Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Giddens, A. (1993) New Rules of Sociological Method

    Uploaded by

    Pedro Vicente Navarro
    36 views37 pages
    Anthony Giddens, 1993.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Anthony Giddens, 1993.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    36 views37 pages

    Giddens, A. (1993) New Rules of Sociological Method

    Uploaded by

    Pedro Vicente Navarro
    Anthony Giddens, 1993.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 37
    New Rules of _ Sociological Method __ A Positive Critique of | Interpretative Sociologies _ Anthony Giddens © Second Edition _ Stanford University Press | Stanford, California ne Schools of Social Theory d Philosophy Tn this chapter 1 shall discuss what might ty spe 2 lasing dey of schools of tought Hometer, they al share “Timo conor themes ond have evan dete ‘esronnecinns BAI ex concved, a some fease or saoibet, wih problems of TEnguge and mcaning in relation to the "intrpretatvs Under andg of ban aco, Thal oot be intrested in easylng, any Seal the imelectol soucce which te together the radios upon which they Grav. One can ready dxingush "allen threo sch enon. The longestetblised jn thet of th Grease or terse sop cin {Gecmuny dues back tothe eighteenth cemry, I tof couse, fish nd comple, ed topeer 38a dice body of thought fy toe conta accorded the notion of Vereen nthe sia of amin cnet, ad by a continuing emphasis upon a adeal Gferenton between the problem of the soil and the nate tlc Mas Wee aries aon fought the sare time Dighly rll of iL 1 is large frou wings the rs Veen es bezome oe toirage among sci cients Inthe Englisspesiing word 1 Shalt evalsle Weber version f intepetat socio tere becase many crteal analyses oft are eready salable he Were, but als became, a should become cleat sub- fejuenty, Treeard much of Weber diction of the intr. ‘etalon ‘and iplcation of action es obsolete in the ight of Ypbsrquectdevelparas ate ploeopy of reliod. ‘Some School of Social Theoryand Phicsophy 29 “The second stream of thought -pechps too rent tobe aply called a “taditon’~ is that ecving from the ltuenes of the Inter Wigensten, Most srongly based in AngioSeroa pile sophy, this can be Broadly grouped togeter wih fhe rd Jangtigepilospty” of Aun, aod is subsequent Sevelopmens, Few author afliated to the standpoints of titer Witenes x Aa ave bees al need conical rent ‘Nove the les itaow semis cea that there are imparaat pose ‘of overlap, in respec both of the isues that ave come fo tae fore an the modes of approach to them Phenomenology, the third ct the schools of thought which gure prominery in this chapter, bas in some pat served a a broker between the other twor The complicated samifenton af sonnections can be bre taced through a flow. Scheer, ‘iting draw heavily upon those of Hisse; but Sete ss conjoins Huser to Weber, and that i indiealy baked 20 tradition of the Geisermastaschafn. The work ot Gcnkel tur takes its point of departure from a of Shute. ad sete the later to ideas adopted tour Witgensiin sod’ Austin: Wigsnstcin's PidaophieaInvetigctons the mala sesieg 10 the wings of Winey s cera authors mentioned ele ave iat there te siden sinc Dower Ws ‘ews and those develope ty the ening fue in sontemporney hermeneutic phlospty, Gadamer, Gademers work Iriel profoundly infesced by one offshoot of the phenomena taco, tht represented by Heseggen Existential phenomenology: Schutz 1 would be fair to say that phenomenology has only recently been discovered by English-speaking authors in the social Sciences t least its only over the past 0 decaes or 30 that the writings of phenomenological philosophers have commanded ‘widespread attention. But Husser's writings date from abou! the ‘sume period as those of Weber, and Sehuts wrote his major work attempting to develop themes from these two thinkers at roughly the same time as Parsons published The Srucrure of Social | Action. To speak of ‘phenomenology’ Is not 1 speak ofa sigle, Some Schoo of Sacial Theory and Philosophy, ‘ody of thought. Huser! has hod various important ‘but few of them have pursed the same pats that he SS Right al a spel athe erases ore he = plilosptical approaches of such writers as Scheer, Heideguer, Merleaw Ponty or Sarit, itis as well to remember that the heaomecoloical traction is internally 2 considerably diver- ‘ified one. uses prime aim, a est im bis eaner writings, was to abi phcwophizal scheme that ransecadsempintl know Kee Al conciousness is “tential in the seas, Wich Sey ev tat tT of snc no that we ‘bean When we apeak in English of itence action, roomy ed ir miedo es tthe ood cb Schoistss that onsciousnes vaya Bas am objet that con: sits it Comegueniyepiemology implies enon know: lege imps bongs and the ‘object (ahhough noth rea) fat no sgiicanceexcopt ins far as conseonnes is dccted "pon i Emprcsm, nith excetal notion of senda in “opis som Hance he ds om the parteuar to te genera fom (pee Gece to tinea dada, Aa hase Seve aot be Menied mith any specie objet or vent d's notin ny ay the so o a defaite numb of objects or ‘rents There an soot ference hetmeen ancl univer SI and its concrete “paral Imentonaliy involves a act eatin which x gute disint rom the objet of aenion ‘scl nd comequemy it sth wich ste fos of Huse meres since fin the epoch, we “racket all empieal pat cals i seems asi we ae bie to poeta to the eee of ‘ompcouscs Inthe qed for rascendenal phenomenoiogy, therefore, the liedn worl in the “eluate te ‘rinaryssmptions tat we make about the physial world out ter peopl, and shout ourselves, in ut ay to-day lle are trated bythe carly Huser ae un so much bebe that ‘nso be cleared away i ger fo reveal subject ns pe form, Fom tht Tefige, armed wits the mean of looking at enc int most esata spt, and fee rom bis, we are thon ate to re-omore to conger the real itoral word: we fevable oseconsitte tinal uncouth compe Some School of Socal Theary and Phikxophy 31 ‘The wouble is that it refuses to be reconstituted, I shall not But this sentence is also necessarily self-referting, as indexica {nits own right; and of course the same could be ssid to be the Some School of Social Theory and Pilxophy 49 ‘ise of any of the statements about indexical expressions that Gorfinkel may make, which themclves mast display “indexcal Features ‘The dificuty is that indesical expressions, as Gafinkel char- actenizes them, cannot te redescribed, oaly ‘sibtituted for One should note that ‘indexicaity’, as Garfinkel west isa much more difuse expression than indexical expression in Bar Hie ‘The laters point was that many wards are dependent for their sense upon aspects of the immediate situation in which they ae uttered. Garfinkel elaborates on this from both ends. “Content! in his wage seems to refer aot only tothe situation of specehe ‘acts temporally (86 ongoing conversations) aad physical (as occurring within a definite physical setting, in which aspects of thar sting including facial exprosions, ete, ate