The Social Psychological Underpinnings of Commons's Institutional Economics - Essay Example

Am not special and this explains why: In life, there is very little that one can be certain about and the fact that something is considered good or acceptable today does not necessarily guarantee will not be viewed as illegal and immoral tomorrow. Take some of the events and situation in human history 200 years ago, slavery was not only sanctioned but it was widely practiced even by the religious organizations that came to vehemently decry its morality at the end of the 19th century. Today the mere mention of the term is enough to elicit extreme reactions from both racial and moral perspectives, the same goes for homophobic sentiment which was retrospectively accepted but today frowned upon in most societies. At the end of the day, circumstances and beliefs dictates human assumption of what is right and wrong and many of our moral rules and norms are generally not determined by their “rightness” or “wrongness” but the prevailing conditions and situations. This is in accordance with class rule number two which states that “it depends on the situation” positing that things are subject to change based on contextual perception. This paper will examine the truth of this statement by examining from a sociological point of view, the argument based on the theory of structured socialization that men are made by; they do not make their circumstances. This argument easily finds support in “Mills the Promise” in which she conjectures that situations are often responsible for the actions and conditions of people not the other way round (Mills 2). In her opinion, what one is today is subject to abrupt and radial change without their control and they are forced to adapt to the change because the environment dictates. One of the main functions of the discipline of sociology is to examine the social environmental constructs that dictates actions and behavior in human beings who invariably needs must exist in some sort of society (Berger 8). According to Durkheim, what sets it apart from other subjects such as science and mathematics is the inconsistency element (Durkheim 20). Take for example the chemical reaction that ensures when one exposes iron nails to salty water, they will inevitably rust at some point, these nails will behave in the same way no matter which part of the world they are taken to with variations based on water and salinity. Nevertheless, the principle of rust will uniformly be reenacted in each scenario in the long or short run. On the other hand if one was to replicate a social construct from one part of the world to another, the result they would get could be markedly different, for example, in some parts of Africa, when one wants to express their gratitude they shake their fist at the other person. Nonetheless, this very same action when replicated in a European or American environment is likely to be misinterpreted as a gesture of rudeness of show of anger. The diversity of culture is often manifested in “culture shock”; when an individual visits new social cultural areas and they are surprised/ shocked because the customs or norms are either very new or in direct contraction to what they are used to (Berger 10). At some point most people have heard of or encountered experiences in which faux pas are committed owing to ignorance of cultural habits mostly with humorous and less frequently with grave consequences. A common example has to do with dieting, what some people view as food can be considered as abomination by others, in parts of France, snails make a very popular meal known as escargot. However, the mention of slugs of snails at dinner time in parts of England just across the border could result in lost appetite and constitute poor table manners. Every action that one engages in whether, it is eating entertainment or even sleeping is invariably a product of the culture in which they are brought up in and rarely constitutes a deliberate personal choice since even when one thinks they are making objective choices; there is a chance they are following a covertly laid down pattern. Durkheim postulates that in the fulfilling of ones duties in which ever capacity in society be it as a parent a friend or employee, they are inexorably bound by external social codes from which their lives are immersed. At times one may feel that they can achieve a level of objectivity be acting one the basis of education, training or a code of belief, however by this very actions they are reinforcing the reality of their dependence on external environment (Elster 67). Proponents of individualism will no doubt attempt to invert these claim based on the presupposition that a humans are inherently autonomous and they therefore transcend but are not immersed in their environments (Van 37). To some degree they are of cause right since there exists and have existed individuals who have been able to come out with completely new ideas and knowledge. Nevertheless, one must also take cognizance the fact that most of the knowledge they possess and which they use to come up with new ideas was harnessed through externally generated information (Donald and Ian 11). In his theory of social behaviorism, George Herbert Mead suggested that individuals acquire self-awareness and self-image based on social experience, consequently one can only define him/her after they have sufficiently understood their external environment and determined the role