2008•Sociologisk ForskningOpen access

Motståndets betydelse

Elin Lundin

Open full text 1 citations

Abstract

The significance of inhibition: a contribution to the agency-structure debateA central problem in social theory today is how to integrate agency and structure. The vital question is how to explain social reality by proceeding from both the notion of people doing things which affect the social relationships in which they are embedded (agency) and the idea of the social context moulding social activity (structure). Sociologists as Pierre Bourdieu, Anthony Giddens and Jürgen Habermas call attention to social practices as the ”missing link” between agency and structure. In accentuating social practices, the aim is to explain how people in their daily encounters actively contribute to the production and reproduction of social structures. This article puts forth the posthumous contribution of George Herbert Mead to the agency-structure debate. I argue that his social pragmatist theory gives us a compound and thorough– but not fully recognized – explanation of the dynamics and the course of events in structurally framed encounters. By especially emphasizing the importance Mead ascribes to the inhibited social act, I examine how his theory deepens the understanding of social practices as a bridge between agency and structure.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The significance of inhibition: a contribution to the agency-structure debateA central problem in social theory today is how to integrate agency and structure. The vital question is how to explain social reality by proceeding from both the notion of people doing things which affect the social relationships in which they are embedded (agency) and the idea of the social context moulding social activity (structure). Sociologists as Pierre Bourdieu, Anthony Giddens and Jürgen Habermas call attention to social practices as the ”missing link” between agency and structure. In accentuating social practices, the aim is to explain how people in their daily encounters actively contribute to the production and reproduction of social structures. This article puts forth the posthumous contribution of George Herbert Mead to the agency-structure debate. I argue that his social pragmatist theory gives us a compound and thorough– but not fully recognized – explanation of the dynamics and the course of events in structurally framed encounters. By especially emphasizing the importance Mead ascribes to the inhibited social act, I examine how his theory deepens the understanding of social practices as a bridge between agency and structure.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The significance of inhibition: a contribution to the agency-structure debateA central problem in social theory today is how to integrate agency and structure. The vital question is how to explain social reality by proceeding from both the notion of people doing things which affect the social relationships in which they are embedded (agency) and the idea of the social context moulding social activity (structure). Sociologists as Pierre Bourdieu, Anthony Giddens and Jürgen Habermas call attention to social practices as the ”missing link” between agency and structure. In accentuating social practices, the aim is to explain how people in their daily encounters actively contribute to the production and reproduction of social structures. This article puts forth the posthumous contribution of George Herbert Mead to the agency-structure debate. I argue that his social pragmatist theory gives us a compound and thorough– but not fully recognized – explanation of the dynamics and the course of events in structurally framed encounters. By especially emphasizing the importance Mead ascribes to the inhibited social act, I examine how his theory deepens the understanding of social practices as a bridge between agency and structure.

Key concepts: Structure and agency, Agency (philosophy), Sociology, Social structure, Epistemology, Context (archaeology), Bridge (graph theory), Pragmatism

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Motståndets betydelse — Research Paper | ScholarLens