ted te formu late meaning. It also seems to refer tothe ‘contextual location” ‘of utterances within sets of tacit rules, Ta include the later with the first two, however, obliterates at least one sense in Which “indexical expressions’ muy be distinguished from ‘Sontext free expressions ~ a distinction that Garfinkel appears to want 10 ‘tain, For no expression cun be ‘context-fes”n the third sense The statement "2 x 2'= 4" ie only contexttre, thats, "non indevical’ in the fist two senses; understanding i meaning certainly presupposes taily “locating” it seriain rules of mathematics. Garfinkel the other side of the original connotation of indexical expres: sion’ involves extending it to comprise wiht Austin cally the “locurionary’ and ‘perdocutionary” force of utterances ~ refer. sing to ony, bragging, ete. Now the elation of such perfor. salve aspects of locutions to thei meaning” iss conttoversal matter, But this, together with the complications indicated above, has at some point tobe confronted dicty or else we are stock with just another voicing of what one philosopher bes ‘eferred to a8 "the wearying platitude tht “you can't separate” the meaning of a word from the entire context in which it seus. The problems raised by contextual features of aston ‘nd meaning, however, are certainly not peculiar to ethno ‘methodology, and are confronted by the othe schook of thou shal now proceed to examine 50 Some Schools of Social Theory aed Philosophy Post-Wittgensteinian philosophy: Winch Consider the flowing averion: ‘ti « mater of empiiat fisewery that people tale cern way. for 3 ony be Sriea she ek tet we cn lim oanderstand what the Oe {ig and why they ae doing The saterert comes, not {fom an “ethnometbodolopst, but fem» plsopter (Louch) inthe course ofa work ot diparagigty stacks the claims of con sient oe able to contract hears of human com St tht rein 0y way sperior to the planation that lay Stor are sapeble f giving of thei own actos. planation Shuman acto, the ethor agus, neo oral explana tions whether ti atapted hy score thomelves, 6B ‘Tcudsatie observers of what thy do. When we ck 10 xpi an ache sk fort 'grounds which means for te {owl uae hat apeton has or dong oye she thee Av son anne know thi me have no mone ned ak sy the act ocurred I Tllaws tat the soil seen 30 ar Bihey mele ting to po beyond Geely surveying ‘Shia any str amp, ae jo 20 moc Fr te. Aathropoioy, fr example, sllecton of travellers thes with no panes seni sgfeance the sme te of {oxo save that im many cae he aes are fara and 0 thos ecbount seem vanecetsary and pretentious. “The argues avaneed ote shee this wth hore = veloped by Winch hough the Iatersessment of the sine Ted poubliesof sonal sco is more smbguts thao he Smechng judgement with The jt quoted. Winch ia ako tha oval cis hve pretensions which re door fo fe te, Boni they take the tee nate of Cet eeu ‘coring to im, the tks of soog) ae essen pil sophia The claim might inal appec a pursing one: at sve realy om vey foi arn, fort depends upon the Bropoud ha buran ston Sneantngll in 8 way i whi rents inthe natal word are not. That which has caning inti eae, scoring t9 Wine, ipo fc ie-verne Wins iat some pins to demorstate the universal core spondence tetncea ‘caning an rl-goverme behaviour Some Schools of Social Theory and Philosophy St 1e ght appear a fst sight, he says that only some forms of ‘meaningful conduct are rule-governed. The actions of bureau ‘at involve an orientation to cules, but itis not so easy to see that those of a social rebel, who rajets the norms ofthe wider F society, do so. The point is, Winch holds, thatthe socal rebel sill follows a definite way of life, which is oriented to rules no des than that of the strietest conformist. For conduct tobe ‘ale: fovered? it not necessary, Winch goes on to say, that some fone following a rule if asked, should be able 10 formulate i consciously: all that matters is “whether it makes sense to stnguish between a ight and @ wrong Way of doing things in ‘connection with what he doc ‘The implications of reeogniing that ‘meaaingful conduct is aecessariy rule-ollowing conduct. according to Wineh’s analy sis, are profound, and show that ere i a radsal discrepancy between the methods of natural and social science. The ‘regularities’ which can be discerned in human conduct are nol tobe explained inthe same terns as those that oscur inthe nat ‘al workd, Weber was night in emphasizing that human action i ually ‘predictable’, but wrong in supposing that its explanation an assume a eausal form which is logialy fot in conten, the fame a that characteristic of natural science. A “teguariy observed phenomena presupposes criteria of identity, whereby happenings are classified as “of the samme kind’. In soil conduct these criteria are necessarily given hy the sles that express dierent “orms of lites iti only inthis way, for example, that ‘near able to talk of two actions a “doing the same thing Natural seience, of course, proceeds according to rules; Dut these govern the activities of the scientist im relation toa in ‘ependenily given subject-matter. tn the case of social science. sibat ee suds. as well ab our procedures for studying ity are tivities carried on according to rules an isthe rules gover ‘ng the actions that we investigate which supply our enter of ‘Mentty not those involved in our odes of procedure. So is quite mistaken in pnp to compare he acuity of» student frm of soil bebsvioar with that oy. an enn fer studying the workings of @ machine» If we are gong t ompare the social studeat to an‘eapiner, we shal do betet fo 152. Some School of Socal Theory and Philosophy ‘compre him 10 an apprentice engineer who 6 sung what ‘egiveting~ that ste avy of eapinering ial abou. His Sertanding of Social phesomena i more like the engincer’s nettanding of his caleags actives hn si ke te engine ‘cor understand ofthe mecha systems he ues, ‘The study of social conduct necessarily involves “making sense ‘ot observed actions, andthe observer can only do this in terms of {he particular rules to which those actions relate. Tis does not men, Winch goes on, thatthe socal stentist has to make wse of actors’ own concepts and nothing more. Technical however, must always be Togiealy tied” (Wineh's term) to the former, which have frst ofall to be ‘understood’ if the latter ste to be applied, Technical redesription does not mean causal explanation. For, Winch says, ‘if social relations between men fst only in and through their ideas... since the velations Derween ideas are interna relations, socal relations must be a species of internal relations too?” Ths is very simply lustrated ‘by considering the connection between an order given by one person to another snd the action af compliance to i Explain- Ing the act, secording to Winch, involves specifying conceptual felotions between the aotoas of “command and “obedience tnd is thus quite different from isolating a causal dependency between two events in nature. Tollowing