48. Cental Problems in Social Theory evelopment of these contributions, however and he secompish- iment ofthe tsk of integrating somioie tie more closely with ther areas of social theory, demands abandoning most nate ‘oppesitons that have been taken over fom Snissre: those Iangueparole synchrony sachtony nd signtiersged.addis- «ardingthe conception of the arbitrary charnte ofthese, Inthe Place, We may expect to develop theory of axes and feos Peodcton, proud in broader theory of skal practice, and reconnected to hermencits, 2 Agency, Structure “The priipal se with which [sbll be concerned ia this paperis the of connecting notion ofiuman action with structralexplan tion in socal analysis. The making of such a connection, I shal rue, demands the following: theory ofthe human agent, o of the subject, an account of the conditions sod consequences of ‘ction; and a fterpetation of steetare’ as somehow embroiled {in both thowe conditions and consequence” “Thearisofaclon versus lnatettonaltheotios ‘Acton and ‘structure’ normally appear in both the sociologist 4nd philosophical literatures antinomis. Broadly speaking, i ‘would be tue to uy that thor cols of thought which have bez preoccupied with ston havo paid tle attention to, ar have Found bho say of coping with, coneptions of stuctaral explanation oF octal causation, they have alo fled t relate action theory £0 frablems of intational transformation. This is most obviously {tue of the Anglo-Saxon philosophy of ction, Both ints Witgens: ‘inion form and i versions es directly influenced by Witpens- tein. Notwithstanding the great interest of Wittgenstein’ Iter Dhilsopty forthe socal slencesin respect ofthe relations betwoen guage an Praxis, we apy come up againsitslimitsin respect, ofthe theoristion of Instat, Itations certainly appeae in Witigenstlnian philosophy, and in @rtherfondareatl way. For ‘the transition frogs the kee of the earlier Wittgenstein to the ter fe effectively one from nature to wets: language and social convention are shown in the Philrophical Investigations to be0 Conal Problems i Social Theory inextricably intertind,so that to explete oc to expat the ther. Bot as expressed in forms of fie, insti are analysed ‘only in so far a6 they fost a consensus backdsop apatinet which ation is negotiated and is meanings formed. Wittgestinian philosophy has aot led towards any rt af sonceen wih cil shange, with power relations, or with confit in society. Other strands in the philosophy of action have operated a even farther Sistance from such ses, Focusing attention slmontexchvely "upon the nature of ressne intents san tv ‘Within more orthodox socal! trations, symbolic interac tionism has placed most emphasis upon regarding soeisl Me as an setive accomplishment of purponive, knowledgeable actors nd it Ins also een associated witha definite "theory ofthe subject ay formulated in Mead's acount of the octal rigins of reflexive ‘consciousness. But the “sei” in Meads formalstion i nied Yo Tamia gutes andthe ‘generated ther’ Mead did ot elaborate conception of a eiffeentiatedwsiely, nor any interpretation of Social ansformation. Much the sume fe the ce withthe slse- ‘quent evolution ofthis tradion, which has net sascessflly = ‘eloped modes of institutional analysis. One ofthe eats as been {part accommodation betwces symbotie itersetonism and functionalism in American sociology the former held to be a “micro-sciology”. dealing with small-scale “interpernonal los tions, while mote embracing ‘macrosocalogica task ae Rt 60 thelater. "Functonalism and strcturatism se alike in acoording priority to the object ever the subject in some sense to siactre ove ction. Functional ators have normally thowght of hie a teas ‘of ‘emergent properties’ of th totality, which nt only separate ‘haraceistes fom these of snail members, but cause ‘exert a dominant influence aver thei conduct. The silts Durktvim experienced with this notion, in 30 far as hs writing, fre regarded om the point of lew of thet connections with funtion, rather am with stuturalism, are well known, Durkheim wished to emphasise thatthe characteristics of thesocal whole are separate trom those of indvial agents, and accented ‘arous senses in which ‘wcletyfs external to its indival mem bers: every person is born into an aren constitute soc, nd ‘every person is only one indivdhal in a sytem of soclation involving many others. Bat neither nhs easier writings norin his Agency, Siucue 51 later works id Durkheim manage to conceptualise the extemal or ‘jective character of sucety in a plaibe fasion, Durkheim's ‘urler poston ie exemplified in The Ruler of Sociological Method, Sd anciated externality with contain. Two etors can Beds emed in this standpoint, It was 8 mistake to understand socal constant ss simie to phys constant, anit was a mistake ‘cpa coastrant at allie a eiteron of thes0ca othe ins ‘ona Taken together, these led toa conception f subject and ‘hject which ven Durkicim had to adit as seriou dices. ‘Soviely becomes a Kind of inhibiting enironmeat ia whi actors ove ai hh mass presence Fe teh he reser effects which conition their condoct. The analogies to wh ‘Seuhal spened i odo Msouc the enteral pow of sta facts in i ear work are clearly decent He sometimes ompaed the properties of society, 38 contrasted wit those ofits embers, tothe combination of elements in naure Theassocatan ‘tonygen and hydrogen to form water creates properties which are hot those of x comtitucntclemonts, or derivate ren them the ‘ine Holds tre ofthe relation between sacely and x constituent core.” Bul such an analogy only works for those very types of perspective Durkicim set ott to crite, sch ae attra ‘iui If individual 2 fully formed socal beings, tte to fete to erste ew sci properties bythe fet of their scl ton a i contract theories of Society, the analogy might Bl; 9 support Durkheim's ease it does not Sateen Buti canes may nln oni, sessing the moral nature of social fets, ond thereby separa Pins constaint om the sorts of prsres exerted by sky {ver its members. I this Tater Durkheim’ = stho recognised that ‘moral phenomena are both positively motivating as well a con Staining in his orginal sense who was the main inspiration for Parsons, Parson's “ation frame of reference’ Is much mee f= ‘ehted to Durkheim than t the others whose work he elaimed 40 have sythested in The Siacieof Stal Action * Parsons under~ stands ation in elation to what cls "vohuntar’, ad hae “ought to reconcile the latter with recognition of the “emergent properties" of well systems, The reconaition achieved through the influence of normative values on tw Teves a elements of personality and as core component of soe, As internals in pertonaliy, valves prove the motives or need-dipesitions which52 Cental Probleme in Socal Theory limp the conduct of the actor; while om the lve of the social ‘stem, as institutiontied norms sahies form amoral coment "hat scives to imate the totality, “Voluntarism here thas be- ‘comes largely reduced to making space in soil theory fora ‘sccount of motivation. conneced vinnormsto te characteristics soxlal systems, The edict of actors in society is este a the ‘etcome ofa conjunetion