Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 41:3
The Meaning of Meaning in Sociology. The
Achievements and Shortcomings of Alfred
Schutz’s Phenomenological Sociology
Theories of social action such as rational choice theories (Abell 2000; Coleman 1990; Elster 1989 and 2007), Weber (1922) and early Parsons (1937) usually build on a conception of an individual actor who is capable to order his or her goals in the order of preference and act accordingly. Moreover, the actor is usually interpreted as being transparent to him or herself in the sense that there are no rejected motives or unanalysed habits directing the actor’s behaviour. Such a point of departure has been called “cognitivist” (Bourdieu 1980). The cognitivist bias inherent in many action theoretical frames of reference has triggered the criticism that a more realistic frame would take culture or the social totality as its basic concept and analyse actors as something embedded in their cultural environment. (Functionalist variants of such criticism include Durkheim 1912 and late Parsons from Parsons 1951 onwards; for structuralist variants see Lévi-Strauss 1958; Barthes 1964 and Greimas 1966). However, the drawback included in these alternative analytical frames is that the concept of action is replaced by the concept of structure, which covers up many socially relevant action-theoretical problems.
With phenomenological sociology, however, we can eat the cake and also have it. This is so because phenomenological sociology has an individual mind as its point of departure, it deals with problems characteristic to action theory, it pays great deal of attention to those cultural maps and schemes which deﬁne the environment of action to the actor, and it does not understand culture as a uniform code subordinating the subjects but emphasises instead cultural variation between the actors. This paper discusses phenomenological sociology from such an angle. The basic question is: Is the attempt to integrate action theory and cultural analysis in phenomenological sociology successful? The answer given here is an afﬁrmative one. A further question asks whether the phenomenological © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
synthesis is able to relieve social theory of the cognitivist bias characteristic of action theory. It turns out that here the efforts of phenomenological sociologists have been less successful, even if some progress has been made. The remaining problems have to do with the basic concepts of the phenomenological approach and especially the phenomenological deﬁnition of meaning. It is recommended therefore, that the phenomenological frame should be supplemented with such alternative analytical frames as pragmatism, neostructuralism, approaches based on Bourdieu’s work or the recent current called the “practice turn” which can be interpreted as complementary to it.
The paper opens with two sections on Alfred Schutz, the founding father of phenomenological sociology. First of these deals with Schutz’s great invention, i.e., the synthesis of phenomenological philosophy and Weber’s sociological action theory. After presenting the conceptual frame of phenomenological sociology the paper moves on to the second section on Schutz the topic of which is the dilemma of phenomenological analysis of meaning. This is followed by a section on Garﬁnkel’s ethnomethodology and social constructionism by Berger & Luckmann. In this section, it is shown that they too are captured in the trap of the phenomenological dilemma. The concluding section states why there is a reason to pay attention to such abstract issues and discusses the problems of Giddens’ structuration theory as an elaboration of those problems which emerge when due attention is not given to the attempt to solve the problem of cognitivist bias.
THE FOUNDATIONS OF PHENOMENOLOGICAL SOCIOLOGY:
References: Abell, P. 2000. Sociological Theory and Rational Choice Theory. In B.S Turner (ed) The
Blackwell Companion to Social Theory
Baert, P. 1998. Social Theory in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Barthes, R. 1964. Elements of Semiology. New York: Hill and Wang, 1994.
Berger, P. & Luckmann, T. 1966. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology
Bourdieu, P. 1977. Outline of the Theory of Practice, trans. Richard Niece. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Bourdieu, P. 1980. The Logic of Practice, trans. Richard Nice. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press, 1990.
Bourdieu, P. 2000. Pascalian Meditations, trans. Richard Niece. Cambridge: Polity.
Coleman, J. 1990. Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard
Durkheim, É. 1912. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, transl. Joseph Ward Swain. New
York: Collier Books, 1961.
Elster, J. 1989. Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Elster, J. 2007. Explaining Social Behavior. More Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Frank, M. 1984. What is Neostructuralism? trans. Sabine Wilke Gray, foreword by Martin
Garfinkel, H. 1967. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1984.
Giddens, A. 1976. New Rules of Sociological Method. A Positive Critique of Interpretative Sociologies.
Giddens, A. 1984. The Constitution of Society. Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Berkeley and
Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Giddens, A. 1994a. Beyond Left and Right: The Future of Radical Politics. Cambridge: Polity
Giddens, A. 1994b. Living in a Post-Traditional Society. In U. Beck, A. Giddens and
Greimas, A. J. 1966. Structural Semantics: An Attempt at a Method, transl. Daniele McDowell,
Ronald Schleifer, and Alan Velie; introd
Nebraska Press, 1983.
Gronow, A. 2008. Not by Rules or Choice Alone: A Pragmatist Critique of Institution Theories in Economics and Sociology. Journal of Institutional Economics 4(4), 351–
Heiskala, R. 1999. From Goffman to Semiotic Sociology. Semiotica 123(3/4), 211–234.
Heiskala, R. 2001. Theorizing power: Weber, Parsons, Foucault and neostructuralism.
Heiskala, R. 2003. Society as Semiosis. Neostructuralist Theory of Culture and Society. Frankfurt am
Main and New York: Peter Lang.
Heiskala, R. 2007. Economy and Society. From Parsons through Habermas to Semiotic
Heritage, J. 1984. Garﬁnkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hilbert, R. A. 1992. The Classical Roots of Ethnomethodolgy: Durkheim, Weber, and Garﬁnkel.
Husserl, E. 1913. Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie. Halle
Husserl, E. 1900–21. Logical Investigations. Vol. 1 and 2. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul,
Husserl, E. 1931. Cartesian Meditations. An Introduction to Phenomenology. The Hague, Boston,
London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1982.
Joas, H. 1985. G.H. Mead. A Contemporary Re-examination of his Thought. Cambridge: Polity
Joas, H. 1996. The Creativity of Action. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Joas, H. 2000. The Genesis of Values. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Kant, I. 1787. Critique of Pure Reason, ed. and trans. By Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Kassler, D. 1979. Max Weber. An Introduction to His Life and Work. Cambridge: Polity Press,
Kilpinen, E. 1999. What is Rationality? A New Reading of Veblen’s Critique of
Kilpinen, E. 2000. The Enormous Fly-Wheel of Society. Pragmatism’s Habitual Conception of Action
and Social Theory
Kilpinen, E. 2002. A Neglected Classic Vindicated: The place of George Herbert Mead in
the general tradition of semiotics
Kilpinen, E. 2004. How to Fight the “ Methodenstreit”? Veblen and Weber on Economics, Psychology and Action. International Review of Sociology 14(3), 413–432.
Levi-Strauss, C. 1958. Structural Anthropology, transl. Claire Jacobson and Brooke Grundfest
Schoepf. New York: Basic Books, 1963.
Mead, G. H. 1934. Mind, Self, and Society. From the Standpoint of Social Behaviorist. Chicago and
London: The University of Chicago Press.
Niiniluoto, I. 1999. Critical Scientiﬁc Realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. 1995 The Knowledge Creating Company. New York, Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Parsons, T. 1937. The Structure of Social Action. A Study in Social Theory with Special Reference to
a Group of Recent European Writers
& Collier Macmillan Publishers, 1968.
Parsons, T. 1951. The Social System. New York: The Free Press.
Peirce, C. S. 1931–58. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. 8 volumes, (eds) Charles
Hartshorne, Paul Weiss, and A.W
Pleasants, N. 1996. Nothing is Concealed: De-centring Tacit Knowledge and Rules from
Please join StudyMode to read the full document