the fst publication of The Idew of a Social Seiemee, ‘Wine colar upon the views stated there. The issues raised are obviouly macifes ia thet starkest form when we investigate “forms of life’ that are very diferent om our own, AS an ‘example, Winch taker Evane-Prtchards colebrated analysis of Imagie and witchcraft among the Azande, phenomena which ‘teem peculitely alia 10 those schooled withia the contest of [European culture. We kao, Evans-Pritchard assumes, that what the Azande believe about the influence of magic i, say, healing itiness, or of wicherat ia producing it, is mistaken. The task, therefore, is 10 show how magical practi, witeheraft and foracular divination survive in the face of the fact that they do ‘ot yield the results which the Azande baliove they do. Accord {o Winch, the question is pot one that can be legitimately ‘asked in the fist place, inthe way in which Evans-Pritchard Some Schools of Social Theory and Philosophy 53, ees Map and witchrat ae central and inne to Zande Eure, end this have v0 be understood que iferenty foe Siar bisa prcties as fara hy lager om out ‘om cata oly within the cone of the ate that we can Speak of such activites a iratonl, or even as lore a Tate’ 1 dicing why We are forced to arrive a hs conclsion, Winch quotes Witgenstn' anaes of gas. The rales of fae specif o univer of mesang ts prin win the pla ‘phere Now suppose that na parclar game, perv cen aly win by means ofa simple rks when the eaton ofthe he layers is drawn to thin seats o bea game, We cnet Say that we have rele that it want realy a ame a a he poi that she or hehe tat va me gue hat od {5 tere principe fem th old ens "We now ee something siren Witigerstin sy “an con longer eas on aying* In trying to ienpret Zande passe tee Wester ides of sine undersnaing’ the cberer con iting» steorymtake parle! fo tying fo undead he ‘ules fone me hy means of spins oun he ‘tls of woth. The telavte ines of ths srt of Soatss are evident Winch ess to sit they bY apecing {rain costant in eaton to which varying elle ay Re erprted. Hing esee scene rational be laent ten hat he cling stir which ave prsppose op "sven of tan ic. These nag mon. slesng to thy Sera elations =e inesapa invtved in the ie of all own human societies ina way eich fre ws 8 clue where to lok if we ae ped shout he point fen aen system or isons’ ‘The critical seception of Winch's work Is by now well developed in the secondary literature, and shall not attempt to do much ‘more than reformulate some of the chief pots made by his stitics. Fist ofall, Winc’s eeatment of 'ineaningul ation” a9 ‘equivalent to ‘rale-governed' conduct will aot do. 1 The notion of ‘ule" does too much work in Wineh’s dis fusion, and is not adequately explcated. According to him, we [54 Same School of Socal Theory and Philosophy ‘ean show whether say given mode of behaviour is rule governed, tnd thereby ‘meaninghl, by reference to whether or not it makes sense 10 sty that there & a right? and a ‘wrong’ way of Going it But, as Macintyre asks, i there a right way and wrong ‘way of going for a walk? He concludes that there Is not akhowgh Ihe would cerfainly want to hold that taking aa evening stroll is {meaningful activity." In contadistinetion to Macintyre, how ‘ver, T shall prefer 10 say that there are actualy two senses ia ‘Shich the cfterion of doing something "righty" or “wrongly” tay be applied to euch an activity as going fora walk, and ts 8 Signal failure of Winch’s analysis not to distinguish these. One Sense is that in which the linguiuic expresion ‘going fora walk’ might be rightly or wrongly applied to a particular mode of Conduct - this would cover the adjudgement of whether being pushed along in 4 perambulator would correctly be counted a fin instance of “gong for & walk The second sense refers 10 mora evaluations of right and wrong, aod the sanctions a8s0- ‘ated with them ~ the sense in which going fr a walk down the Cenite ofan arterial highway may be regarded as an inlraction oftholaw. 12" Winch ses “rule! in avery elastic way, but it is lear that most of shat he bis to say i informed by & model of linguistic ules or conventions, where conformity Is essentially unprob- Tematic. This has two consequences. Fist, Winch does not one pose the question, whove rls? Language, I shall armue later, Expresses aoymmetries of power: and social norms, especially fmoral norms, ave frequently imposed as. obligations. wilia Sstems of domination. Second, there is more than one sort of ‘entation ‘which etors may develop vievis social noms Knowing the ‘meaning” of 9 aetion 1 quite cisinet from the ‘commitment to cary it out. Winch does not deal with the slide Ing seele between moral commitment and cognitive approisa involved in “rulecollowine’, which again i directly connected to {he significance of power in social hie. 5. Thus Winch tends 10 eontuse the meaning of action with iis oeestence, According to him there is aa “intrinsic relation’ between an act of command and an act of obedience 10 that ‘command, But this is only 40 on the level of “meaning” or th Inteligibliry of action ~ what it means 10 use the linguistic Some School of Sotial Theory and Philosophy 55 ‘expressions ‘command’, ‘obedience’, etc. Rule-following in the sense ofthe actual oecurence of an act of abedience to a com- ‘mand, as Weber in this respect quite properly emphasized, is not explained by identifying the intellgbiity of obedience’ “4 Adknowledgoment of the latter point vadermines Winch’s attempt to make a logical case for excluding the posbility of ‘usa analysis from the socal seience, oa the basis hat actions ‘merely ‘express idea’ and the relation between ideas is concep {ual rather than causal. It may indeed be correct to hold that ‘the explanation of why someone obeys a command cannot be expressed aban instatoe of caus ia, bu this is «diferent ‘5. Winch's accoumt ia one rather important respect exag- ‘grates the differences between the social and the natural Seiences, because he docs not develop the point that “why (questions in regard o observations of nature, both lay and Profesional, are oflen oriented to. problems of inl. ‘Thus 3 person who asks, Why did the sky light up just then?