of soil and pascal determinant In which the former dominate the ater through the hey inne !uuibued to normative clement. This effectively eachdes certain stele componentstthe tiny ton asa emcee The ontmony T have just sketched ako figures prominatty ia “Marxist phionophics. In some part this traceable tothe anbigo- ‘ous content of Marn’s own wating. The Hegelin inheritance in Marx, with ts connotation of setive consciousness andthe coming foisll of the subject im history. mingles uneasily and in an ‘enrsotved way in Marts works witha allegiance va determinis tie theory in which actors ee propelled hy historical hws The sistance Between the Lukes of History and Class Consciousness fd the Marnsm of Althusser gives ample evidence ofthe widely Aiscrepontceadinge which Mai’ texts can engender, although a ‘more Spposite comparison, I shall suggest below, perhaps made between Althustes vw and the phenomenological Maris of Paci thas been pointed ou often enough that there atsimilrites between Parsons’ funtionlism snd Althusser's Version of Mark- ism. Such siniariti arent clifiul o dsern: Parsons theory of the internation of values has dnc parallels with Ahuses reworking ofthe notion of ideology and theformersidentifcation ‘ofthe fanetional problems facing social ystems resembles Alhus- S's conception Of the regions thit compose sos foematons {even if Tor one author the ‘deerinatin inthe lat fastance™ cultural for he other eam But the most important sinlarty is surely that, while both systems of ought are concerned {0 ‘overcome the tujest-objct liam = Parson vate action tame ‘freference and Althusser through his Theoretical alanis each reaches position in wih subject x controlled by objet Parsons actors are cultral dopes, bat Althusser’ agents ae stnictural dopes of even more stunting medics, (For futher Aiscusson of Althusser on structural causality. a8 pp. 155-60) ‘The “te mubjects of Altinrs mise en scone a he candy sedis are the "places and fasts that agents oy = Agency, Smucnte $3 Pac's project is diameticlly opposed to that of Althusser nso far ashe nttemtsto prove teading of Mat informed primary by the later writings of Hower.” Pacis theme i precisely the Ienation of urna subjectivity within caplm-Like Lukes he concentrates a good deal of his attention upon problems of reise tion-orobjectliation-asreification, anditrmst be considered one ‘tthe moet important contributions of phenomenological informed types Mra that they pose the fare of efleation as ental to the ertque of ileology somethin which simpossibleto ‘sscompish ip Althusser's scheme” But Pac's work is lage eon- erned with riclsing Hawer's Qin of Europea Sciences as tsitique of the eilying character of technical Teason. is hase position is closely ted to phenomenology, and is open 0 some of fhe objections that Athuserand others infivencedbystuctaralisn ‘have quit lepitimately levelled gins sac ses of thought. "These things having been sad, Mars writings til epresent the most signin single fund of dens that can be drm pon in Seeding illuminate problomsof agency andstracture Mars writes inthe Gnondsse tht every socal item “that has 2 fed form spears ax mercly‘avanishing moment inthemovement of society. “The conitions and objectiistions ofthe proces, he continues, ‘are themselves equally moments of it, and Hs ony sebjects are indvists, bat fndividuats in rout relationships, which they ‘ally reproduce and produce anew...” These commentsexorest ‘vac the standpoint I wish to elaboratein this paper. ‘Tae, ageney practice 1 shall argue here tht, in social theory, the notion of ation and structure presuppose one another but that recognition ofthis epen- ‘ence, which fa dalectical elation, necessitates a reworking both of asenesafconceptsinkedto each ofthese terms, andthe term: themselves. i this section I sal consider some sues concerning the theory ‘of etn, before attempting to connect agency with conception of ‘tractral amis 1 sal draw upon the analytical philosophy of Seton, as developed by British and Ameria philosophersover the past ovo decades But Tall want to say that, a charsctetstially Formulated hy such witers, the pllowapy of ation has number54 Conral Problems in Social Theory of ntble ena, One, which hve remy mention i: my ‘min cone nwt alow the asta pilsopy of sto inks stheorbaton of nstton Tw ter consis sal Chim, ral fomuchathcoation The fst the norton terry int he edertaning ot han ageney te ee ithe nconaton of ower ata othe coms m regard as a fundamental theme of this paper, and of the whole of thx bok, hat oa they mut ake it has de preity, timecspace nrc tently ined ff ‘Sat etic. Alsat ecg (end ie thos psc nye asa doblesemst fern bts efoto se Tv heady nested tna yin the revit pape, Sail tty isatenyaconaiatedinhe tact momento Aiterens tempor parcial Gnvekig strc whi ‘spreset oly ins instantiation) an spall. Aliso paces {re simare wien mea th tenses Tataltake up poems of tne space eaonsnsome etallin ‘sabe paper inthe wok Gf 198-233) Asner ‘No author hesifuminated these problemsasmuch as Heider. In {Mreying tec of Kans meena Heer ots {tat the Kintan «pb mp the mt of tinea el that whieh makes he hin wh peso th ting et he ‘Sesto Kanon etter candice sai py tht what etme adap he ropoaon tat appressed space, Ler w ‘imi respect ore stactoy: Littell tht we not trent time snd gc seeps snaiingepelence,ecse $Ssnp pole toorson tis andape eat o jeas nd eve tme en space se the oes in which bjs ad ents or happen Sma, fr Heldegg aed er fom: every exit Boing tompor As one commen. stor pte apes tm tine, the econ of he Pee. tary ces i our ken inten pobities the action of te tamcndealy the omy of the Donal What Hager spread hhc take rong Rito ondings of wee pole the ‘onaay cron of page nee, pees ‘nh the apron so theory Seep blow a Agency. Smuctre 38 argue that ne, space an vi ioc! (rset) the threcldimersectono irene arcnocesryoticconaiie thon ofthe ea, Or, to expen the pont in other ways the SSutapmate, which beth fers ant dee, necestates the purposes te ater a eurively dependent pon the toner "ALN, Whitehead ap somevtete that What we pereive asthe preset isthe via! tng of memory tinged wit 0 Traiger wrens the i etwonn Anderton emory “then sod denken hind) in hong tht the experience of time ent that of shszon of mows, Butte erpolton of smomory ad stspation nthe presente, Nether hme oe theexpsenc one ate agprepaes of stants Thi empha important for virion reason, One wich Bars ety upon th tTeament of ston by anata pilenophor, onecrns he com {Stuainusionofactsinentons, porpoe retons, ete Inordiary nls sag, wspeak si tne were distinct ani or lements insome way apeepated or stra together nation, Mos ish and Ameria poner of scm have eset th age ceqeslonngy Te x doing ny hive towing sete dency rom cation an tine, rom te temporality 0 day {oc conduct, What tk Morte ignores tho elle tmoment atest, ale intng in scare that esksim the tow of actin which constitutes the day-to-day actly of human sbjeca'” Such 8 roment tole even in dhe com Sito of action oon a from he eo ve trogh Npcton oF agency, as I use it, thus does not refer to a series of ncrtemsscombanedtogter bute scorns fiw of ond We may define setion Tay