Constructionism Offers a Bold Invitation to Build New Futures - Coursework Example

Constructionism offers a bold invitation to transform social life, to build new futures Social constructionist ideas are channels to reconstitute the past in more promising ways. This assertion of Gergen (2006, pp.33) is still more explained in James Holestein (2006). In the views of James Holestein, the constructionist camp finds itself divided, some arguing for ‘strict’ constitutive reading of social problems while others argue for ‘contextual’ constructionism. James Holestein et al (2006) cite Woolgar and Pauluch – calling them social analysts – to have suggested that social constructionist arguments can generally be broken out into three parts: (i) Identifying specific behavior or conditions. (ii) Identifying various definitions of these behaviors and conditions. (iii) Highlighting the variability of these definitions relative to the constancy of the conditions. Though such analysis appears to be a reductionist approach, it can be accepted upto the level of explaining the concept of social constructionism in its entirety. (James .A.Holestein and Gale Miller, 2006). In social construction, communication plays crucial role thereby giving considerable niche for languages. Despite its innate weakness, language could not be categorically rejected from any culture as it paves at least some movable path towards dissemination of factual materials. Gergen (pp. 34) is of the view that thre is no privileged relationship between words and world. The necessity and availability of multiple descriptions for a particular situation reveals its weakness in dissemination. He boldly challenges the status of any language and its means of discourses, if they are unable to attain perfection in dissemination towards truth. Gergen (pp. 35) further analyses the concept of ‘meaning’ in any language. The literal meaning in many languages do not correspond to the construed or felt meanings of certain occasions. This differs from culture to culture giving way for idioms and phrases peculiar to individual culture. The meaning is generally understood in such circumstances in correlation with the situation expressed or conceived. When both the receiver and transmitter are in same or similar frequency, the meaning understood is construed as true. A form reliability and trust is spread. Interactive understanding thus creates more opportunities and opens fresh gates for further communication and subsequent strengthening of relationships. The parameters of good and bad are simply the tools used in such interactions with little impact on the strength of relationships. As such, languages with and beyond their ‘meanings’ are inevitable in all cultures for creating a strong social construction. Traditional and conventional ideas when found obsolete could be kept out of use only when their non-utilities are brought to lime light through efficient discourse. Simple rejection of old ideas do not render any valuable change as there is possibility of a sudden come back of the conventional ideas, which usually have a strong and indelible impact in all culture. Only through imaginative and poetic activism as pointed out by Gergen, (pp. 49) those conventional ideas that are felt obsolete could be removed from the usage. This process invariably takes much time factor. Creating a generative discourse paves way for such development or growth. To deal with discourse we have to understand discourse in a relatively discursive manner. Yes. Discourse is a tool for human to realize the self and to have an identity. My appearance and activities may create some impression about me in you. But only when you reveal the impact either with me or with others, then only I can see who I am and what I am. Thus the recourse to discourse becomes an essential tool of mirror in which one could see the self. I have specifically termed ‘human’ because our way of communicating with one another is different from other species. Geography and culture play pivotal roles in our social interactions. Unlike birds, which universally communicate among themselves in an identical manner, we the people use different languages. Different cultures lay different impacts on our communication patterns. Thus our discourse styles bring out various apprehensions, understandings and realization. Seed –bed of social construction: - In any country or culture in the name of civilization we necessarily tend to near the Truth. But it pragmatically leads us to scores of multi focus leaving a very thin ray of Truth’s essence. Social constructionist views are the best vehicles that make us travel in discursive manner. Thus the search for truth (…) has been at the foundation of social science from the start. (Burr, V 2001, pp.6). V.Burr has elegantly cited discursive psychologist Foucault, who brought out those ideas of ‘sexual perversions’, ‘unnatural practices’ and ‘sexual immorality’ became the possibility when positions of authority, either in state or in church took the role of inquisitors. V. Burr establishes that discourse as a channel of social constructionsim. He brings forth the psychologists like Foucault in his support as they do not deny the existence of a material world, the mere talk or