Giddens Lecture

Giddens Lecture 2/12/05

Bourdieu and Habermas are examples of Agency-Structure Intergration

We are going to have a look at another example of this: Anthony Giddens and his Structuration Theory.

(quote 1)

“the problem of structure and agency has rightly come to be seen as the basic issue in modern social theory” – Margaret Archer, Culture and Agency.

“[Dealing with the agency-structure problem] has become the ‘acid test’ of a general social theory” – Margaret Archer, Culture and Agency.

Even though there are many differences between sociological theory in Europe and the US – we could say that this Agency-Structure problem seems to be something that they strongly have in common.

This concern for agency-structure is at the core of the work of a number of social theorists:

(quote 2)

Bourdieu – Habitus and Field

Habermas – Life-World and System

Burns – Social Rule-System Theory

Lukes – Power and Structure

Abrams – Historical Structuring

Touraine- Self Production of Society

Crozier and Friedberg – Game Theory Approach

Giddens – Structuration Theory

Handout: References.

We have been looking at the overcoming of binary oppositions in philosophy and in social theory – before we go on to look at Giddens’s Structuration Theory – I would like to talk about the micro-macro binary – it is often called in Anglo-American social theory and how this relates to the binary known as agency – structure in European social theory.

At one level these two sound similar – and in a lot of theory they are often treated as if they are similar.
Margaret Archer has argued that the structure/agency problem connotes a concern for micro-macro relationship – as well as – she argues – a concern for voluntarism-determinism and subjectivism-objectivism.

This seems fairly reasonable – if we make the association of the micro with agent and the macro with structure.

However – there are other ways of thinking of both micro/macro and agent/structure that make the differences more distinct.

While agency does usually refer to the macro level – agency can also refer to (macro) collectives that act.

For example:

Burns: sees human agents as including “individuals as well as organized groups, organizations and nations”

Touraine: focuses on social classes as actors.

If we accept collectives as agents – then we can’t automatically equate agency with micro-level phenomena.

Also: while structure usually refers to large-scale social structures – it can also refer to micro structures such as those involved in human interaction.

Giddens’s definition of systems (which is closest in meaning to structure – closer than his own meaning of structure) suggests both kinds of structures because it involves: “reproduced relations between actors or collectives”.

Micro often means conscious creative actor – but it also mean a more mindless behaver of interests to behaviorists.

Thus: both agency and structure can refer to either micro-level or macro-level or to both.

Giddens

Giddens’s Structuration Theory is one of the best known theories that tries to integrate agency and structure.

Giddens first starting introducing this theory in the 1970s – but it really wasn’t until his book – The Constitution of Society: Outline of a Theory of Agency – that theory appears in its most developed form.

Giddens goes as far to say in this book:




(quote 3)

“Every research investigation in the social sciences or history is involved in relating action to structure … there is no sense in which structure ‘determines’ action or vice versa” – Anthony Giddens, The Constitution of Society.

“Men make history, but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered, given, and transmitted from the past” – Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Selected Works.

While Giddens is not a Marxist – there is a strong Marxian influence in The Constitution of Society – Giddens even sees it as a extended reflection on Marx’s inherently integrative idea (quote 3).

However, Marx is just one of the many influences that go into Structuration Theory – in fact, Giddens has analyzed and critiqued most major theoretical orientations and has used many of the useful ideas in them.

Therefore: Structuration Theory is incredibly eclectic - (not restricted to one source of ideas – but choosing from a wide range)

Giddens looks at a social theories that begin with the individual/ agent (symbolic interactionism) or society/structure (structural functionalism) – and rejects both of these popular approaches.

Instead: Giddens suggest that we begin with recurrent social practices.

(quote 4)

“The basic domain of study of the social sciences, according to the theory of structuration, is neither the experience of the individual actor, nor the existence of any form of social totality, but social practices ordered across time and space” Anthony Giddens, The Constitution of Society. pg. 2

All social action involves structure.
All structure involves social action.
Agency and structure are inextricably interwoven in ongoing human activity or practice.

At the center of Giddens Structuration Theory – with its focus on social practices – is a theory of the relationship between agency and structure – the theory is intended to show the duality and dialectical interplay between theory and structure.

Agency and structure cannot be conceived of apart from each other – they are two sides to the same coin.