Bartow a formation to Previous work, ar invaving a sve of tal or comempate tsa inerventons of compres beings inthe ongoing proves of ‘Stemstthemorad" Cava smment ood tobe made aboot {hi Fr the ton of cto aw rerone to the evils of font td canot De examine pat fom a broader try the wings recs to kt pon is apparent tatoloey, ‘Sense in substan pat ofthe piesa! Herre the etre of nin fs dewsed primary elton wo cots with “Towemens the chcttrsie ofthe ator a subject ema explored o inp" Fhe concept of ageney be T advocate itS56 Central Problemsin Social Theory hore, dnvelving “intervention in « potentially malleable objet- ‘worl, relates directly to the more guneraid notion of Pasi. Sha Inter teat regulrised ects as situated practices, and stall Fegard this concept 26 exprosing 4 major mde oF connection Derween action theory and suc analysis. Second, it 6 a socessiy feature of etn tha, at any pol i Ue, the agent "could havesctedotherwie’= either positively in terms of tempted {ntervention lathe process of 'evenein the wold, negatively in terme of forearance. The sense of cou hve done otherwise” ‘bwiously a ffi and complex one Hi aot important th paper to attempt to elaborate» dotiled ustication of 3 Be a Imistake, howeves,tosuppose that theconcept of action canbe aly lucdated in this respect out of the context of hiseically locaned modes of aetiy * conditionsof | setlon 1 [ Rationaisaton of ation | Gfaction \ Motivation ofaction . Unactnowledged ie unintended Prove 24 Figure 2.1 porteays what cou be sepatded a “tation model" of stl: & mode! whose impestions however cannot be properly worked out separately fom the discussion ofthe proper ties of structure that T shall provide in a subsequent section. The ‘eflexive monitoring of conde eer othe inentanal or purp ‘Sve charatterof human behaviour: emphasises intentional” «3 roces. Such intentionality & 2 routine feature of human conde, fd does not imply that actors have definite goss comin hak ‘in mind during the course of their activites. That the later is tuna, i fic, indented in ordinary English wsage by the ‘stncton between meaning ot intending to-do something, and ‘doing something ‘purposeful, the later implying an uncommon ‘egree of mental appication given wo the pursuit of a ann When Jay actors inquire abou each other sitentionsin respect of particu Jaracts, they abstract from continuing processaf routine monitor fing whoreby they relate their activity to one another and to the ‘bject-word, The distinctive feature aout the reflexive monitor ‘ng of human actors, as coapared to the behsviou of anal, ‘ction | consequences ‘Agency, Smuctre ST what Gaafinkl call the accountability of human action. take “fevountabliy’ to mean thatthe agsounte that actors ate able to lfer oftheir cont draw upon the same stock of knowledge 36 fre dawn upon inthe very prodoction and reprodution of thee ston. Ae Hare expresses thi, the very same soil knowledge ind ski Is involved in the genesis of action and accounts. an Individual’ silty todo each depends ypon his stock of soil [nowelge.” But we must make an important emendation tothe paint of view Hare spears to tke. The ang of account ees {othe dscnieecpablites and nsiintions of actors and does 00 ‘ahunet the connections between stocks of knowledge” apd action ‘The factor ising from Harré charsctersation Is practical ‘consciousness: tact knowiedge thats skialy applied nthe ena tment of cours of conduct but which the actor: notable to Fommalat dacuravely “The relesve monitoring of behaviour operates against the back rand of the ratonalistion of action ~ by which T mean the Expabites of human agents explain’ why they act they do by ving reasons for theirconduct—andin the more close’ context Sf practical conscious Like “intentions “seasons only form scree accounts inthe context of queries, whether initiated by bothers ora clements of process of self-examination by the actor Tee very important to emphasie that the reflexive mentoring of sti clades the monitoring of the seting of interaction, and pot Just the hehavioue ofthe purtcular actors taken separately. TRsIs shown by Gatfinkol toe a base featere ofthe ethno-mathde Involved in the day-to-day constitution of social interaction! The rationalisation af atin, set eon feature of daly conduct, a ‘normal characterise ofthe Bebaviout of competent social agents, fu! is indeed the main bass wpon which their ‘competence’ is cjuge by others. This des not mean that reaonscan be inked 4s diretly with norms or conventions ss some philesophers have aimed or implied. Reasons donot ast ineladethe cing of or the fppeal wo norms: to suppose that such she case atl eas the Phileeopty of action back towards the Parsonan ation frame of Teference, ance conduct then becomes driven by “internals” ormative imperatives.” “The reasons actors supply dscarsively for their conduct inthe «couse of racial queie inthe conte of daly soca ie standin ‘elation of some tension to the rationalisation of ation as actualy tmbodied within the steam of comdt ofthe agent ‘The lest Interesting or consequential aspect ofthis concerns the possibilities58. Coal Problems in Socal Theory ‘of deliberate dssimlatin that exist where an actor claimstohave acted for reasons that he Was notin fact guided by. Moe important are the ey areas of practical consciousness that xs intheeation hetween the rationalisation of action and actor’ stock of kno ledge sn between the rationalisation of action and the uncon scious The stocks of knowledge, in Sehut'sterm, or what Teall the mutual knowledge employed by ators inthe production of social ‘counters, are not usually kw to thore actors in an expilly «elie form; the practical character of such knowledge conforms tothe Wittgnsteinian formulation of knowingarule,Theacounts score are ableto provide of ther resons are bounded, orsubjet ‘atious degres of posible aniclation, in respect of tty em loyed muttat knowledge.” The giving of reasons in day-to-day activity whic closely seein withthe moral account of action, is inevitably eaght up in, ad expressive of the demande. and th conflict entailed within social enounters.Butthe art tion of accounts reasons i aso influenced by uncimscks lementsof motivation. Thsievolvespossibtiesof rationalisation inte adn es he ring tel he wets upon conscious proseses of atonal zou Motions components of ation, which aks tele tothe ‘organkstion of an actor's wants, suaudle conscious and uncon ‘cious aspects of cognition and emotion. Tae whole weigh of pstchoanalytic theory suggests that snotvation has an interna Fierarehy of its own. Ishall argue in a sibsequent paper that conception of the unconscious i eset to soil theory. even if the resultant stem T shall develop departs in nome ways fra ‘lassical Freudian views, Bat the unconscious ofcourse canony be ‘explored in relation 1 the conscioae tothe reflexive mentoring and rationalisation of conduct, grounded in practical consciousness. We have to guard against a redotive theory of ition: fn respect of the unconscious: that apast theory which, in ‘seeking to connect the forms of sca ie to mneansiows provenes, fails to allow sufficeat play to autonomous sci forces ~Froud's ‘own