Structuration, according to Anthony Giddens, is defined as
the process of the making and remaking of social structure. The book
‘Constitution of Society: Outline of the theory of Structuration’ defines
‘structuration’ as bridging the gap between structure and action theories.
In Sociology,
the dilemma regarding human action and social structure considers the following
issues: how far are we creative human actors, actively controlling the
conditions of our own lives? Or is most of what we do the result of general
social forces outside our control? Which has primacy: the social constraint
exercised by societies or the wishes of individuals?
According to
Durkheim, societies impose social restrictions on our actions. They are solid
and firm and have primacy over individuals. Social structure constrains our
activities in a parallel way, therefore, restraining what we can do as
individuals. It is external to us: systems exist and operate independently from
what we make of them.
The criticism that
followed in response to Durkheim was that society is a sum of individuals
behaving in normal ways in relation to each other. Symbolic interactionists
said there are reasons for our actions and we live in a world developed by
cultural meanings. Social phenomena depend on symbolic meanings we assign to
our regular activities. We are the creators of society, not its creatures.
Theories that only
focus on structure are beyond the control of human beings. They refer to
structure as rigid – something that can not be changed. Individuals do not have
the liberty to change structure. On the contrary, action theories mention that
individuals deny the power of structures.
Giddens wrote
structure is fluid – it is produced and reproduced by individual actions.
Actions produce structure, structures produce action. They are inter-linked.
For instance, in Pakistan, Urdu Language is an established structure. A decade
ago, Khaalis Urdu was used – however, today it has changed because people tend
to mix Urdu with English language. Hence, we actively make and remake social
structure through our daily activities. Societies, communities and groups have
a ‘structure’ only when it is shaped by regular behaviours and predictable ways
of the people. On the other hand, action is feasible because we, as
individuals, possess an enormous amount of socially structured knowledge. In
the case of language as a social structure, speakers have to examine certain
properties. What someone says would not make sense unless it abides by
grammatical rules. Structural qualities of a language exist only as long as
individuals conform to rules. Language is constantly in the process of
structuration.
It can thus be
concluded that structuration, as Giddens added, always infers ‘duality of
structure’ – social actions presume the existence of structure. At the same
time, structure presumes action because structure relies on everyday human
behaviour.
No comments:
Post a Comment