representation of which amounts to discourse and subsequently leading to social construction. Stemming from the need theory of Abraham Maslow or even before, every scientist and psychologist emphasizes that self actualization and self realization are the culminating end of human life. In this process, language is one of the most important medium through which alone man can communicate to and interact with his fellow beings. Such interaction is an inevitable way of life whether one accepts it or not. Everybody needs a friend to share his thoughts, feelings and emotions. At least he needs an enemy to fight with. Are all languages full in accomplishing the ultimate goal of understanding to its fullest sense? It is really ambiguous. Even two people who speak the same language are prone to fall prey to misunderstandings and misconceptions. The obstacles in translation between two different languages need not be mentioned here. (Stevens. R, 2004, pp.240). To communicate ones feelings is really a difficult job. Languages just try to help human. Many a feelings get confused but seem to originate beyond the borders of conscious apprehension. Locked up feelings of intense power and violence are experienced only in dreams. (pp.22). Languages in the course of discourse: - Early interaction of infants with mother and father open flood gates to worldly information where from the process of discourse begin in human life. In the individualistic cultures of most western countries, the children’s self concepts typically revolve around defining themselves as distinct entities that must negotiate with and navigate through the group. (Stephen M. Kosslyn and Robin S. Rosenberg, 2001) Forrester M.A, (2001) reinforces this by his finding that the study of the development of the discursive self begins by examining the discourse genres of the self made available to the child, that is, versions of the self presupposed in the caregivers talk. (Forrester. M. A, 2001) . Man needs man in support. This quality is present in almost in every human being right from the childhood. The findings of Bennet Mark and Sani Fabio, suggest that group memberships are integral parts of children’s self-concepts. (Bennet Mark and Sani Fabio, 2008). A research conducted by (Carl Nils Johnsons, 2005) Carl Nils Johnsons showed that during the elementary school years children are acquiring a firm understanding of the brain as the primary locus of psychological attributes and identity. In understanding the speak track of parents infants showed much attention towards the synchronization of visual inputs. Language learning capability thus stems from and supported strongly by visual feedback. The findings of research conducted by George Hollich, Rochelle S. Newman, and Peter W. Jusczyk, in 2005 revealed that infants used synchronized visual–auditory correlations to separate a target speech stream when a distractor passage was presented at equal loudness. Infants succeeded in a segmentation task (using the head-turn preference procedure with video familiarization) when a video of the talkers face was synchronized with the target passage. (George Hollich, Rochelle S. Newman, and Peter W. Jusczyk, 2005) Self identity: - Self identity is something perceived by individuals in relation to others. To acquire and establish this identity everybody harness their own parameters thus making self identity perfectly individual. (Hagger Martin .S and Chatzisarantis Nikos L . D, 2006). Results of the research conducted by Hagger Martin .S and Chatzisarantis Nikos L . D, 2006, indicated that self-identity was significantly associated with the generalized self-related measures, and self-concept and social physique anxiety moderated the self-identity-intention relationship. This investigation provides some preliminary evidence to support the effect of individual differences in self-identity on the formation of intentions to act. Here the social physique anxiety forces individuals to engage themselves in discourses so that the participants find at least a single factor of commonness in them. This reminds us of the age old saying sailing in the same boat. Self identity from time immemorial was connected with the geographical fixation. Racial identities are the offspring of these geographical identities. The question ‘who are you?’ generally implies ‘where are you from?’. During interaction answering simply to the previous question does not give a satisfying answer. However if the answer is like ‘ I am from …’ the person asking the question gets satisfied and continues the conversation. Thus the place identity is the latent expectation of establishing ones identity. The value of this concept is that it attends to the located nature of subjectivity, challenging the disembodied notions of identity preferred by social psychologists.