* say accepl as an epproprite anser, ‘That wat shee-fighning” ‘Winch does not wish to argue thatthe sociological obverer, Jn llempting to explain social conduc, mast conine his or her ‘ocbulary to that ged by lay actors themselves, But apart ran {aumber of passing comments, n0 indication is given ofthe ‘elatonship which ext between ly and technical concepts ar, [adeod st very clear nby the later shouldbe called fora a. Difereat cultures are so ouay dierent language-gamcs that Jae to be undsrstood in tsi Own toms, ae the actin of ‘he sosal sical examining thi ultra! versity, Winch sve elke wing one's knowledge ofa language inorder to unde stand conversation, aot Ike applying seni generalizations In order lo undertand how a plese of machinery works. The implications ofthis view, although he are not spelled ot in any deta le the asthor' cai that his anal simply elucidates Wat socal scien aeady do. One. of the things which ‘ecologists and anthropologes steady doi to try tetas feoeralization about different socilics that ‘Gepend upon Siilarites which are no, and perhaps canaot be, formulated in the terms employed by the members of those sodetes, became 56. Some Schools of Social Theory and Philosophy they ae ected ether tovands making comparisons that cannot ‘be taproed in tows terns or towards exlaning why they exit [theft pac. But such endeavour are apparently precluded Aloguter by Wind's poston, which scemo to rec ought ‘dopo ot making such omparnon. a “that har ar oped aétcutrihereit in Wises view indisted by ls scrambled rita! (om 8 fullblova reltvisn, in peeking of certain “lmidag notion? hat ext ma um ocean "Foee turn out to eter 1 biopic! waverals eet S'tome sem pay port io al Human extene, and pos: ‘uguncos hat have tobe adapted t0 or coped wih by any form of soca erpanaton Bot sry th hs, NOH sua edged in wth quality i presiely ofthe sre hat oko aijedee ae Slgiimate, What he are sapponed 00, Ty reference to such univers i to slate puzing features UF cn intttions hese give us an anchor, a i were, OOF Stomper to work out he wenn flaonalupe within the stom idee that av exposed” those iets However, the ‘eat cating to the pedro on mich wea supose to bul te ley. thames gone wa ee gsngeeame and. tnay prevent some srt of “nea ‘gences of human eisfence in wa which have othing Wis creetbido ith wha we mph regards tom thin the form of root Western care, as bilogal univers ‘Wines work wes one contin tow ocd of writings by ‘Bash pitmopher frm te 194s onus, tn which the ff ce of the Later Witgestein loomed very Tage, and wich Sve concord wth problema of action so sneaning and wi Tapcion of hone fa fers of tenon reson motive, Ste Thesgicane of Wines work derived perhaps les fon {is specie originality than from the fat that wan explicit focazed upon the socal sence, Tho wilting Of most of Ccpenng views similar 10 or ovelaping wth thre of Wisah Sidhe Amcombe, Peters Melden. Kena and oer. were f' {hs mont put nobly lacing in any such emis Where ee mu ny the seo om pi i. they were concerned wih peychology rather ‘EET sdoncen or peraps one should sy, the olher socal ‘eienoa and prtery ih problems of bbesiouram’ Te ‘Some School of Social Theary and Philosophy 37 Jmpetus behind this concern was undenizbly a product of the themes of the Philosophical Investigations, with ts mach quoted ‘biervution that “in psychology there are experimental methods and conceptual confusion’. This telative nepiec of the social ‘eiences on the face of it seems rather strange, For ii @ major sleeat of pot Wiens plosopy that Wich pss ‘he philosophical eucdstion of human intsigene, and the notions ascited with thi, require that thee notions be paced ‘nthe context of the relations beawech men in society nso fara ‘ere has hora a gentin revelation ethane es ithe empha om orking out of which wend in Wagons’ Sit omequences, i dps dis. Were ic both the strength and the weakness ofthe ‘plilowphical revolution’. Immediately alter ths. statement ‘Winch quotes Witgenstcin: ‘What bas 1 be ascepted, the given, §~ s0 one could say ~ forms of ie. The epigram suns up the ‘new directions of interest in philosophy, and at the same time Fporosly citcumscribes them. Having discovered soil ‘conven tio’ of social ‘rules. and having perecived that many of the proceses of interchange between the individual and the sit Tuning world are denied from, and expressed i, socal con: uc, ths philosopher takes the forms of social life as piven and, ‘tere, works back’ from there in attacking problens of pile. hy. Established rules set the boundary of inves ile the conduct of actors is portrayed as purposeful and cogent, origins of conventions are left shrouded in mystery. and per haps cton as necessarily inexplicable; they donot appear ws ne go> sted’, as themselves the produet of human action, but rather fas the backdrop against which such action becomes intelli. Summary: the significance of interpretative logies {sa useful point at which to sum up the contibutions and (of Schu's version of . ethnometh: and the efforts of Winch 10 apply ideas dawn from the ‘58, Some Schoals of Social Theory and Philosophy Se ceeuse b wane tees Tes Fel en ae ee ae ce a ey doe te pene eee i eet et ace mtr ep eer ee teeed Eero it re aoe ee tea ae le ay ae a eee ak Sas et ie peptone pteekep reper emt erent Sa ee oar ae Se Somer Ma dr eel ene ae ear igre seni crn Stl nee erin nk sonia win ie oe ere ae Ae od upc tn Paral sn Be co a a fel Sel ee 0 Ee eh ca Sa a ee te Tilo bo cones re inca Teen ae wr Che oan ett oe ec ae a econ gmeneery egrer ar eaten Ose ei St ee ena Gea aaa aie naar a te emencutc cls cee see ne eed Sat a ew on apt cea sec en ee cote mae as read oceans era td fete ec ne es ee ae Some School of Socal Theory and Philosophy 59 the socal scientist, but as generic wo all social interaction a such ~ in Schutz’s words ~ tho particular experiential form in which commonsense thinking takes cognizance of the social ‘altura world’ Second, i is the direst implication of this tat, in basic way, social investigators deaw upon the same sorts fof resources a Iay actors do in making sense of the conduct hich tis their aim to anlyse or explains and vice versa thatthe ‘practice! theorising’ of laypeople cannot merely be dismissed by the observer as an obstacle to the “Sclentie’ onderstanding ‘of human conduct, but i 2 vital element wheceby that conduct 's constated or “made to happen’ by socal actors. Third, the socks of knowledge routinely drawn’ upon by members of seciety to make a meaningful social world depend upon know. Tedg, largely taken for granted or implicit, of a pragmaticaly ‘tented lind: that so 38 which the agent i rarely ble to express in propositional form, and to which the {deals of ‘Sens - econ of formulation, lop edu, car lvical Uetition, ete ~ are ao elevan. Fourth, the concepts ‘employed by the social scientist re linked to, or depend upon, a Dior understanding af those used by laypeople in sustaining a ‘meaningful social world. Each of these conclusions demands emendation and further ‘annfication, which 1 shall yee to provide inthe course ofthis ltuly. The development of sueh themes in the work of these various authors, moreover, is limited by characteristic weak sees in their views. Firs, ea deuls with action a8 meaning ‘ather than with action a8’ Prass ~ the involvement of actors oth the practical realization of interests, including the matesal ‘nansformation of nature through human activity. Secon, partly as 8 consequence of the first, none recognizes the centrality ‘of power in socal lie. Even a transient conversation between vo persons is a relation of power, to which the muy bring unequal resources. The production ofa ‘orderly oF ‘accountable’ social world cannot merely be understood as col Iuhorstive work carried oun By peers: meanings that are made count exprest asymmetries of power. Third social norms ‘ules are capable of diflereatial interpretation; differential tion of the ‘sae idea-systems lies at the heart of based upon divisions of interest she struggles between, Some Shoals Soc Theory and Pnophy. 