Action/structure and interpretivist views

• Social structure theories revolve around the idea that individual behaviour is shaped by structures in society, these could be a value consensus (functionalist) or conflict (Marxist) idea. Individuals are shaped by society.  

  • Macro – sociology meaning that it looks at studying society as a whole  
  • Quantitative data  
  • Positivist  
  • Marxist and Functionalist  
• The strengths of social structure theories include:

  • Looks at all of society and the bigger picture  
  • Draws attention to how people are influenced by social structures  
  • Using quantitative data could be seen as trustworthy and reliable for proof 
• Weaknesses of social structure theories include:

  • Overly simplistic as it tried to understand complex structures and behaviors in terms of cause and effect  
  • Not qualitative data  
  • Overestimating the effect that society has on people  
  • Viewing people as easily shaped by society  
  • Not specific enough as it is looking at all of society  
• A positivist sociologist: Durkheim
• Durkheim thought that there are social facts, which means that there are objective reasons why certain behaviours happen eg. The more someone is socially integrated the less likely they are to complete suicide. Methods like questionnaires (quantitative methods) should be used because they are more structured and can be controlled more. This allows for measurement. You need to have reliability; you need to be able to repeat experiments to check your hypothesis. You need to reduce variables to test the hypothesis. Society works to serve all its members (institutions)
• Social action theories revolve around the idea that individuals interpret and respond to interactions with others. Structures in society are created by the patterns of these interactions but the individual and meanings attached to symbols are the more important.  

  • Micro – sociology  
  • Qualitative data  
  • Humans have freewill to make decisions based on meanings given to certain behaviours  
  • Meaning we give to behaviours and groups can shape the way that society functions  
• Interpretivism is an example of a social action theory and it focuses on the idea that deviance and individual’s differences are more tolerated. It communicated with symbols which are meaningful and looks at subjective aspects of social life. For instance. Communication between individuals and groups. 
• Weber focused on social action between individuals. Verstehen – understanding. Individuals construct their own meaning for things and these shape interactions, there are types of interactions: 

  • Instrumental - a rational decision to attain a goal. Such as going to university in order to get a good job. 
  • Value rational - we strive to a goal which may not be rational but it is pursued by rational means. For instance, following teachings in the Bible 
  • Affectional - action via emotional means  
  • Traditional - actions that are guided by customary habits like crying at funerals.  
• Mead looked at symbolic interactionalism and he emphasised the subjective meaning of human behaviour. He thought that the ‘meanings’ that people associate with groups and individuals influence how people interact and behave towards people. These meanings are a product of social interaction in society. When we interact, we think about how other people view us and we consider our own roles and expected behaviours. We interpret the meanings behind other people’s behaviours by imitating people as children through play, we learn to see ourselves through how others perceive us.  
• Blumer looked at symbolic interactionalism. He thought that our actions are based on the meanings we give to things.  
• Strengths of Weber’s ideas on interpretivism:

  • Looks at individuals and what meanings they give to actions and groups in different situations  
  • Doesn't ignore how these interactions can shape behaviours and society as a whole  
• Weaknesses of Weber’s ideas on interpretivism:

  • Not all actions fit neatly into his ideas. There are more than one meaning attached to actions  
  • There is a danger of interpretation of actions, could just be the researcher’s ownn meanings attached to groups or behaviours 
• Strengths of Mead’s ideas on interpretivism: 

  • Doesn't ignore the power that society has and interactions have on people  
  • Doesn't ignore how people learn how to act view imitating people and how this can lead to us thinking about how other people view us  
• Weaknesses of Mead’s ideas on interpretivism: 

  • Only looks at small interactions  
  • Structure may be important in determining social rules. Power relationships are not discussed like capitalism 
• Goffman’s dramaturgical model. He thought that the most appropriate way to understand people is to view them as if they are actors on a stage. People use props like clothes in order to project ideas of themselves onto their audience. People may have several personalities - the ‘presentation of the self.’ We have backstage areas like the home, we prepare for our social performances. We reflect on how good or bad our performances have been and plan to change them. We are very manipulative, we may never really know someone’s true identity unless we spend time with them during their day.  
• Weaknesses of Goffman’s argument:

  • People may be forced into particular roles due to structures in society like gender 
  • There may not be such a clear ‘front’ and ‘backstage’ area – it is hard to apply this to research 
  • The focus on individuals means that the research is hard to generalize to other situations and only really tells us about specific individuals 
• Garfinkel's ethnomethodology - he argues that social order is extremely fragile. Events like the pandemic draw attention to how fragile social order is and how our common sense knowledge of what is expected of us breaks down easily.  
• Garfinkel argued that there is:

  • Indexicality – nothing has a fixed meaning, and all meaning is dependent on social context. Social order only exists in our minds and everything is changeable.  
  • Reflexivity – common sense knowledge about the social world. We use this to know how to act in certain situations  
• Strengths of ethnomethodology:  

  • Seems reasonable to argue that social order is extremely fragile because Garfinkel is using real life examples to back up his ideas  
• Weaknesses of ethnomethodology:  

  • Marxists argue that ‘common sense knowledge’ is just part of the dominant ideology and it all comes down to capitalism and the power of the ruling class 
  • Some sociologists argue that the ‘common sense’ methods that individuals use to create social order are trivial and we don’t need research for this