they play in it (Albert and Yngve 5). Subsequently, one must admit that most of our ideas and knowledge do not originate from within us and they can only penetrate the individual if they are externally imposed upon them. Based on this, one can confidently argue that a social construct can only exist where there is an organized social setting since actions are not essentially defined by their inherent meaning but by the meaning to which society ascribes to them(Forgas 262). While the above situations and actions are based on law, customs and similar cultural norms, other categories of actions exist in which the individual motivated by social currents, which is to say he ends up following the crowd. Take for example someone in a political meeting, they may not partially support any particular candidate and could have attended the meeting with the sole intention of making an objective judgment based on what each had to say. However if in the rally the majority of the crowd who show open fondness or hostility towards a candidate, one may find themselves inexplicable drawn or revolted by the individual in question purely based on popular opinion. The same applies to many aspects of life where one finds that they are drawn to something based on the pressure of the public majority and they may end up disregarding objectivity to follow the public sentiment. In such cases, it is easy to appreciate the debate behind this paper in which it is contended that it things are determined by situations in which they occur. Social currents are extremely powerful forces that compel individuals to conform to specific environmental and cultural norms; however most people never appreciate or even recognize the pressure exerted on them externally (Durkheim 20). For example, in the early years of the 20th century, the issue of race and women’s rights was by today’s standards characterized with extreme racism and sexism. However before revolutionaries like Malcolm X and Martin Luther king begun to agitate for equality, many people from both the oppressing and oppressed factions had conformed to the social realities. While they may have felt the situation was wrong privately, they dared not do anything about it because the underlying assumption was “it has always happened that’s how I found it, that’s how things are meant to be”. However those who encounter the pressure of the social current are those that stand against it, when one is submits to this current they are unlikely to even realize its effect on them conversely opposition often results in acute awareness of ones against the grain stand. This is often the situation in which revolutionary leaders and their followers find themselves; they attempt to go against a system which had been controlling them for years or centuries. The ensuing resistance which epitomizes of most of the world’s revolution conflicts is evidence of the reluctance of the social currents, in many cases politically manifested to admit opposition. Even when the sociological environment is completely stripped of all its extraneous elements, an individual still lack mental autonomy since their behavior is dictated by a variety of other physical environmental factors such as weather and other attributes found within their biological makeup. While it may be argued otherwise, this translates to the assumption under structured socialization under which it is argued that situations make men to men situations (Hallinan 22). From the arguments considered herein, this statement is unequivocal; men are immersed in the physical and cultural environments and they they are often helpless to control it only adapting as best as they can. In many instances, the literal or cultural survival is determined primarily by the adaptability of a people or a culture, according to the work of Charles Darwin in the survival of species, the survivors are not constituted of the strongest or the most intelligent species but those that best adapt to change. The power in culture to influence social, political and economic phenomena cannot be overstated, In the YouTube video based on Denish Dsouza’s book “end of racism”, he proposes that racism is not really the root cause of the problems facing the blacks out their own cultural dysfunctions (Denish, 2011). From this we can deduce that despite the pre-eminent assumption that blacks are disenfranchised in America owing to the racist tendencies of other races, it is possible, assuming of cause that he is right, that it more of a cultural factor emanating from the blacks themselves. This supports the debate that “it depends on the situation” because when one considers the existing literature on the history of black problems they will likely assume the position that they are predominantly racial as opposed to cultural. The video however reasonably questions the retrospective assumption by changing the viewers’ “standing” point and making them consider the issues from a cultural perspective and producing a different hypothesis. Under the rational actor theory, it is suggested that individuals pursue their own individualist goals which are a reflection of their self-interest and an internally driven motivation (Scott 4) which makes the individual not the environment the determining agent in society (Peter and Charlotta 9). Furthermore, they argue that the preferences of and individuals will always remain consistent and stable irrespective of circumstances, this is especially driven by the fact