). “The child does not internalize the world of his significant others as one of many possible worlds… It is for this reason that the world internalized in primary socialization is so much more firmly entrenched in consciousness than worlds internalized in secondary socializations…. Secondary socialization is the internalization of institutional or institution-based ‘subworlds ’… The roles of secondary socialization carry a high degree of anonymity… The same knowledge taught by one teacher could also be taught by another… The institutional distribution of tasks between primary and secondary socialization varies with the complexity of the social distribution of knowledge” (p. 129-147) => Conversation/communication aims at reality-maintenance of the subjective reality. What seems to be a useless and unnecessary communication of redundant banalities is actually a constant mutual reconfirmation of each other’ s internal thoughts (maintains subjective reality). “One may view the individual’s everyday life in terms of the working away of a conversational apparatus that ongoingly maintains, modifies and reconstructs his subjective reality… [for example] ‘Well, it’s time for me to get to the station,’ and ‘Fine, darling, have a good day at the office’ implies an entire world within which these apparently simple propositions make sense… the exchange confirms the subjective reality of this world… the great part, if not all, of everyday conversation maintains subjective reality… imagine the effect…of an exchange like this: ‘Well, it’s time for me to get to the station,’ ‘Fine, darling, don’t forget to take along your gun.’ (p. 147-163) Identity of an individual is subject to a struggle of affiliation to (sometimes conflicting) realities. For example, the reality from primary socialization (mother tells child not to steal) can be in contrast with second socialization (gang members teach teenager that stealing is cool). Our final social location in the institutional structure of society will ultimately also influence our body and organism. “…life-expectancies of lower-class and upper-class [vary] …society determines how long and in what manner the individual organism shall live… Society also directly penetrates the organism in its functioning, most importantly in respect to sexuality and nutrition. While both sexuality and nutrition are grounded in biological drives… biological constitution does not tell him where he should seek sexual release and what he should eat.” (p. 163-183)" See also social constructionism Phronetic social science Speranza ----- The Swimming Pool Library ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html