61 Saxon phosopical watings by “post Witgnscinia’ pio- topiy. Bot Apel ao Hater, or cramp have ex, cussed Winch’ work; and we erica fe they hove id teow thatthe view developed therein, and more boul te themes of the Phdowphia!vegnons, independent Teach Fonion paral to those whi have Become cease “ths ha change ths ha ot come about without a quite m * the hemencute tdlon lel wich separates the wns Of the more. recent suthom from thei” nieteetbceny edecsson. In cmon with pst Wityesteinion paso, ths inoes a revel apreciaton of the nue o langage tod ity sgnflcance in sa! Ley a Gada pty tenes ‘Vester st sprackgebunder: Undersinting el te as tuage) ©'The any Heomec’ fSclermoche- ily ce AU oght to etatah te basso aa drepancy betwen the stasy of man cond oad the wears oF events i future by holdin that the former can (and mus) be dro 1y erasing the subjects eoneciousnes of tat conduc, wh he ager ean only be casaly explained om the ous In (10 explain’) the emphasis is put upon the. psychological naciment’ (Nacherleber) or” imaginative reconstruction bilder) of the experince of the other which is demanded pl the observer who wishes to study human social Hie and {60 Some Schools of Social Theory and Philosophy Catholic and Protestant, for example, that have figured in the bistory of Westera Christianity. "None ofthe tree schools discussed so far has much to offer about problems of institutional transformation and history. 1 fof some importance, then, to turn 0 a furter tradition which ‘ombins a basic interest such matters with an equal emphasis ‘pon isoes of meaning, communication and agency in soca ie, Hermeneutics and ctcal theory: Gadamer, Apel Nabermas “The appropriation of JS. Mls em ‘oral sciences by Dithey Tee Molin ofthe conspt oe Getterescafen: and Seth tet ter today has no ect Fgh egvalent, While Soping anlaon ot Mis tem, Dithey none the let sob queston n'a profound way We views of the fomer {tinker onthe lgle and metbrtclgy of he Slees of human {Sinac Tae waltion of thovghtm which Diy stands, and Sp eich bo wos major formative ifvence, both antes ‘he invention ofthe tern that has come to esgaat it and com {tat very markedly with the piceophical sekoos which bare {Toms Inthe Englshapesking word fom Mill onward The origins of hermeneutic ploophy i te modem age pesos sost appropratly attrbted to Scleermac Trtutton of Shiermacher’ asempt to found 8 ‘programme’ for hermencutics can De traced back abo to Herde Tha'Fredrich Wolt While thos put ofa adtion of th “Wct suet rom hes autor though Dilboy to Heide nl Gaderer in moe recent German piosophy, the pepe iRosaoumtl ih he Gennaro hve Largey hen fo English-speaking writers, wi the exception SA2% foo phlscps of hac (non nay Coling woud iis theetre partes srestng to soe that srme cone poray Geran phloopher and ost thinkers oi Sy pcmcncuss, sucha Apel and Haberman (opstor cose France), have acknowledged a cameron. {Dongit berweon coutemporary trendy in ermencose pi Spi snd ine break with gia empiric signalled in Ang ‘Tis sort of conception of Versiehen, us set out by Droysen, Dilhey (specially in bis eater writings) ed, in a more qual version, Weber, has been subjected to altack by numerous fpsiivisically minded cries. Most of these eitcs have held Bat the method of interpretative understanding may be a use+ adjunct to socal science, as source of ‘hypotteses’ about uct, but that such bypotheses have tobe confirmed by other, impressionistic descriptions of behaviour. According to Ab! for example, ‘the operation ot Vershen does two things it ls of & sense of apprehension in connection wth beh that is unfamiliar or unexpected and ie is a source of ches, which help ws in the formulation of hypotheses! * Given the premises of Dilthey and Weber, itis perhaps hard {62 Some Schools of Socal Theory and Philosophy tw ress the force of this sort of rit, since however much cach Dilley n particular) wished to insist upon the differences ‘etmeen the stady of hamn beings and the siences of nature, Both ranted co st that the forme. ae capable of produ reulls of comparable “objective validity’ to ie Dilthey's views, n modified form, ae not without defenders but the main thst of hermeneutic thinking, following the appear lance of Gadamer's Wahrheit und Methode (1960), has been in ‘ferent direction, ‘Gadamer's version of Vertehen emphasizes that understand. ing such asi involved, or example, in interpreting the actions of people in the past, is not a subjective matter, “but rather a8 Zntsring into another tradition, such that past and present ‘onstantly mediate each other-*” ‘Understanding’ is til re- sarded by Gadamer, a it was by Dilthey, as profoundly diferet {fom the explanation’ of events in nature, Dut Gadamer rejects the nation that this depencs upon a psyebological ‘re-enactment ff the experiences of those people the “meaning” of whose Scions is understood instead its Held to depend upon the inter hange between two frames of reference or different cultura ames, What matis off the objects (Fubjects) whose conduct Studied ia the Gelsteswissenachafien is that, in principle, the fbserer can, and indeed in a definite sense must, enter into Gialogue with them in order to understand how they ae. Under Standing a text fom a historial period remote from the predea for example, or from a cultere very diferent from oUt o¥@ [B according to Gadamer, essentially a creative proces in which the observer through penetrating an alien mode of existenc, vices his Or her ova self-knowledge through coming £0 sr The penpecve of others, Version consis, not in plac ‘oneself “insie’ the subjective experience of a text's but in understanding lerary art through grasping, to ‘Wittgensei's term, the “form of life" which gives it mess Understanding is ackieved through scours; Versteen is fore detached from the Cartesian individualism in which it ‘rounded by Dilthey (aguin particulary in his earier work). inseed related to language as che meiam of in and a the concrete expression of forms of life, or what calls "traditions. Some Schoo of Social Theory and Philosophy 63 ‘In discarding the idea of ‘reliving’ as central to hermeneutics, Gasamer also abandons the search for ‘objecive’ Knowledge in the manner of Dilthey and Weber (although not for ‘truth: all understanding is situsted in history, and is understandiog ‘rom within a particolar frame of reference, tredition or col: ‘ure. According 10 the notion of the hermeneutic cigce, which Gadamer adopts from Heidegger, a8 the latter puts it, “Any ‘interpretation which i to contribute understanding, must already thve understood what is fo be interpreted. All understanding demands some measure of pre-understandiag whereby