that under this theory, individuals have full information and tend to weigh all possible alternatives before taking action on any matter (Foley 9). To some extent one must admit that the opposing argument does carry some weight especially in regard to the fact that individuals pursue individualistic goals, after all, everyone acts in their own interest most of the time. Under individualism, the individual is often the starting point of any action and in consideration to Marxist ideology; the individual is the genesis of the struggle for liberation (Brown 168). However, from a critical perspective and in light of existing sociological theory and the arguments examined previously in this paper, the suggestions of the rational actor theorist are impractical and Utopic at best. Individualism is an illusion created when and one is unaware of the social current pushing them along and as aforementioned, much of what individual know was imposed externally though education and socialization. Therefore, claiming that one is driven solely by their own autonomous motivation is illogical; moreover the idea of individuals having complete information and weigh decisions critically based on this said information is hardly practical. Were it true, then humans would never make mistake and neither would there be a need to pursue knowledge since the suggestion that one has all the requisite information about a subject or action renders future research on the same obsolete. Knowledge is more of a journey as opposed to a destination, therefore absolute knowledge about anything is impossible since situations are always mutating and with each development or new discovery humanity learns more about its previous ones. For example, before the microscope was discovered, many people assumed they knew all there was to know about the “dirt” that causes diseases and this information was proven to have been extremely outdated and in many cases wrong. In the same way, one cannot reasonably argue that humans are completely rational beings who make rational decisions with all the possible options having been considered since this would imply completeness of knowledge. At the end of the day, I can reasonably conclude that individualism as most people think of it is not actually possible; ultimately, individuals controlled by a series of external and internal social factors which are the driving agents in human life. As such, neither I nor anybody else can think of themselves as special because our knowledge, thinking patterns actions and lesions are not originated form us but from the socialization through which individual are nurtured based on the sociological framework in which they are born(Mortimer and Roberta 431). In the Pedagogy of the oppressed, Paulo Frerie postulates that the primary distinction between men and animals is that, men transcend and consider the world while animals are immersed in it (Freir 125). Nonetheless, from a sociological context, this argument can be readjusted so that it depicts men as being immersed as opposed to transcending society since their very humanity, which sets them apart from other animal species, is derived from their specific social setting. Works Cited Albert, Alexa, and Yngve Ramstead. "The Social Psychological Underpinnings of Commons's Institutional Economics II: The Concordance of George Herbert Mead's "Social Self" and John R. Commons's "Will"." Journal of Economic Issues 32.1 (1998): 1-46.  Berger, Peter. “Sociology and Individual past time”. From Invitation to sociology.1963. Print. Donald, Green and Ian, Shapiro. “Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory: A Critique of Applications in Political Science”. Connecticut: Yale University Press. 1994. Print. Durkheim, Emile. “The Rules of Sociological Method”. Trans. W.D. Halls. New York: The Free Press. 1982. Print. Elster, Jon. Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.1989. Print. Foley, Duncan.K. Introduction (chapter 1) in Peter S. Albin, Barriers and Bounds to Rationality: Essays on Economic Complexity and Dynamics in Interactive Systems. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1998. Print. Forgas, Joseph P. "What Is Social about Social Cognition?" and "Epilogue: Everyday Understanding and SocialCognition." In Social Cognition: Perspectives on Everyday Life, edited by Joseph P. Forgas, 1-26 and 259-270. New York: Academic Press, 1981. Print. Freir Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Bloomsbury Academic. 2000. Print. Hallinan, Maureen T. "Sociology and the Goal of Generalization." Contemporary Sociology 27.1 (1998): 21-4.  Mills, Wright. The Sociological Imagination. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2000. Print. Mortimer, Jeylan . and Roberta, Simmons. Adult Socialization. Annual Review of Sociology 4:421-54. 1978. Print. Peter Hedstrom and Charlotta Stern. "rational choice and sociology," The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition. 2008. Print. Scott, John. Rational Choice Theory. From Understanding Contemporary Society: Theories of The Present. California: Sage Publications, 2000. Print.   Brown, Susan. The Politics of Individualism: Liberalism, Liberal Feminism, and Anarchism. New York: Black Rose Books. 1993. Print. Van, de Walle. "Durkheim and Socialization." Durkheimian Studies 14.1 (2008): 35-58.  Denish D’Souza. “The end Of Racism” Youtube. 2011. http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9LaF_vlqPDKV9QSz05GgxyxtYSLvs52S Read More