Essentials of Sociology. George Ritzer
Чтение книги онлайн.

Читать онлайн книгу Essentials of Sociology - George Ritzer страница 25

Название: Essentials of Sociology

Автор: George Ritzer

Издательство: Ingram

Жанр: Социология

Серия:

isbn: 9781544388045

isbn:

СКАЧАТЬ theorists are opposed to the broad depictions of history and society offered by modern theorists. An example of such a narrative is Weber’s theory of the increasing rationalization of the world and the rise of an “iron cage” constraining our thoughts and activities. Instead, postmodernists often deconstruct, or take apart, modern grand narratives. Postmodernists are also opposed to the scientific pretensions of much modern social theory. They often look at familiar social phenomena in different ways or adopt very different focuses for their work. For example, in his study of the history of prisons, Michel Foucault ([1975] 1979) was critical of the modernist view that criminal justice had grown progressively liberal. He contended that prisons had, in fact, grown increasingly oppressive through the use of techniques such as constant, enhanced surveillance of prisoners. Similarly, he argued against the traditional view that in the Victorian era people were sexually repressed; he found instead an explosion of sexuality in the Victorian era (Foucault 1978).

      Jean Baudrillard described the postmodern world as characterized by hyperconsumption, which involves consuming more than we need, more than we really want, and more than we can afford.

      Baudrillard also saw the postmodern world as dominated by simulations—that is, inauthentic or fake versions of ”real” things. For example, when we eat at McDonald’s, we consume Chicken McNuggets, or simulated chicken. It is fake in the sense that it is often not meat from one chicken but bits of meat that come from many different chickens. Simulations characterize Disney World (e.g,. Main Street), Las Vegas (the Venetian hotel-casino), and much else in the contemporary world. The idea that we increasingly consume simulations and live a simulated life is a powerful critique of consumer society and, more generally, of the contemporary world. That is, not only are we consuming more, but also much of what we consume is fake.

      Ask Yourself

      Does a life devoted to hyperconsumption, especially online, cause you to become disconnected from others? Are new kinds of human connections created by a common investment in a life devoted to excessive consumption?

      Inter/Actionist Theories

      The slash between inter and action(ist) in the heading to this section is meant to communicate the fact that we will deal with two closely related sets of theories here. The first consists of those theories that deal mainly with the interaction of two or more people (symbolic interactionism, ethnomethodology, and exchange theory). The second comprises those that focus more on the actions of individuals (rational choice theory). A common factor among these theories is that they focus on the micro level of individuals and groups. This is in contrast to the theories discussed previously that focus on the macro structures of society.

A photo shows an image of the Statue of Liberty on the New York-New York hotel in Las Vegas. The framework of a rollercoaster as well as other tall buildings are visible behind.

      This is not New York City but the hotel-casino called New York–New York in Las Vegas, Nevada. One hypothesis of postmodern theory is that we live in a world characterized by an increasing number of simulations of reality. How many others can you think of?

      DESIGN PICS INC/National Geographic Creative

      Symbolic Interactionism

      Symbolic interactionism is concerned with the interaction of two or more people through the use of symbols (Quist-Adade 2018). Interaction is clear enough. We all engage in interaction with many others on a daily basis, whether it be face-to-face or more indirectly via cell phone, e-mail, or social media. But interaction could not take place without symbols: words, gestures, internet memes (Benaim 2018), and even objects that stand for things. Symbols allow the communication of meaning among a group of people.

      Although we can interact with one another without words, such as through physical gestures like the shrug of a shoulder, in the vast majority of cases we need and use words to interact.

      Symbolic interactionism has several basic principles:

       Human beings have a great capacity for thought, which differentiates them from lower animals. That innate capacity for thought is greatly shaped by social interaction. It is during social interaction that people acquire the symbolic meanings that allow them to exercise their distinctive ability to think. Those symbolic meanings in turn allow people to act and interact in ways that lower animals cannot.

       Symbolic meanings are not set in stone. People are able to modify them based on a given situation and their interpretation of it. The Christian cross, for example, is a symbol whose meaning can vary. Christians throughout the world define it in positive religious ways, but many in the Islamic world view it as a negative symbol. Muslims associate the cross with the medieval Crusades waged against their world by the Christian West.

       People are able to modify symbolic meanings because of their unique ability to think. Symbolic interactionists frame thinking as people’s ability to interact with themselves. In that interaction with themselves, people are able to alter symbolic meanings. They are also able to examine various courses of action open to them in given situations, to assess the relative advantages and disadvantages of each, and then to choose among them.

       It is the pattern of those choices of individual action and interaction that is the basis of groups, larger structures such as bureaucracies, and society as a whole. Most generally, in this theoretical perspective, symbolic interaction is the basis of everything else in the social world.

      While symbolic interactionists deal primarily with interaction, they are also concerned with mental processes, such as mind and self, that are deeply implicated in those processes.

      Ethnomethodology

      Ethnomethodology is another inter/actionist theory, but it focuses on what people do rather than on what they think (Liu 2012). Ethnomethodologists study the ways in which people organize everyday life.

      Ethnomethodologists regard people’s lives and social worlds as practical accomplishments that are really quite extraordinary. For example, one ethnomethodological study of coffee drinkers attempted to understand their participation in a subculture of coffee connoisseurship (Manzo 2010). Learning to enjoy coffee is something of an accomplishment itself; taking that enjoyment to the next level and becoming a connoisseur requires even more doing.

      Their view of large-scale social structures differs from that of structural-functionalists, who tend to see people and their actions as being highly constrained by those structures. Ethnomethodologists argue that this view tells us very little about what really goes on within structures such as courtrooms, hospitals, and police departments. Rather than being constrained, people act within these structures and go about much of their business using common sense rather than official procedures.

      The best-known example of an ethnomethodological approach relates to gender (O’Brien 2016; Stokoe 2006). Ethnomethodologists point out that people often erroneously think of gender as being biologically based. It is generally assumed that we do not have to do or say anything in order to be considered masculine or feminine; we are born that way. But, in fact, there are things we all do (e.g., the way we walk) and say (e.g., the tone of our voice) that allow us to accomplish being masculine or feminine. That is, being masculine or feminine is based on what people do on a regular basis. This is clearest in the case of those who are defined as being male or female at birth (based on biological characteristics) but then later do and say things that lead others to see them as belonging to the other gender (based on social characteristics).

СКАЧАТЬ