further taderstanding is possble. Resdiag 2 novel, for instance, i volves understanding cach particular chapter as one comcs 10 iin terms of a progressively more complete awareness of the ‘eral plot of the book; the comprehension ofthe global form fof the novel, on the other hand, is deepened by erasping part- fulae sequences in it, and this enriched overall understanding Jn tum helps to produce a fuller appreciation of the specine Ippenings which are described ay the work unfolds. The under standing of human things (Works of a, literary texts) vin the heomencuti circle is not, Gadamer says, to be seen as a is the ontological proces of human ds- in whic, through the mediation of langasge, “ile mediates le. In Gadamer’s wows, the understanding of @ language ‘does not comprise 2 procedure of interpretation’. To fanderstand a language fs to be able to ‘ive in it~ a principle ‘that holds not oaly for living, bot for dead languages’. The hermeneutic problem & therefore nota problem of the accurate ‘mean, he says, that this framework should be regarded as ne fom enticism and revision: on the contrary, whether in “GA Some Schoo of Socal Theory and Philosophy day-to-day ie, inthe rary arts oF inthe social and natura ‘Slonccs is chronialy na proces of tansmutation, while al {he Gime remaining the very fabio of our thowght aod action Hermeneutics is ths universal made of plosophy” and nc. eel the methodological foundation of the so-eled hum "The afin butweca some main themes of Gadamers views and the ofthe later Wittgenstein are skin, since he Phlosophic!fovestguioes,shough written in German em rinfucesed by ihe athectal sources rom which Cadamet ‘Save Ithete is aoe major way in which Watgensiin's Ine Stig comtinues te hermes of his Tract, si respect The tent tot the imino language ae the iis ofthe word Gadamceceboe thi in saning Being s monies in language ™ For Gadamer forthe ater Wize, lagausge not i {nt foremnt 2st of itso tepresemtatons whi ‘tay ‘lng for chjects but an expresaon ofthe iuman mode WCocing inthe world Ape! har sought to show i some del thatthe ali to aeady apparent fm Hidegger. But Inaicsten together wi Haberman at Gadamers philosnt tbo proves a source of eral approach to Wittens ‘tors and more partslry to Wines endeavour to apply i Tawa from tt fh lope of thesoil ences. As Apel remeril tke Die some seven o eight decades befor him Winch Mis Logic asa plese fl against which to develop his ‘ews In doing 20, he continues, Wigc teaches 2 pos ‘eich place him lose to hermeneae theory: bt the ch ‘Some School of Soci! Theory and Philosophy 6 practical frm of ie" and understanding of the york Thus Wester Christianity both forms a ity single altura system ~ and yet is ia constant internal and external slog, which isa soutce ofits change over time. The logue fvich is esabished when two cultures meet i not diferent in Igaity trom that which i implied within any vital tradition or "form of lie, which is coastal ‘transcending ise? Habermas has. made some considerable we of Gadamer’s ‘york in his own writings, which are directed toward connecting Termencutice with other forms of analysis in the socialsciences Wile there isa very important sease in which ‘interpretation’ in Ae ight of (heoretcal) presuppositions is necessary tall forms Dt enguiy, in social or natural science, ii equally intportant, cording to him. to emphaiv thatthe study of human att cannot be purely hermencuic- the conclusion which Gadsmer find Winch both come to. The thesis of the “universality of menus" could only be sustained if human Beings ete Bpboly transparent to themselves, ina world of perfect Hegelian iy tf necessary. im fc, to resist the ‘lim vo miver- iy, wth regard to the explanation of human conduct, ofthe 0 major competing traditions of philosopy: hermeneutics and ‘Each aspites to cover the whole range of aman out, 19 accommodate it ¢9 is particule loge scheme Becordig to the hermeneutic philowphers all nan action has be undersood’, and is tefraior to the nomalogisal rps of sation which characterizes the natural sciences; in the eyes if postvistcally minded philosophers, on the other hand, the ‘his thought, which i nom hstorical, prevents him Grom p {form of natural science applics, broadly speaking, in ahs Moet et ay caougn Wilt menor he I sconce also. For Habermas, however, the socal sciences NN eee enue bon 8 Bis: both hermencitic and nomological (quasi naturalist) and oniact between diferent “forms of ile" or “langusge-eamed wo sorts of endeavour have aso 0 be complemented by @ ‘Ae another commentator has expressed it "The dificult of stitial theory. language interpretative sociology according to. Wine Ia is earlier writings, the psychoanalytic encounter, oF at eas. tlmately revel the Roundary of Wittgenstein’ philosophy idealtypcal version of it, was Weated 20 an exemplar of cio ‘lations between Rerneneuue iterpretation, nomclogical laser et se en eee sonar nation and critical theory: in Haberina’s words athe ‘Wioch's vows eventuate in an untcuabe relativism because tungibe example ofa science incorporating methodical sl fal to we that thor is always a tension, e8 wel sarc “Psychoanalysis fist and foremost interpretative, ‘between three ‘moments of lnnguage-games ~ between the" itis the aia ofthe anasto understand the verbalzations {65 Some Schook of Social Theory and Philosophy ofthe sagan, to expat (hidden) meaning a sim ‘hich scomplaied though logue Bat pnchonaiic Sheory aad pactes do sot rein athe horntevts eek its emt! objective of payhoamaly fo dave below te dbacpons ef experens feed bythe sna in ode xpi oly my they are dtored representations oreo Gs mata hl ce nc fo ens a the pros of pychewaly therpy he analy moves fo ‘uly fom ot vel or fame of tree to he oe, “Spling wha Hes behind the distorted se-underantng of the individ. tn Peas orginal eatin, hs nceamry “cdg betwoen the Hemenec and he numa want expllyesognised a ssh: hence tbe coafson of esc fSeneays eed on aalgy wit pystal foes, wih these Cmts ce) which refer fo meaning categorie What ex teeter ne so blanors the hemenetc ad pomologil tomman ofthe ppcoanagueacuntr, Habermas sy & ie emancpaory impue whch bh sini, soca, peal trapy tents nconsous proces, whch [isthe pen to haven ways ot sort to so he own ‘ohtry convol no somcour modes of acon whch te tie! hr or er rol masery. Poyehoualys has te ral tsk through furthering se inowtedp, of Mieang the peson fom he pan pl of factors which lv his As btnty without Ue medion of ie Habeas err wort, the Jno tie empirically (aomologal,bemencatc and ct ie is negated with anes of ter lasetons whch fanedtthe cpitnaogy ofthe asi sess ith he feo sujectmatr. Tae thesfld separation jas mentioned orrespords 10 thee sors of "enti interes” which cont thiman beings in thir ation tothe soi and the natu word Namlopcl hnowidge ts deceed.pinuiy oa incre in technical contol of teak! mastery of 2st ob Stal relations (bs srt of Knowlge, Habermas sys Some Schook of Social Theory and Philosophy 67 ‘which