soiotogial writings leaves ot tobe sired in ths es But we mas alo avoid a reductive theory of consciousness thts ‘one which i emphasing the rol ofthe unconscious, sabe rasp the reflexive features of ation ony a. pale eat of uncon. Selous process which reslly determine them “The philosophy af ection, a= developed ty Aaglo-Sexon authors, has shintedbstes hat are ndcatedateacnseof igure 2.1 Slat Agency, Sincure 59 as the unconscios is concerned, this neglect express more than Jt an aoceptance of Witgenstein'ssurpicions about the fgieal ‘atu of payehonnalysis Rather ita consequence ofa preocea- Potion with the relations between reasons and intentional cond, nt authors if they reer to "motiver” at al, we the term aS uivalent to ressons A theory of motivation is cracal because t Stpplies the conceptual lnks between the rationalisation of ection fnd the framework of convention 3+ embodied in institutions {Glthogh Tahal segue subsequently (sce pp. 216-19) that large trea of cial bchaviourcanberepardedasnot dicety motivated). Bata theory of motivation ao fast reat to theunacknowledget Conditions faction: in respect of unconscious motives cperating or ‘outside the ringo of the sell-understanding ofthe agent. The unconscis comprises only one set of sch conditions, which have to be connected to thou represented on the other se of the ‘gram: the unintended consequences ston Te scion pilosophy has largely avoided questions of the uncon. seiout, thts leo displayed virtually no intrest inthe unintended Consequences of nena conduct Tisisceraly responsible in Some pt forthe pul thet as separated the philosophy af ecto from institutional Moris in social science. I Tuneionaist wets have teen unable to develop an adequate aecount of intentional ‘onic they have nevertheless ben quite righty concern with the escape of att fom the sop of the purpose ofthe actor. ‘The uniatendo consequence of ation ate of centatzmportnce to seeial theory ins fara they aesytematiallyncomporated within the process of reproduction of snslutions. T shall diets the Jplieatonso thin some detailer, ut tis wore pointing ‘ut ths jonctre that one such mpteation that the unintended consequences of conduct relate dicey to as unacknowledged elton ay specified by theory of motivation. For in so far as ‘ich unintended somequenses are invobved n sell reproduction, tty Become conditions of setion abo. To follow this through further, however we must urn tothe concept of structure. Tie, srt, system In social snc the tnm sructre” app ia two main bodies of literature: that of funconalsm, which soften in contemporary ersons caledSiucturabfuncionaim’ and the tadion of{60 Contra Problems in Socal Theory ‘hough that hasembraced i most comply, storm Sofa 28 the ft ofthese fs angered, arvcie normaly appears Conjunction wth fan. Spencrand ther etch futhors who employed thse tems dd so often inthe comet of {sly bundyexprened schemes flap aig To ty thestrcturofoosey ks saying the atomy ofthe canis {ostudy sanction ike studying the pylon oftheorani, 1 is wo show how the sractre moka Altnugh more cen funcional suthor: have Bosom wary vt employing ct or sealed biol! part The same ot of resumed lation beeen stature and fonction endl parent in hr work Situcturevunderstood an refering toa ate socal eaton sis uncon, to how ach pats aay operates Sper Sirctre here is pm deserve rm, the maa bat of aplnation Being cried ty fonction. Tis perhaps why the inert of srutura-functosaem bothsympathllcanderteal, ts heen overwhelming concerned with the concep of fron, ‘ately eating the noion of strate at ll Tr i any ene Inceative ofthe depeeto which the ens of funcional have {ken over the parameter other oppo. In srctram, by comet, ste spears na more ex pnatory roles inked tothe otonof transformations Suture nal, whether ape wo ingnog, toh lester a oF more generally to sca flat, comiderd to poate Below the level of sace apesrincer, The dion between Src a tn eyo between ode nd Sage. A ft sph, suucure fn te tsagey and oer concepts associated wih cen to avelitl or atigineommon wth ‘ovons employed by fenctonalitsuthors Hey have wed to damorsate i the previous paper aiough ntraly vets ‘raion of thoupht, stata and futons Jo share poor schooling > ho-level employment > material dept ‘ation. A poverty eee fons homeostatic lop i each ofthese Factors participates reciprocal sees of iatluenees, without any fone ating #8 controling iter forthe hers. A homeostatic nop form apserines ofthe flowing patter We might discover such a fonp if we ace out the influence of inary eveton upon the other clements mentioned above. Ti, Fowever.weconsidertheinienccof shldrew overall edvcationl factory it might cmenge that an examination ‘Tike particular example & not iportan.) In sich acircumstanse, the examinitions canbe rpatdod as the equivalent ofan informa tion control apparatis ina mechanical feed-back yer, The feed-back effet here might gover a regularsed process of dire tonal change: such te 8 propeessve transfer of chile trom stoking ans backgrounds into white-calla occupations, incon Junction witha clave expansion of the white-collar sector, Now fet us suppose thi, on the basi of sto the community, shoo! lind work, the Ministry of Ecatlon applies knowledge of the poverty cle toaterven inthe operation ofthat yee: in thiase The retcxive moatoring of ston rejoins the organisation fst tems ane becomes guiding nflence ini "The expansion of attempts at reflexive self-regulation st thetevel ‘of system integration isenigentyone ofthe principal features ofthe Somemporary world. Sach a phenomenon undetis the two most fervasive ypes of stl mobilisation im moder tes: the egal Fatomal stl organisation and the secular social movement. But {a aso highly important to recogni that atempts at reflexive80 Cena Problems in Social Tory self-regulation ako produce farther diftsin eed buck proces: Ss, vin the introduction of “ystems technology. I hve aleady stressed tat reflexive sellsregslation understood preys thn «alcontrol~asissovigorousy argued by Habermas-—may become a potent ieologel force. "have arg tht sstnusonemay be regarded aspractics which are deeply sedimented in time-space: that, which are enduring Sind inctsve laterally inthe sense that hey are widespread among the members ofa eommunity or aacety. At this point Fant to Introduce a tnction tht Tahal referto quite olen subsequenthy inthis book, between dnaiutonal analysis and the analysis of strategic conic. This does not correspond tothe difercitstion hotween social ad system integration, becatse T intend it 8 he methodological rather than substantive. The point the distinction Js to indicate two principal ways in which the stady of sytem properter may be approached nthe soil seences: each of which 's separated out, however, aay by 2 methodological epoché To "examine the onstttion of socal sstems as strategic concoct ody the mode in which actors draw upen strata elements ues and resources in thet scl elation, ‘Stature here Appears as cons’ mobilen of discursive al practical one SSousnes Ia soca encounters. nstational sali, onthe oor than places an epoché pon strategic conde, eating res and resources aschtonialy reproduced