Social constructionism: sources and stirrings in theory and practice

Citation

Sayers, J. (2010), "Social constructionism: sources and stirrings in theory and practice", Gender in Management, Vol. 25 No. 8, pp. 700-702. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542411011092345

“Social constructionism: sources and stirrings in theory and practice” is now a dog‐eared and coffee‐stained book after spending a month or so in my possession as I have reviewed it. It took me a while to summon up the courage I have to say. A quick review of the Table of Contents told me I was going to be for some heavy reading: whole chapters on Vico, Wittgenstein, and Foucault. Other writers and philosophers covered include: Husserl, Schutz, Heidegger, Merleau‐Ponty, Gadamer, Ricouer, Habermas, Levinas, Bakhtin, Volosinov, Vygotsky, Mead, von Uexküll, Bateson, Garfinkel, Goffman, Giddens, Charles Taylor, Elias, Hallowell, Labov, and then to finish off with the contemporary thinkers – the Gergens (Ken and Mary), Rom Harré, and John Shotter who is clearly the inspiration and major influence on both authors. Rather daunting stuff, but as in exercise, if it does not hurt, you will not get fitter. Consequently, I girded my mental faculties, and plunged on in.

The cover is attractive and intriguing; a head in a room with no roof, in a city, with scaffolding all around it and lots of construction workers doing stuff around and on it (the head). The authors are both well‐known professors of psychology at Massey University (in New Zealand) and the University of Calgary (in Canada). Kenneth Gergen and John Shotter have both thoroughly and unreservedly endorsed the book on the back cover. One author (Lock) sees himself more as a classic academic and the other author (Strong) as a practitioner, and so although the book features theory, it is theory written for practitioners, and also functions as a reminder to theoreticians about what happens to their ideas. It always pays to remind oneself that (as Richard Weaver has said) “Ideas have consequences”. At many times during the book, either one author or the other introduces a personal anecdote or example that one can imagine being raised in class to illustrate a point to perplexed students. Consequently, the book reads like two very learned yet pragmatic professors trying really hard to explain to a group of naïve instrumentally oriented students why theory matters. The sub‐title of the book, Sources and Stirrings signals its intentions: to introduce the major philosophical roots of current thinking, and to recognise the ferment post‐structural thought is providing in the social sciences, and to stir things up a bit to promote critical thinking and better science.

Why write the book? The rationale for the book is very clearly laid out, and compelling. Mainstream behavioural scientists pretty much dominate thinking and pedagogy in a variety of the human and social sciences, and the authors question the veracity of claims to science that preface understanding of meaning, so central to social science and especially the “helping professions”. As this knowledge is becoming firmly sedimented into the human sciences through various so‐called “quality” and auditing processes, challenging the pre‐conceptions of science so that it is in fact science is crucial. The authors contend that if what constitutes approved education is wrong‐headed, then the problems of the discipline are “falsely posed”. This is not a problem that faces the therapeutic professions alone, but is also a key problem for the development of management and organisational studies, or business studies, as a discipline and so is of central importance to the readership of this journal.

Like many management academics, my post‐structuralism is self‐taught and consequently somewhat patchy. I constantly feel like I might not be quite connecting the dots despite a background in the humanities and then sociology. In later years, I have become more interested in discourse, through Foucault, not surprisingly. Reading the book is like taking the course I always wished I had taken if it had been available (which it was not) when I was learning my academic trade. The book begins by outlining its rationale and then begins with the flow‐of‐consciousness writing style which characterises each chapter. The story starts with Vico, a philosopher of the pre‐modern era. In featuring this writer so early, the authors draw attention to the problems and challenges of the modern era that have arisen as an outcome of the application of narrow conceptions of the modern scientific method: compartmentalisation of the mind away from the body, emotions, other individuals, and communities; “I think therefore I am”. The book then discusses the phenomenologists, beginning the chapter with a lovely poem by Rainer Maria Rilke expressing beautifully the connection between the internal spirit and the ineffable universe. Husserl, Heidegger, and Merleau‐Ponty, and Schutz are all covered in this chapter. Chapter 4 covers hermeneutics: from early Greek and Roman philosophy, to later German scholarship. Heidegger, Gadamer, Ricouer, Habermas, and Levinas are all discussed and central threads in their thought highlighted in terms of the themes of the book. Chapter 5 looks specifically at the “Bakhtin Circle”. Vygotsky is given an entire chapter to himself, because he is relevant and popular amongst educators and increasingly being taken up by therapists and counsellors. A chapter is then devoted to meaning, and the focus is given over to George Herbert Mead and Jakob von Uexküll. This is one of the most initially engaging chapters in my opinion, with many interesting and catchy anecdotes used to explain points of theory. I find Wittgenstein (covered in Chapter 8) hard work, I admit it, but the discussion on Wittgenstein made him almost comprehensible to me, on my first read through! I am sure that with further concentration and repeated readings, I will understand even more. The next chapters bring the commentary very distinctly into issues of relevance to contemporary society: Bateson on a cybernetic view of communication and human interaction; the micro and macro sociologies of the three G's – Garfinkel, Goffman, and Giddens; and then a really interesting integrative chapter which discusses all the themes that have come before it under the heading of sources of self and the sub‐headings of the role of technology and urbanisation discourses, the construction of moral selves (Taylor), civility (Elias), and a few other issues like privacy, leisure and individuality. Foucault gets his own chapter, and how could not he? Critical discourse analysis is also covered well in the next chapter. And then the book finishes with chapters devoted to the main inspirational motivations behind the authors: Ken and Mary Gergen; Rom Harré; and John Shotter.

You can see from this brief descriptive overview of what is covered that a lifetime of learning is reflected in the pages of the book and such coverage can only make the book's insights deep, wide, and profound. I cannot sum them up. They are unsumupable. The book can be read over several days, but I suggest a reader takes a relaxed approach and enjoys the ride. I advise having the book nearby for grazing and slow thoughtful rumination, in concert with practice, as the content relates to the real world of trying to improve the theoretical underpinning of pedagogy and practice.

In such a work, there are of course omissions. The material and economic contexts were not emphasised quite enough for my liking, and perspectives from feminists were under‐represented, but these seem churlish criticisms of a book that explains its historiography so well, and explicates the central ideas of these major thinkers so eruditely. The book is a valuable addition to a bookshelf and I expect yours will become dog eared and coffee stained like my own. I hope the publishers do not want it back, because they are not having it.