connects his writing to that of the ‘older generation’ of Frankfurt philosophers, and beyond them to Lukses.) Hermene fates, on the other hand, is diected 10" understanding the [artcipation of actor in an intersubjective “form of ile and fence to an interest in improving human communication ot selfunderstanding. Critical theory is tied to an “emancipatory fren beste i sels to wansend each ofthe former eee types of imerest considered separately, by seeking to free ‘individuals from domination: not only from the domination af ‘thers, but from their domination by forees which they do not understand or contol (including forees that are in fect them: selves humanly crested). ‘These three sets of ‘knowledge constitutive’ interest are further connected, in the socal sciaces, to some major sub, ative conceptual ditinxion made by Habermas, One concer Of soci analysis ‘has to be with purposiveraional ator (Weber's Zneckrutionalit), which Habermas also simply labels ‘Work’ or tabour’, and which refers to either instrumental action & riional choice or theit conjuncior”. Instrumental aston ‘zpends upon nomologcal knowledge, formed through empirical ‘bservation or experience such knovedee eso informs tecnica dessins about strategies of rational choice. Purposive- tional Eston has to be conceptually distinguished from “interaction, hich refers to intersubjective communication and symbolens governed by consensual norms (or, in Winch's terme, "ules, ‘Waiped hermeneutical, by the socil-scentie observer 3s by Paticipants, But the former can make use ~ asthe later do as 4 ‘nailer of course ~ of the reflexive charseter of speech the fact ‘ordinary languape isis own metalanguage. To the notons work’ and ‘interaction’ one can ada that of the asessment of human conduct inthe light of encompassing sianJatds of reason fs specified by the tasks of erteal theory, Such standasds of inality certainly have to be distinguished from the tectical ‘of purposve-ationality, but they are, for Habermas, as ocated “in history’ asi the latter. The progress of human feltanderstanding moves toward fesing individuals hom bond sg to causality (in which their behaviour appears as ast another {68 Some Schools of Socal Theory and Philosophy vies of evens in tre’) by expanding te pe of hee mae’ eke emphasis upon te centraty of language, and espe cay Sr Buogus tin aod between pets Soman, erect testy nected bing ermenety ct Some nlite’ cho of mater pnp. We tay ‘Sou is pet with Rieu nhs e sonar Language re tne Reng pou of Wipe vexom, the Eat nu poopy, the phenomenon Ow some x Baer Heagerswrestpaton, he wort ot he ‘mann Sel oft vse oe Tae cautions compute Sry, oC pon a ‘SeReany conerng mye and ste = and finaly rare Gatnhars ious daar we a nek tine te Gtneriecaien be cougar of nani Secu shred ingusepomio, he feo tbndon the taeedotpen int ote ey Dithey and of ‘Mons There moreover undo cg together" ot Ty eipued between teeneneses and te ceque of las SreSricen rating nthe pnp of lec n 0 Sen ect io nec non anced th starting Sil Rear aca pus iy apiy when he spe of he ein nig nd way i plnophy 2 at af Bs gga afer ppesencoigy, ransom pen sent ped ef one Mon in hcrophys namely tt sree eee he sl Ne an frst tthe Sod br ser sbstieed for his soond ain, that Wretoe veon ete ule if Geom ts tuscan of tne ear ps of roar phony. howe Sho va ofr Cen of ten hve teny ben ay No. cntiy aumied ty Herm Apr heme Sean sect cnen ple uf cou hs psy hich scp neem ~ of nang tral cond {Sins which go beyond thew of atom ated {Sutin and which are ot explnstory nicance i tothe Bgualywoperan weve he rote red these dpe alos Gade laborats Some Schools of Socal Theory and Phicsophy 68 argues. that_hermeneutics is ‘a discipline which guarantees ‘wath But this means that ruth ineres in being, the fundamen tal eror of existentialist phenomenology, and one not rescued ‘by Gadamer’s appeal to dialectics. Bett has commented that, vile Gadamers exposition of hermeneutics might very well ‘uarantee the intemal unity of interpretative materials of, 88, work of erature or of the actions of individuals in another Histovical period oF alien culture it eschews ax non-problematic ny further question of the “crrecines’ of such interpretation. ‘According to Betti there are four premies of hermeneutics, of ‘which Gadamer only teats the fst thre: the objet has to be understood in its ow terms, that i, a5 a subject (hermeneutic tulonomy’); it has to be understood in context (meaningful ‘coherence’; and ic has to conform to what Bet calls the “actie Aly" of the experience of the ialerpreter (presandersinding’). ‘But there is aso a fourth element involved which, although it nderpns the other thre, does not appear ia Gadamer’s work, ‘This is that of ‘meaning equivalence” (Sinnadiguanz des Ver- ‘chen: that se interpretation ofa harman producto action i “adequate in relation to the intentions of te originator, ‘Belt isnot alone in offering tis sor of eicsm of Gadamer’s views, and I shall amplify it hore. According to Gadamer, her ieneitisis nota method, and iteannot generate sccountsthatean ‘be adjudaed as ‘corrector ‘incorrect in terms of Whatua author ‘eant communicate" through a text. The mesniag of 2 text oes not reside in the communicative intent ofits erator, but a the mediation that i established between the work and those ‘who “understand” ir from the cootext of a dilereat tradition, For Gadamer, following Heidegger, language speaks is owa Deaning’ 98 one of Heidegger's exyptic illeminations hes i, "th Sprecher sprickt far uns im Gesprachenen’ ("The speech of ‘thers speaks for us in what is spoken’). A rtten text ths sdxineuvely diferent from speech, which presupposes Both a sealing subject and another to whom the words are addressed. ‘work of literary artis meaningful in and Of ell, and assumes “autonomous being’ of language as such, The circumstance of ing tien down is basic to the hermeneutic Phenomenon: ‘Bains an existence of its own, detached from that ofits 70 Some Schools of Social Theory and Philosophy Since-the understanding of a text i a creative mediation of tmadiions, such uandersionding is an uneadiog process; it can never be ‘completed, because new meanings are browghtiato being through readings of the work within fresh twations. The attractiveness ofthe emphasis i evident. Treating understanding as a productive acuvity, which isnot bound by ny criteria of interpretative accuracy concerhing writer's {intentions in his or het work, seems realy to deal wit, say, the ‘numerous different ‘eadiags of Marx that have been made over the generations since the lal nineteenth century. But the di- cally confronting the view is equally obsious: the adoption of fone reading, rather than another, sppears a an arbitrary matter. ‘Scholarly debates over the analysis of Man's writings, (0 pursue the same illustration, sem then to be jut wasted efor. ‘Gadainer is antious to avoid this kind of "vblism’ for Mi, “onath’ ists in the ruidulaes of self slarication whereby the