features fsoctel systems Tis ‘uiteesentl to ae that this is nly a methodloycel bracketing these are aot to sides fa dualism, they express a dual. ‘lity of structure. No such tracking appeared atustitic Socolopes, Which end to equate social cation and stractral onstain ak synonymous notlons. A casi example Duhoin's ‘Stacie, n which Rida conduct Hy treated as caused by ftors such swe soe iteration’ incombination wth psyehological ‘autes), Durkheim's account lacks any mode of understanding Suki behaviong, and th socal neraction i which te meshed, ‘srelesvely monitored conduct" ‘Contrast the character of Durkheim's sociology with that of Goffman. Goffman implicitly brackets insttatonal analysis in ‘order to concentrate upon sci! interaction s strategie conduc. Much of Goffman’s work may be read a investigating the tact stocks of knowledge that are employe by ay sears inthe produc: tion of sock encounters. Gasforan anclyses knowiedge’ in the Agency, Sucre 81 Wingensteinin sense of “knowing rues; the feeting of sharp jamination hat dhe reader often experiences in reading Gottman ‘derives from hi making expt wha, once e has pointed ther fut, we rexagnise to be ingredients of practical consionsnens, ‘niall employed in sn unacknowledged way in socialite. Onthe ‘other hand, Goffman ecology, like Witigentanian philosophy hes not developed an secpunt of nsttuions of history ostruetral transformation. Instiations appear as unexplained parameters ‘within which ators organise hei practical activities Ti therefore in the end more than s methodological “bracketing i feflt the duaiam of action an srvtase that has been noted ier. Being mitedinthisscose, Gfman ssocioioy also ignores the possibity of reeognising the dal of presenceabsence that ‘Sonnecs acta tothe properties ofthe totality: forthisinvolvesthe fed to generate am intone theory of everyday fe ‘The ually ofstenetoreiniateration Let os ow give more concrete form to the duality of structure in Interaction, following on from what hasbeen eulined shove ‘What I cal here the modalies’ of sructaration represent the central dimensions ofthe duality of stractare nthe constttion of Iteration, The modalies of struturation ar drawn upon By "Setrsin the production of interaction, buat the same time are the tedia ofthe reproduction ofthe structural component of systems fraction. When istitutonal analysis Is bracketed, the mo= “alts ave treated as stocks of knowledge androsoures employed by actors i the constitution of interaction asa skilled and kno Legeable accomplishment, within bounded conditions of the fonof atin, Wherestritepicconductisplaced under an We modalities represent rules and resousces considered at al features of systems of socal interaction. The level of modualty thus provider the coupling elements whoreby the racket~ ing of stratepe or lnsitudonal analy is disolved i favour of a acknowledgement oftheir interrelation. “The clstidcation given in Figure 2-5 dows aot represent a y= pology of interaction or structures, but a portayal of dimensions that are combined in fering ways im socal practices. The oom= ‘munication of meaning interaction doesnot take place separately | |82. Conta Problensin Social Theary INTERACTION. communication power sanction (MODALITY) interpretative faclity norm ‘home STRUCTURE signification domination tagitimation Fount 25 from the operation of relations of power, o¢ outside the context of ments I isimportant however te bear in mind What hasbeen sl previously in respect of ules: no sexi practic expreses oreanbe explicated in terms f, a single rule oF type of resource. Rather, prictices ae situated within oterscting see of les and resources ‘that ultimately expres features of the totality “The distinction between interpretative seems, ax concerning the communication of meaning, and norms, 26 concerning the Sanctioning of condaet, can he snfied by considering Winch's Siscusson of rue-ollowing iis Hea ofa octal Science Accorde Ingo Winch, rle-felfowing’condactean be identified with mean {nfl ation. The citron of behaviour which is rule-fllowing Is torbe found in whether oge can ask ofthat behaviour I there “ght and wrong’ way of doing it" Now thiconflstes to senses ‘ofrate-folowing or rather, wo aspectsof nesta veiled in ‘he production of soekal practices; that eating 10 the conaition of ‘medning, and thot relating to setions invoWed in social conduct “There are right and wrong ways of using words in a Language, 4 matter whic concers those aspects of rues involved inthe eam Sttution of meaning: and there are right and wrong modes of Conduct ia rexpect ofthe normative sanctions implicated in interse= tion, Although i important to separate thm out conceptual, these two senses of ght and rong ways intersect in the sta oostittion of social proctics. Thus 'oreee language se ialvays Sanctioned: while the tevance of eanctions to conduct oer thn ‘Speech is nevitably connected with the Mention of tha com ‘duet on the plane of meaning, The fist sense, to adapt an example ldcussed by MacTnigre fs that in which an expression ike Boing, for a walk” is used righty oF wrongly in relation t 2 particular iy: that is, what to cound a ‘ping fora walk the langage 2 practised i day-to-day ie. The second le the seme ht which Agency, Stature 83 “ine fora wl sia wt me ee “Eppoprat conduct peng for sl log the pavement inthis {Spec diflers fom wrering ong the mile ot te rud in ‘Shepard of the conventons or hws gverang wae Devi Cou persona fe) Te point of dtingushing these two senses Sr rtd eectng the cs tat hase ate two peso ale Consttuive ad ope) implatd n soc procs, pre help inorder tobe able {o examine thir nercomneton. The ‘entitcaton of ety oer word itera in important 95 ‘th norman comierations (and vie ver) hse most ob ov and mos formally coed tn lw where. regard sanctions th ar applies great dea ges on dsintos between mr dh mmtaghter te irinot enough jute tres thenced ins heorytoreatethe constttion ani mmuniation of meaning 10 ormaie sane ons; ec of thes hs treo be ee Yo power tanto. ‘Tiss so i the twofold seme indicate by th tx dat of crate, Power eressed nthe capable to make ‘erin ‘ncouns coun ano caer sancing pros; Bar eae cap "fy interpretative schemes’ I mean standards elements of seeks o kre, ppd by actor the producionotintera “ion lnerretative secs formhecorofthe mutans ‘thereby an countable univers of mesning i susalbe thos) ind proces of incracon. Aesounai,in Carfiak’s stme, dejende upon the mastery ofetinomethods iva in Temauage tse and coon fo grap te poit, made by CGotnet ‘nd rater arent fn by Habermas, cht sh toostery canon be adequately undo monolopia This Itwahcs mae than he popiton (a by Habermas) shat a Satisfaction apptoach ems cant be derived from Chom Sys sync pine to eter of the ration Between lan- uipe and the content of th are of exten Imporiance to Sat ory. nie prodston of scaring in fmteracton, content anno be tess merely the eminent” or beckgound of th gg. comet fer nso dee od and nant on Ie ot eration onancaieeenanmier The efenve montrag of cone incratfonimos the rouine rman opon of sea soca84 Coral Problems in Socal Theory temporal etext in the sustaining of aecountaity i