(Dixon .J and Durrheim .K, 2000) Imagination is the sibling of constructionism. Seymour Papert has aptly put: Building and playing with castles of sand, families of dolls, houses of Lego and collection of cards provide images of activities which are well routed in contemporary cultures and which enter into learning processes that go beyond specific narrow skills. Here ‘narrow skills’could well be assumed as the outcome of traditional instructionis model of teaching. (Seymour Papert & Idit Harel, 1991) In any culture, constructionism although accepted in hypothesis is more widely harnessed in arts rather than in other academic arena. This may perhaps be due to the main goal being ‘creativity’ in arts, unlike ‘instructiveness’ in others. While revealing her concern over the contemporary plight of educational institutions in growing countries like India, Professor Padma Venkataraman of Stella Maris College of Chennai, India, as cited by Vidya Venkat, said that performance of theatrical arts gave students a great confidence boost. She was happy that the students became good communicators as they learnt to use their body and voices well. Her strong hope that those skills of the students can help them in their professional lives too could not be undermined. (Vidya Venkat, 2008) Phases of social constructionism - Social constructionism is theoretical orientation which to a greater or lesser degree underpins all of the new approaches namely – critical psychology, discursive psychology, discourse analysis, deconstruction and post-structuralism – which are offering radical and critical alternatives in psychology and social psychology. Vivien Burr (2003) calls the approaches as alternatives in explaining the theoretical orientation.(Vivien Burr, 2003) But currently these approaches are gradually becoming the component entities of constructionism. Anti reductionism and anti realism are just critiques of constructionism. Constructonist theory suggests a strong connection between designing and learning, although these two fields are not closely related. Design theorists are interested in product and learning theorists focus mainly on the process and not the product. However, recently both the theories tend to move towards one another in accepting ‘construction of meaning’ as a core process. (Yasmin B. Kafai and Mitchel Resnick, 1996). Discursive perception towards social construction: - In medical arena: - In the field of medicine and health care social constructionism has been put into rigorous analysis and usage. It is subjected to various kinds of tests and research in which it is found that constructionism is useful for medical experts to explain their own stands in many aspects. R.Bury (2008) argues that constructionist propositions offer a bold attempt to resolve some of the problems in earlier formulations of the sociology of medical knowledge. He points out that although constructionism frequently rests on contradictory intellectual and value premises; both policy considerations and theoretical consistency require a critical appraisal of social constructionism and the future role of constructionism in medical sociology. (M.R.Bury, 2008) Social constructionism was an efficient and convenient tool for the study of a medical case in which transsexualism was chosen a subject of debate. Dave King has employed his style of analysis in furthering the debate between two groups one asserting that trans-sexualism was discovered while the other argued that it was invented. By establishing that the arguments of ‘invention’ side is also common to other medical area of knowledge and practice Dave prudently held that the legitimacy of transsexualism is just maintained by the ‘discovery’ side. (Dave King, 2008). Social constructionism is highly influential and counted as knowledge itself in family therapy. (Bebe Speed, 2008). Social constructionist perspectives are harnessed in their fullest sense in diverse fields of medical sociology. A pragmatic integration of ideas are being explored by medical professionals especially in dealing medical sociology. Rudi Dullos presented a case study illustrating how concepts and techniques influenced by social constructionism might further be integrated along with contemporary and pioneering ideas.(Rudi Dallos & Amy Urry, 2002). Restorative practices advanced from social constructionist approaches were found to yield fruitful results in reducing the exclusion rates at New Zealand schools. The philosophy of punishment and judgment that were dominating in many schools were found to occupy an ugly phase on restoring to restorative conferencing modes in the schools.(Wendy Drewery, 2004,) Argument of various scholars that sexual desire is socially constructed is clearly disproved by James Glles (2006) in his work wherein he cleverly puts forth the biological essentialist approach bringing forth the awareness of human about the gender of the self and of others that has nothing to do with social constructionism in the issue of sexual desire.(James Gilles, 2006) In social understanding: - The nature of social constructionism being multifarious, it is highly useful in analyzing the complexities of gender and sexuality. Each social constructionist approach offers particular strengths in arriving at sociological assertion of gender and sexuality.