Giddens’s starting point is human practice – and the important point is that Giddens means that these practices are recursive.

In other words:

(quote 5)

“[activities are] not brought into being by social actors but continually recreated by them via the very means whereby they express themselves as actors. In and through their activities agents produce the conditions that make thses activities possible.” – Anthony Giddens, The Constitution of Society.

Structure is reproduced in and through the succession of situated practices which are organized by it.

Similarly with consciousness: The human actor, in being reflexive, is not merely self-conscious but is also engaged in the monitoring of the ongoing flow of activities and structural conditions.

Giddens deals with the agency/structure issue in a historical, processual, and dynamic way.

What Giddens is saying here is that practices are not created by human consciousness – or by the social construction of reality – nor are the being produced by social structure – rather by expressing themselves as actors – people engage in practices – and it is through practice that both consciousness and structure are produced.

But not only are the social actors reflexive – but also are the social researchers who are studying them.

This point brings us to Giddens’s well-known ideas on the double hermeneutic.

Both social actors and sociologists use language.

Social actors use language to account for what they do – and sociologists use language to account for the actions of the social actors.

Thus: Giddens thought that is was very important that we were concerned about the relationship between lay and scientific language.

Especially – Giddens thought that we should be aware that the social scientist’s understanding of the social world may have an impact on the world they are studying and thus lead to distorted finds and conclusions.

But let’s look at Giddens’s Structuration Theory in a little more detail:

(quote 6)

Actors continually monitor their own thoughts and actions as well as their physical and social contexts.

Actors develop routines that enable them to efficiently deal with their social lives.
Actors are motivated act – these motivations involve wants and desires that prompt action.

While development of routines and reflexivity are continuously involved in action, motivations can be thought of as possibility for action. Motivations provide overall plans for our action – but most of our action – Giddens claims – is not directly motivated.

In the realm of consciousness – Giddens makes a distinction between discursive consciousness and practical consciousness:

(quote 7)

Discursive Consciousness – being able to put things into words.

Practical Consciousness – that which is done by actors – without them being able to say in words exactly what it is they are doing.

It is Practical Consciousness that is most important to Structuration Theory – because of its focus on what is being done rather than what is being said.

This focus on Practical Consciousness shows itself clearly in the move from agents to agency – the things that agents actually do.

Giddens gives a lot of weight to agency (his critics say too much) – Giddens tries very hard to separate agency from intentions – because many times what actually happens is NOT what was intended – intentional acts have unintentional consequences.

This idea of unintentional acts plays a large role in Giddens’ Structuration Theory – and it important to get us from agency to the social system level.

Giddens gives the agent a lot of power – for Giddens agents have the ability in the social world.

For Giddens – agents make no sense without power – the actor stops be an agent if she looses the ability to make a difference.

Giddens sees that there are constraints on actors – but this does not stop them from choices that make differences.

To Giddens power must be prior (before) subjectivity – because action involves the power to transform the situation – thus, Structuration Theory accords power to the actor and action.

This idea is in opposition to theories that locate the power in the intent of the actor (phenomenology) and other theories which locate the power in the external structure (structural functionalism).

The conceptual core of Structuration Theory lie in the concepts of :

(quote 8)

Structure

System

Duality of Structure


(quote 9)

“[Structure is defined as] he structuring properties [rules and resources] … the properties which make it possible for discernibly similar social practices to exist across varying spans of time and space and which lend them systemic form.” Anthony Giddens, The Constitution of Society.

Structure is made possible by the existence of rules and resources. Structure themselves do not exist in time and space. Rather, social phenomena have the capacity to become structured.

“structure only exists in and through the activities of human agents.” – Anthony Giddens, Social Theory and Modern Sociology.

“In my usage, structure is what gives form and shape to social life, but it is not itself that form and shape.” – Anthony Giddens, Social Theory and Modern Sociology.

Giddens offers a very unusual definition of structure – it does not follow the Durkheimian idea of structure as being external to and coercive over actors – Giddens makes a point that structure is NOT OUTSIDE or EXTERNAL to actors.

Giddens does not deny that structure can constrain action but he thinks that most sociologists and social theorists have exaggerated the importance of constraint.

Furthermore: they have failed to show that structure is always both constraining and enabling – structures enable actors to do things that they would otherwise be unable to do