Symbolic interaction emphasizes the constructed and negotiated aspect of self and social life. As a result it draws attention away from analyses of the structural and institutional features of society. How can some of the key concept (there are at least 10, work with 5) in this framework be used to explore stratification systems and relations of domination and the subordination they sustain.
Stratification is based upon the arrangement of groups in social hierarchy which can remain over generations due to the presence of inequality. It includes division of groups according to the caste system, on the basis of gender or various other symbols. Status differences are used through the difference in symbols among people. Goffman has enlisted several symbols such as speech, gestures, clothing, friends, possessions and activities as a symbol of socioeconomic status in societies. An important key concept is based upon gender differences in our societies and are related to the masculinity and femininity of any person. People interact with male members logical, whereas female members by using emotional symbols. Similarly, a doctor occupies certain status in society which cannot be challenged with the status of nurse or a clerk. There are certain cases which include people into the master class like that of community leaders. Goffman tells about stigmas possessed in each person which create the prestige of a person in front of others. An ugly face can be a stigma as such persons do not hold respectable place among coworkers. Homosexuality on the other hand has different place in different countries; it is allowed in the west but strictly prohibited in east. According to Goffman, a stigma is a source to spoil identities (Appelrouth, Edles 2012).
Symbolic interaction gives us a way to empirically analyze the self. How can you observe and scientifically analyze the operation of feeling rules. Why this method often called an “interpretation of an interpretation?
The scientific analysis of operating feelings can be observed through various expression vehicles. The most important tool is face which connect social attributes though the surety of their expressions are not necessarily approved or expected. Face creates all sources of assumptions and is displayed so others may see and get the message delivered. The image presented comes with emotions and feelings as well in order to enact positive or negative feelings by the actor apart from the encountering effect. If the encounter reaches positively, actor receives good feelings otherwise bad. Emotions and feelings give away a spontaneous subconscious result of the feelings. After entering encounters, an actor is bound by a commitment with respect to his facial expressions towards others. All of these features, expressions and other attributes construct set of permanent attributes. On the same time, an actor has to be cautious about the rules of a gathering according to a situation so his images or face is views by others accordingly. Then next is the maintenance part of a face which stays consistent if the feelings are coming internally. The important point is that internal feelings cannot be forced but they arise due to personal judgements about the surrounding people. The facial expression maintenance depends majorly upon the views and perception of others according to the flow of events according to the initial actions of the actor. The orientation of these events are strongly praxis depending upon social interaction. All of these actions of an actor have a limit with respect to order of all actions. Every possibility has a range and points of flexibility based upon aspects of the encounters as well. Hence, the symbolic interaction analyze interactions empirically. Each act is scientifically connected according to the feeling rules. Altogether it makes the process as an interpretation of an interpretation (Appelrouth, Edles 2012)
A common theme in Goffman’s work is the notion that impression management is shaped by strategic and moral concerns. What is the context by which social behavior might be more guided by strategic rather than moral concerns?
Goffman refers impression management to be the art of manipulating our impressions on the front stage upon others for which we use several sign vehicles to deliver our messages. These vehicles include appearance, social setting and manner of interactions dealt strategically. Several pointers make or break the social impression on other people and hence the vehicle tools mentioned above can be used to work out a strategic way as compare to the moral concerns in several situations. The social setting through which we interact tells a lot about us. Hence, the concept of dramaturgy applies in both impression management and dealings of social behavior in society. It all depends on the way we play our roles on the front stage which should be different from the back stage. He has said that social behavior is also a sign of vehicle and is dependent upon attitudes which personify our impressions upon others. Goffman has stated one of the best way to deliver attitudes is without using spoken words, through non-verbal communications. Such communications comprise three pointers. First is through gestures while meeting people for the first time. For instance when a person extends his hand to shake, it is a welcoming sign to interact, if the other person does not responds equally, it is an insult for the first person. Similarly, a firm shake hand shows confidence, whereas a crushing handshake claims domination. Second is through facial expressions. A smile, narrowed eyes, raised eyebrows, frown and many other such expressions give a perfect visible facial expression. Third is body language which shows a conscious or unconscious way of communication. It gives a clear picture of person’s feelings than words do in some situations (Appelrouth, Edles 2012).
Compare and contrast critical theories/the Frankfurt school (Chapter 10) and post structuralism of Foucault paying attention to themes of rationality, power and standardization.
While considering the Critical theory, there are two notions in rationality, first is related to power and lacking normative force; second is related to liberating force based upon yet to come situation. Difference in rationality resulted into mutatis mutandis by Habermas. The theory is related to interest according to true or false type. Foucault on the other hand considers power as the main focus of work. It is the relationship which affects others actions and is affected by violence or force. It includes doing something freely or through force. It does not have stability due to monopoly over powers. Foucault further discussed discipline because it maintains standardization (Appelrouth, Edles 2012).
Discuss Foucault’s genealogy of punishment. To what extent do you think that Foucault’s notion of a disciplinary society ring true today. Using concrete examples discuss the effect of surveillance in your own life and contemporary society as a whole.
Foucault’s genealogy of punishment was borrowed from Nietzche’s Genealogy of Morals. A genealogy disclosed the break points within a discourse in order to focus on specific situations. It explains that not all modern ideas are true and are results of power. The genealogy tends to allow people stuck by systems of such sort toward speaking. Its aim is to allow the modern prisoners chance to speak. This genealogy is same as Foucault’s Archaeological idea towards discontinuity from the order of things. In order to maintain standardization, discipline is the strongest tool to control populations their movements. Another basic unit is of discourse, holding the possibility of chance in some particular field. The best example here is that of a prison. Foucault’s notion of disciplinary society rules today as the modern system of prisons even allow all criminals to speak for their right. The court allows every minute to extreme case’ culprits to speak to defend themselves, just like the genealogy. The right to speak to defend oneself is very helpful in our societies as it allows an unjust hearing or crime call towards justice. The right to raise voice helps in many unjust and unfair criminal cases (Appelrouth, Edles 2012).
Work Cited
Appelrouth, Scott, and Laura Desfor. Edles. Classical and Contemporary Sociological Theory: Text and Readings. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge, 2012. Print.