the draw: ing pom of contest atthe same tie rereats these element a ‘context relevanees. The "mutual owledge this empayed and Feconsttued in socal encounters cane reared the mem ‘whereby theinterweavingof lacutionayandillocutonary elements ot language's ordered As ith other aspects of context, the eommancaton of meaning in prozeses of interaction does nat jst ‘oscar ener time. Actors Sstain the meaning of what they say and do through routine incorporating "what west belore’ and antciptins of “what al come next” into the present of an encounter neni features of Jnteraction thus imply ifécance in Derrida’ sense. But the Tagguage-use i aso grounded in other, referential features of contest, which border om “what cannot be sid Ziff’ analyse of context i important here Some linguists have argued that language can in prineipie be separited frm ll feature of conten, because such features can themes be expressed in language’ view which converges wth some he central noionso strustral- ism. This woul! ental hat the uptake of yo uterance such Fhe pen on the desk ix male of gol eed and derstood inn everyday context of communication, could be anaes ito Stem or set of statements desing the contexts elements ‘mutually known by the participate, and necessary tothe desis! properties ofthe uterance. Hence itis tons suchas ‘avoid inking contaminstod water the suction =the ‘kof being poisoned ~ involves consequences that have the oem Of natural events Durkheim ackaowledged this distinction in Separating what e called “utiitarinn from mora’ saetions. But the way in which he formulated the distinction, creating moral sanctions a the very prototype of social relations, prevented ise from theorising gute basic sense in which norms can be rege, In a“utlitarian’ manner by agents manner tht hast be ested conceptually to the contingent character of the reatiation of no pea Ageney, Simctre 87 mative clas. There isa range of posible “shading Between cceptance of 3 normative cigation asa moral commitment, the type ease for Durkheim, and conformity based onthe acknowige- nent of sanctions that apply tothe transgression of normative preseriptons tote words, the fat that the normative featores of “Salle involve the double comtingeney of soca interaction docs ‘ot neces eleate a "utara mode of orientation towards ‘Srstions to non seal casal consequences of behaviour, Amato nay ‘caleuste the ak! involved inthe enactment of ven form Social conde, im expect of the Hkethod ofthe sation: ‘involved Being actually applied, aad may be prepared to soit them as a price to Be paid for sehieving a ptcular end. The theorclicel Sgifeance Of this semi obvious point for prob lem of lesitimation snd conformity i considerable ~ in two re spect, Ones that i det the theory ofleiimation aay fromthe “mernalisedvalue-nocin-moral contens theorem that has Been the hallmark of the "normative functionals’ of Durkheim and Parsons." second that it ret tention tothe notated Ghrscter of sanctions, relating the predction of meaning to the Jroution of ancnative onder, "acute" atitudes towards roms can eatond through to processes of “presentation of self, "Parting fein which ects who ether Conform o ansgress normative prescriptions may negitein some degree what confor Intyortaneresin arin the content oftheir conduc, by means of that conduct, thereby sho affecting the saneions co which i is subject, 'Aclsscetion of sanctions can be based upon dhe elements smobilisedio praducethe sanctioning effet, the ater tobe efetive Llways in some sense impinging pom ators” want (conscious oF {tnconsciogs) even inthe carcof sanctions which involve tbe wse of force I follows however {om what hasbeen ald previousy,thatit would hea mistake to spe that ranetons onl exit when ators “erty te to bring each er to line” in sere particu asion “The operation of sanctions, or sanctioning’ 1s achronic feature of all soi encounters, however pervasive ot subtle the mutual processes of adjustment im snteraction may be. This applies, of ours, to the pritution of meaning ina baie sense, Thetocksof nowtcdge drawn upon in ingisi communication, ineuding sy tactical tues, buve a sting “obliging quality, and could not ‘operate outside 2 normative contest anymore than any other[88 Conv Problems in Socal Theory structural features of systems of interaction. Conformity ttngui tie rules is baieally secured a a means and an osteome of the feverylay use of language itselt in which the main normative commitments ae simply those ofthe sustaining of “acountabiity” in Gafinke'ssense. Power:relationsof autonomy and dependence ‘Asin the eae ofthe ther modalities f stucturaton, power can be felato to iteration in a dual see: as insted iatittonaly in processes of interaction, and as wsed to accomplish outcomes in Sirategc conduct ven the most casual social encounter Instances slementsof the tofalty es a structure f domination; bat such Structural properties are atthe sume time dra upon, and repo Aiuced through, the sctivies of participants in wstems of terae- tion. Ihave arguod ekewhere thatthe concept of ction slgeally tied to that of power, where the liter notion # undersiood transformative capacity.” This has usually only been obliquely recognised in the philosophy of action in which itiacommvon (talk of seton inter of con” of able tor “powers The literate ‘concerned to analae human agency in terms of powers however, ‘arely fever intersects with sciologil geusons of ations of power in interaction. The relation between the concepts ston find power, on the love of strategie conduct, can Bo set Out at follows. Action involves intervention in event inthe work, thus producing definite outcomes, with intended action being one cale= Bory of an agent's doings or his ersning, Pwer as ramformace ‘apacity can then be taken to eer to agents capable of racing ‘ch oecrnee” ‘Bven a casual survey ofthe massive Uteratureconcemed withthe concept of power and its implementation socal science ndieates thatthe study of power reflects the same dualism of action and structure that T have diagnored jn approaches to socal theory generally. One notion of power, found in Hobbes, in Weber in Somewhat diferent form, and more recent ithe writings ol Dah, {teats power asa phenomenon of willed or intended ation.” Here power is define in terms ofthe capacity or Helihood of actors to achieve desived or intended outcomes, According o other ahr, fon the other hand ~ incoding such otherwise verse figures as Agency Sucre 89 “Arendt, Parsons and Poulantza- power specticallya property of the vocal community, amesum wherebycommon nterestsor css interests ave realsed. These ate effectively two verons of how ypower structures are constituted, and to versions of domination’ {each of which may link the notion of power logically to that of ‘conflict, bat nether of which necessarily doesso).The fist tends to treat domination as «network of decson- making, operating aginst tn anexsmined institutional backdtop; the second regards domina- tion as itsef a institutional penomenon, ether astegardng power as rating to the active sccomplisimeats of actor, at {renting asin some way determined by nstitations, ‘As well