Compare and Contrast Goffman's and Foucaults Explanation of How Social Order Is Made and Remade In: Social Issues
Compare and Contrast Goffman's and Foucaults Explanation of How Social Order Is Made and Remade Introduction
* Whose theories of social order I will be using as the focus of my assignment. (Goffman and Foucault) Main Content
* Goffmans views on what constitutes social order being made and remade through individuals, and how Mondermans’ Thesis relates to how Goffman views social order. * Foucaults’ views on what constitutes social order being made and remade through institutions and how Buchanans’ report relates to how Foucault views social order. * The differences and similarities with Goffman and Foucaults findings. Summary
* Summarise what both theorists have said regarding social order and what I understand about these findings. There are many ways in which social order is produced and maintained. Social scientists are interested in a broader view of society, they look at what leads to problems and the things that need some sort of solution creating to improve them (Reflections on Ordered Lives); I am going to describe how social order is made by using the explanations of Michael Foucault and Erving Goffman, who are social scientists that have attempted to explain how social order is created and where it has come from, I will also be discussing how their views both differ in their approach and how they are similar. I am beginning with Goffmans’ explanations, from the detailed studies he undertook working within the framework of the functions of rituals and order in everyday life; he has tried to show ways in which societies are ordered through multiple performances in contexts such as everyday interactions and where orderliness of encounters come from. He sees social order as being built through the process of building social interactions, which lead to the ordering of social life. His approach is an analytical one of interaction order such as social situations this perspective he has adopted is an analogy of the everyday life and the theatrical, with the theatrical being how individuals display and perform according to the requirements of situations and their roles in it using posture, and body and eye movements. These performances are aimed toward communicating a positive impression, he proposes that in order to understand society we need to understand the way individuals’ actions and interactions are organised (Goffman cited by Silva, 2009, p318-319). Goffman explains disorder in society as something being broken or breached and this is something that gets repaired in the flow of interactional order by people in society. He believes that when order becomes broken or disrupted people generally manage to negotiate between themselves to restore it which would lead to people performing differently and new forms of coordination becoming ways to keep order based on new rules and practices that continually arise (Learning Companion 2). Such as the way we use our vehicles on the road, it requires social coordination that configures a particular way of ordering behaviour and interaction but one that people are often not aware of (Online Activity 23). For example the way we negotiate driving without thinking, like when we stop to let people out, how we acknowledge someone who has done this, or how we flash our lights to let another driver know something is wrong, these are not set laws but it is something that a lot of motorists have adapted when driving which is known as road etiquette (www.squidoo.com). When studying Mondermans Thesis I have found some of his findings to be similar to Goffmans for example his thesis shows that the best way for pedestrians and vehicles to work best together is to remove roadside markings and warnings, which he has called ‘psychological traffic calming’ the aim of this being pedestrians and motorists to negotiate the use of the road. Like Goffman he feels that this would be more...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document