(Chris Brickell, 2006) In facing environmental problems: - In case of environmental problems, social constructionist approach is imminently criticized on the ground that such approach detracts the severity of environmental problems thereby the importance of getting alleviated from the disaster is undermined or diluted. But this is attempted to be resolved by Kate Burningham (2008) in his paper on Sociological Review, wherein he asserts that a social constructionist approach alone would be apt to address an environmental problem, since the approach itself under criticism has the possibility of leading to resolution. (Kate Burningham, 2008) CONCLUSION: A discursive approach of social constructionism deals with various aspects in many different manners. A thing perceived by one is quite different from other, which in no way rejected by society as a whole. As such accepting everybody’s views and notions with their own limitations have become the way of our life style. This forms a society encompassing the ideas, feelings, views and emotions of every group in their boundaries. Even cross boundary conflicts are thus accepted to certain limits in way of allowing individualism. Discourse in all countries is thus a channel of linking with one another to make a big single construct. Understanding the self is a basic need for such interaction. If the self is attained and understood completely the need for discourse itself becomes feeble. In effect discourse is a handsome tool in social construct which some times becomes ineffective in the hands of operators due to their lack of interest. We all are here to live. Being social animals, we are to evolve certain norms. Sociology and social constructionism are the area we must cross through. Of this social constructionism is an elegant and vibrant tool that imparts scores of solutions to many of the problems we face. It is a theory that accepts as much criticism as could and still be vibrant, since the deviation hypothesis is the back bone of this theory. Deviation hypothesis provide a way out from rigidity and offers a flexibility to constructionism that makes it ever young. Gergen’s assertion of social construction as a bold invitation to build new futures is upheld because of this flexible quality of the concept that accommodates any rough and rigid ideas to get smoothened. = end= Reference list – Bebe Speed, 2008, “Reality exists O.K? An argument against constructivism and social constructionism”, Journal of Family Therapy, Vol. 13(4). 395-409, the Association of family Therapy and Systematic Practice Bennet Mark and Sani Fabio, 2008, “Children’s subjective identification with social groups: A group-reference effect approach”, british Journal of Developmental Psychology,Vol. 26, Number 3, 381-387 Burr. V, 2003, “Social Constructionism’, 2nd edition, Routledge, London. Carl Nils Johnsons, 2005, “If you have my brain, where would I be?: Children’s understanding of the brain and identity, Wiley Journal of Research in Child Development, Vol.61, issue 4, 962-972 Chris Brickell, 2006, “The sociological construction of gender and sexuality”, Sociological Reviwe, Vol. 54(1). 87-113 Dave King, 2008, “Social constructionism and medical knowledge: the case of transsexualism”, Sociology of health and Illness, Vol.9(4). 351-377, Blackwell Publishing Dixon .J and Durrheim .K, 2000, “Displacing place – identity: A discursive approach to locating self and other”, British Journal of Social Psychology, Vol.39, Number 1, 27-44(18) Forrester, M.A, 2001, “The embedding of the self in early interaction, Infant and Child Development, 10(4), 189-202 George Hollich, Rochelle S. Newman, and Peter W. Jusczyk, 2005, “Infants Use of Synchronized Visual Information to Separate Streams of Speech”, Wiley Journal of Child Development, Vol.76, Issue 3, 598-613 Hagger Martin .S and Chatzisarantis Nikos L . D, 2006, “Self-identity and theory of planned behavior: between- and within- participants analyses”, british Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 45, issue 4, 731-757 James Gilles, 2006, “Social Constructionism and sexual desire”, Journal for the theory of social behavior, Vol. 36(3). 225-238 James A. Holestein and Gale Miller, 2006, “Reconstructing Social Constructionism”, pp. 9, Aldine Transactions Kate Burningham, 2008, “A noisy road or noisy resident?: A demonstration of the utility of social constructionism for analyzing environmental problems”, Sociological Review, Vol. 46(3). 536-563 M.R.Bury, 2008, “Social constructionism and development of medical sociology”, Sociology of health and Illness, Vol.8(2). 137-169, Blackwell Publishing Rudi Dallos & Amy Urry, 2002, “Abandoning our parents and grandparents:does social construction mean the end of systemic family therapy?”Journal of Family Therapy, Vol. 21(2). 161-186 Seymour Papert & Idit Harel, 1991, “Situating Constructionism”, Alpex Publishing corporation. Stephen M. Kosslyn and Robin S. Rosenberg, 2001, pp.408, “Psychology: the brain, the person, the world”, Allyn and Bacon, London Stevens, R. (Ed), 2004, “Understanding the Self”, SAGE, ISBN 9780761950394 Vidya Venkat, 2008, learning to be creative”, An article on arts in HINDU, the Daily of India dated 08.12.2008 under Education Plus Vivien Burr, 2003, “Social Constructionism”, pp. 1, II Ed, Routledge Wendy Drewery, 2004, “Conferencing in schools:punishment, restorative justice and the productive importance of the process of conversation”, Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 14(5). 332-344, John Wiley and Sons Yasmin B. Kafai and Mitchel Resnick, 1996, “Constructionism in Practice”, pp.4, Lawrence Elburn Associates Read More