known, there have been various attempts to recone these two approaches, onthe basis ckposing the nitatons ofthe ‘power as decision-making" approach " The capability of actors to ‘teure desired oataomes la interaction with ethers, secorcng to ‘Bachrach ad Barat sony ‘one ace’ power; powerhas nother face, which i that of the mobisstion of” bul ato institutions ‘The seoand fs a sphere of “non-dedlsion-making’; of implicitly sscepted and undisputed practices ‘However the ies of ‘n-decision-making i only partial and Snadeguate way of analysing how power i stractred int insite tions, and is fmod in terms ofthe action approach tha is sop- osedly subjected to ertgue. Non-decsion-makingis stil basicaly Fears ava property of agents, rather than of soca instttions Perhaps the best cilcal appraisal ofthese fsues is that by Lakes" Power, acoording to hin, & more than merely shiz it tioes not Just have two faces, but thre. There one key part of Lakess argument which I shall reject at the outset: he 55, following Gale. that power an essentially contestes” concept thd ineraticably evaluative’. think this view iether mistaken or “ineoligtening. tis stn i che implenton that some notions fn the soca scence areesventally contested while others are aot Sch thit we could draw up an (uncontested?) Fst of essentially ‘Sontested concepts, separate fom others. The chronic contestation ‘or disputation of concepts an hors inthe social siences iin Some part due tothe fact that these concepts nd heures ate caUght {pia What theyare abou, namely social feltset:a in of thou ‘sll develop in the conciuding paper in his volume. The notion of power verily tendr to provoke parcularly deep-seated con- rovers, Buta range of ther ter tha ls figure in an impor~90° Contra Problems in Social They tant way inthis bok ~ cas, ideology, imerst, te. — ate eauly Potent inthis respect and Tou watt acai not jt that af ‘xpecaly contentious coneepts suchas these, but the whole eo ‘eptual apparatus of socal theory iin some sense neriicaly valutive™. These things do no, ofcourse, necessarily compromise [Ckess suggestion thatthe tives faces of powerhe analyses may De ‘more less closely elated to tering political postions; however {Vwant to contend that i snot in fact useful distinguish three dimensions of power, as Lakes attempts odo, Takes accepts thal the non-decson-muking proach marks an advanee over the devision-mabing one (or what hecallethepal- Sst view). The former of these, ts contrasted 10 the later, is two-dimensional because it does not simply concentrate pon the ‘enactment of decisions, ut ako pints to ways in which te age “suppresied from being “dcisonuble” at all As Lukes says ite Fiat. the specie imitation ofthe two-dimensional vw that t {sll oo closely inked tothe standpoint which opposes "The ass of the [sock] system, Lakes points out, “is nut sustained simply by a series of individually chosen acts, but alo, most importsntly, by the socially structured snd early paierned Dohaviour of growps, and practices 2” Conse ‘quently in place of the two-dimensional view, Lakes nttodces is {hiee-dimensional concept. The thre-dimensicaal view invokes the nodion of intrest: fn conjunction with i, Lukes redefines power asthe capability of one actor or party tnftsence nother in manner contrary tha oers intrest, Now this does nose to work. Or at leat ntitively there seems na reason to supose that power i only exercised where A affect Bin way contrary to B's interests as compared to where A affects Bina vay tat fy lnretevantto Bsinteents, or more importantly where A slfet in aay that acords with B's ntreuts® The sera ofthese oul only be excluded avs ese of power B always behaved in his own interests, regardless of anyone elses intervention; but people re ‘ot sways inclined toactin accordance with heir interests- should ‘want to sy. a8 agus Lukes, that the concept of interest, ike that ‘confi, has nothing loglelly todo with that of power; although substantively, nthe atu enaciment of seca if, the phenomena to which they refer havea reat dealt do with one another But any ease appeal interest fn od twit nthe argent ocaune ‘ding the idea of faterets tothe one" and ordinal” r Agency, Siewre 91 ‘views whic is essentially Lake's strategy, dose not in fact des the problem of how to Tacorporate ‘secallystocured conduct within general restnient of power; for Lakes does ot sugest that Tnterst rea group oF structural pheaomenon rather than one to ‘do with sndvidost actors, Rar than adng om another "dimen Son tothe decision-making and non-decsion-making approaches, wwe nced to do what Lukes sdvoests, but docs not att acne Dich; this ples attempting to overcome the tadional division Fetweenvolonarsi” and struct notions of power Tlukes his, however, attacked the problem direct} in subse- gent poblication™ Power in socal theory, he args, a8 do = ‘ontraly involved with human agency: person or patty who wilds Power cold "have acted otherwise, nd the person oF party Over ‘whom power i wielded, the conccpt implies, would have acted ‘overwie power ad not been exercised In speaking this one ‘sums that, although the agents operate within structurally deter Sd ould have acted eiflerenty.™ In representing Dlcing limitations or constraints upon the activities of agents however, Lukes tends to repeat the dualism of agency andstractore that have spoken of in earhir papers, lence he talks of "where Structural determinism ends and power begins" and is unable ‘atisfactorily to del with tructar asimplcatedin power relations, fd power relations as implicated in strctue. "This can only be achieved, Lthink, iit ocognised that power mist be treated i the context ofthe dusty of stueture: Hf the ‘Tesoutees which the existence of domination implies and the exer ‘Gee of power drs upon te seen to be at thesame ine structural components of social systems. The exercise of powerisnetatypeot Sather power is iastantated in ation, ay regular and outing ‘henomenon. Rie mistaken moreover to treat power elf a 4 esource 25 many theorists of power do. Resources are the media through which power is exercised, and structures of domination ‘reprolcd, 2 ndieated in igure 26. "The motion of resources, a structural components of sci stems, figures a8 a key one the teatment of power within the theory of sructurtion. The concept of power both a transfor tive capacity (the chaactrstic view hel by howe treating powerin terms ofthe condoct of gets), andas domination (he main focus of those concentrating yon power a structural quality), depens92 Cental Problems in Social Theory cowerons) — rs [rreronnme ars — Fraune 26 ‘upon the ust of sources. ropar each view amplyng the ‘other, however. Resources are the media whereby transformative ‘ipacty is employed as power in the routine course of social Jneraction; but they ave atthe same time stractoral elements of social sjsom as systems, reconstituted though thei wilson in social interaction. This is therefore the correlate, in cespect a Power, ofthe dua ostractureinrespectofte communication of Imeaning and of normative sanetons vespurees ae not jus tional elements to these, but inelide the means whereby the mesa ingtul and the