mutuality of traditions 8 exploed, and an appeal to conformity with tadidon serves to help rule out alternative readings song {ote operating from within it But this conception ie not able fo deal with comparisons of readings made from «ifferent ttaditions nor indeed can ane see ow scan cope with vfering ‘essions ofthe same tradition’ applied to the Understanding of texts, sine it seems to presume that traditions are internally ‘unified and cohereat (as Winch does forms of lis). the bight ‘fal this is important to follow Bett in stressing he need for ecogaizing the sulonomy of the object ~ the text asa situated creation of is author ~ without renouncing the importance ‘of what Gadamer has to say. There is a dilference between fteraping to understand what an author meant by what she ot he weote and how the tat was received among contemporaret to whom it vas addresed, on the one hand, and understanding the significance of the text to ur own present-day cisean stances, onthe other. TRevogeition of sech a difference reisiaes hermencutis 3 ‘method: Gadamer holds that “understanding” should not be eon fased with “aterpretaion’. Reading « novel doesnot demand a process of interpretation; the novel absorbs the reader in a pee- ebedive way. In diclaiaing "method", Gadamer's discussion Of hermeneutics, although itself steeped rather heavily in the Some Sook o Soil Theor and Phiasophy 71 amisceaion of Heeger, bears ome aes wih cenain tsps inthe plonphy of sence ~noaly Feyerabend Exo “abandon method The portance ot these ica, how. felis notin the dining of eth slog, ba ee Implaion for i recomiraon. Hermetcutin T wish to dl, doesnot nd scent range f problems fn the under. Sunding of writen texts sch ba othe eda of ames ‘meaning in gear. Morconr, hte ae vo ode of bet ‘ence prclem whose sonaccon k's vial to trace eo {nd whic span ou the soda and the satura sles One foncers the prefstive character of eaperene, wheter ia the form of the rosnarprte charac tsa, a in the form af the “eery-impepnatal” charter of ineraons ‘itn the natural scence (ehh te to of oure holy sees) In sent is qe ight to phase ta ending {hovel or ting tos chance acquaintance tester ct ‘ierpettve aus, bur are inp ote ste Oe? whch ey tenses con, he remppesos in tems SF ic such avis ora wnt druwn on 2 tact mast However, even the daly inrchanges of Were not whily presedectve, and as B made ea i Stnnomethologs) the selesive applison of "scsane process gue crcl to thle coainsy competent soca fon ch eyes ve dud mess ox mr Preto, and thet ths pane tends fo defeat its possible aplication on the more tunnel of ssa analy: According fo Heber, work {5d teraction. follow ratonlyresonerstblepaterne stich ar ei inden one ter Which {Sterne of insromenitt tenon fem mist ender ‘ight be defn in relation o eli of serpent cans 0 now, tin certily not win lation tote tals of ‘eda cont tell Howeterk be defined, i the enconpasing re ro tere nary se of erates ante hy oman acy, Tabor not (excep pera t 8 fio cae) ito Sty y sane en ner ‘reraction oriented merely to mull understanding or conten fat, but to the realization of ends which mot infrequently ate fccuive of cue anolher, The weaktestes of Habermas’ ost ‘on ere seem to be rected in hs eta theory, wh, ba found the mods of «smmetcal elie Slope appears totake a ft ceneal theme the reilaation of consensus arrived lhroph tional debate: but how this ete fo ceumatanees 176. Some Schools of Socal Theory and Philosophy in which struggles. or exploitative domination, are oriented 1 ‘ieldmuute of scarce eoourceri not made cer ate apconas' pea to pschoaalss as an exemli cE nay tat panne for the soil sciences asa whole ha Sea ucdvcnes because azems to embody cae a Garr: to whch be eae steno: te medion of a rio’ by “explanation, volving te [ronal eionony of the analysand though dslague TE Ghia Yor tor ave obvi dficlties it th, ot ‘Rootes ‘ns acknowiaged™® Pcosnalss seems « ate esa free theory, ins the relation between a eget i afer lla markely skewed anderen euhon ‘nef once more, however, Hakeras uses ony aie ot ae teva hee he prychosnai thera Weetloutcr betwcun mvdual pero, entered into lai avin which hemenctc and nomolopal anata Ga ee fom of uncovering hen moire, ingot {ey tee asl eh st Bow to connect he cx cn Geman wih the sacral properties of isto, ency, Act-identifications and Communicative Intent eal deal of writing by British and American philosophers, en siomely influenced by the work ofthe later Wittgenstein where critical of it, Ras Been concerned with the “philo ‘of actin’. In spite of the voluminous character of this tare its yield has Beem rater slight As teated by Anglo- A futhors, the “philosophy of action" mostly shares Tinitaions of post Wietgenstsiian philosophy as 2 whole, jen where the Wiles in question are not clow disciples of tgenstcin and substanlly diverge from st lest certain of his particular a lack of eoncera with socal steucture, with ituional development and change. This gap is more than & Fptinate division of labour between philosophers and socal tat it if & weakness that nit Jeep into philosophical cs of the charter of human agency. Amore immediate on, however forthe confusing nature of the recent Biterature the philosophy of action isa falre 20 separate cut various which need clearly 10 be distinguished from one another. the formulation ofthe concep of action or agency, the tions Between the concept of action and that of itenion the characerizanon (identification) of pes of act cance of reesont and morives in reation to mgeney: and [do not want to eam thatthe discussion offered inthe p ng sections i extaulie: T wish To use it only as 9 backdro viinst which io develop the format of the est of th Tegy Among, the important issues raised by the various Sitiows or schools of thought T have examined. but not a ‘quately resolved by any one of them, are te follo ArSblemas of agency and the characterization of action; probe Cfeommaniation and hermeneutic analysis, problems of Gkplauation of action within the frimework of sociologe method. The remainder of the book is concerned with farther explication ‘Agency, Actidenicatons, Communicative Intent 79 citizen, that what he or she did was egal. Of course, it may Iuppen thatthe person's ignorance allows him of her 1 escape sanction altogether, or procures a reduction is the individual 178 Agency, Actidentfeations, Communicative intent Problems of agency 1s clear that aypeope inthe cue of hei ayy ok, nwa) ferro ake ac eins of age in some Spor another —akough important emphasv tht oy Srtaraln cso ott ov cramp outs bo) ie tay tncy to be able to pve, or be ered in Bog Seu of thy ot how they do to i abst trms. People ‘Gyula Jecde about espns or uteomes, and moor ‘seracaauc according, well bang hi spores SShunufustfostontrcses ofered by hen A ila Som ot ind reac to, 4 peor conde deemed Siropate where someone coi hep wht Nappened oa SRE or aoe could bop HA penn fall fore Mil. may succes make eats Up ethers fr uns

    You might also like