normative content of lnteracion iy actutsed “Power intervenes conceptually Between the broader notions of transformative capacity om the onesie, and of dominion om the other: power isa relational concep but ony operates a8 sich Through the wsation of transformative capacity se penersted by stractres of domination ‘To repeat what has been sid before, understood as asforma= tive capnety, power is intially related to human agency. The ‘could have done otherwise f ation a necessary element ofthe theory of power. AsThave lado ndoateckewhere," the concept of ageney canaot be defined through that of intention, pe sumed in so much of the Mterature to do with the psiosopy of ‘ction; the notion of agency, as Temply it, Take tobe logically Dror to subjectfobjectafferentiation, The same holds for the concept of potter. The notion of power has no inherent connection ith intention oF ‘wil, ne i haw in Weber's ad many other {ormulatons. Ie might t frst ser somewhat od to hold that an agent can exerese power without intending £0 do x0, of even ‘wanting todo so: for T wish to claim tit the notion of power hs no logical tie to motivation or wanting either But itis not a ll iosyneratie: it itsounds wo, itis perhaps because many dscns ‘of the concept of power have ten place In a polital context ‘where ‘decisions are clearly arcuate in elation to ends that Agency Smectre 93 sectors purse. Ax with the sphere of agency more generally, those ‘specs of power encompassed by intentional ations, or within the feflexive monitoring of condct, have a paticalae form; a range of ‘ations each a8 “eomplance’ “bargaining, et, apply omy within such conte. ‘Athough in dhe sense of transformative capacity power i im- plein thevery notion of action, [shall henceforth employ the term ‘power ata sub-category af ‘transformative capacity’, to reer to interaction where transformative capacity i hamesed fo ato a- {emptsto get others to comply withthe wants Power, thistlaton- lsense,concenss the eapabihty of acorsto secure outcomes where the realisation of these outcomes depends upon the agency of ‘thers The tse of power in interactions can De understood in terme of the facies that purtispants bring 0 snd mobilise 3s ‘ements ofthe prodcton of that interaction, thereby infucnsing fis course, Social ystems are constituted as repulsed practic: poster within social systems ean thas be treated as ineteig epo- Une relations of eutonomy and dependence i socal eration” Power reltions therefore are always bo-iay, even if the power of fone actor oF party in a social relation i minimal compared to nother, Power telatons are relations of autonomy and depen: ‘dence, but even the most autonomons agent Issn some depree ‘dependent, andthe mort dependent actor or party a ecatonship ‘retains some wtonomy. Structures of domination involve asymmetries of resources emp layed in the sustaining of power relations in and between sjstems of Resource Sanction AUTHORISATION COERCION ALLOCATION INDUCEMENT oune 2.7 1 all isitutonaisod forms of social iteration, 26 shall {indicate inthe following paper, there re two major resoarees which ‘an be dstingisheds we can add to these two mala categories of| Scion, a inated in Figure 2.7, Athorstion snd allocation94 Cental Problems Social Thor may be associated with ther orbothypes sanctions: orasitmay bebetterespressed, two moderaf sanctioning, viol there sm clear-eteivison between the typer of sanctions rd thy may be combined in varying ways. The axtncton ir essentially one be= {ween postive andstepatve sanctions, or rewads and punisimess but the threatened withholding of & promised reed can be a punitive gesture, and coaversely the ponslty of avons ot felease rom coercive mesmares a serve an indacement i isimportant vo emphasive that power should nt he detind in texms of conte, since the widely. empoyed Webern definiton of power, refered to earl, fs sometimes been rea to ply thik power and cole are necessarily inked asi power only ents oF sony exercised, when the resitanc of others ha to Beovecome, Te seems cose cnouph that thie is not what Weber intended, however that may be, the formulation offered. here caries no limpiation of thissort at all The ws of power, ofcourse dase simulate confi, or occas in the contet of staan. This sot hhecause of any kind of inevitable connection hetween power sal confi, but bosaise of the substantive relations that often exist Ipetmeen power, confit and interes. Inorests Isl Fog founded In wants, regardless of whether am actor i conse of ‘those wants (hat, setors or groupe may have interest of which they are unaware) Power and confi, i pow aa he reals: tion of interests, are trequenty, but neverthles contingenty, associated with one another. (For further discussion ofthe concep. of interests se pp. 188-90 below) ‘Methodological indus: 2 ret exeurins In conchsion, it might be wseful to coment Bretly about the bearing ofthe ideas advanced in this paper upon the debate over ‘methodological individual in wxil theory, Tere sof cous, no unitary vow thatcanbe identifi as "methodological is che phrase has Been used to cover varity diferent dens ‘One version appears prominent in Weber works, but I shal bey conser here dhe formulation offered by Popper, hs hs ‘been among the foremost advocates of such aviowin modem times. Popper hae described hi stanapoint succinctly allows also phenomena, and especialy the functioning of al soca institutions, ‘ould always be understood at reeling from the devin, se Agency, Soucture 95 tions, atid, et. of human individuals... we should never be Satisfied bya explanation i terms of sovealled “collectives”. "There are tree key ters in this assertion that nee some expla tions india, colecties, and hat i imped in istctions eting tom decisions ee. Safar wth sto hese isconcermed Poppers statement rflcts a characteristic tendency in the Hitera= ture of methodologies individualism (pro an con) to assume that the tere inva” stands lx noel of no explication. Ht night be tought a tram fo Hol that seit only const indivi — fn reing tht might be made of Poppers claim. But tony {ruse tha is true a tev or unieestng sense) if we undes= Sond “individual to mean someting tke “human ooganism” I “inuvidua however meatsagent inthe sense Thaveemployedin this paper be utaaton quite ferent The fist part of Popper's Sateen hen eflets the Inadequaciesf action theory hat Thave nays shove Inston do ined result from human agen: ‘ut they ae the outcome of ation only insofar a they are aso involve seconively as the meu oftsproduction. Inthesense of "Mutation therefore, the lective Bou tothe vey pheno- smenom oaction, “The postin adoptethere can be summarised sfllows 1. Sociat systems ere prods tramactions tween agents and ante amigo a suche the eel of satgh conde. This ‘methodogat inthe sensethst isons als sbrocketea “Mhoughsecuafelamntseccsaryenter in he chasers ‘io of cin ae modalities dan up to produce interaction. 2 national naps onthoother hand, rockets action concen “eating upon models othe med of the reredtion of ial Stems, Bu inte aso pusya methodol bracketing, which io more defen tan te fist we melo te eset importance conception oe dusty of sacar