It was a story of what American society looks like to a foreign observer The

It was a story of what american society looks like to

This preview shows page 4 - 5 out of 6 pages.

I can’t take credit for it, but I found it fascinating. It was a story of what American society looks like to a foreign observer. The writer described these gods that Americans give tributes to in order to take care of these moving objects that they climb in and out of each day. These objects are so important to the Americans that they even eat and sleep in them and spend time washing and fixing them. These objects are sacred to Americans so much so that they even spend a lot of money to make sure that they are well cared for and pay little gods to watch them when they are away. I found this hilarious. Another one I remember was watching a documentary about the Hourani people where the chief came here to the United States. He was taken to a market where he described all kinds of foods as far as the eye can see. He said that the people are all smiling and happy there and when you go to leave, you just smile really big and they give you all this food. The guide told him, “well you have to give them one of these,” and he handed her a plastic card. Then the chief said, “Yes, but they just give it right back.” While these are not my own personal experiences as a foreign observer, I can understand the concept fully of how certain situations might look to an outsider that doesn’t have the background information. Theoretical Dimensions Analysis: Macro or Micro: Micro – Shutz’s theory of how society is constructed is fairly well based on micro theory. He bases his theory on the interpretation of how one’s knowledge of the world is socially constructed from both past experiences and collective knowledge from others. With regard to reciprocal perspective he argues that, “the general thesis of reciprocal perspectives leads to the apprehension of objects and their aspects actually known by me and potentially known by you is everyone’s knowledge,” (pg. 288). In this perspective, he is looking at how we view our “private world” not just with our own knowledge but from a socialized perspective. In a way, what we know and how we see the world is based not only on our own experiences, values and beliefs but is also reflects collective knowledge as well and how well we interpret new situations. In this respect, Schutz is not looking at society in a macro perspective but rather he is basing his theories in a micro perspective instead that we are using our experiences, common sense and relationships to build a social construct of behavior and society. Macro and Micro THE TYPE OF PHENOMENOLOGICAL THEORY ARTICULATED BY SCHUTZ PRESUMES TO EXPLAIN BOTH MACRO (LARGE GROUP) AND MICRO (INDIVIDUAL) MOTIVES AND BEHAVIORS. ALSO, IN TERMS OF CAUSAL INFLUENCES, SCHUTZ ARGUES THAT CULTURAL DEFINITIONS OF THE SITUATION (MACRO) INFLUENCE OUTCOMES (MOTIVES AND BEHAVIOR), BUT HE ALSO ARGUES THAT INDIVIDUAL BIOGRAPHY AND PERCEPTION (MICRO) INFLUENCE SOCIAL OUTCOMES. Materialist or Idealistic: Idealist - I think that his theory was idealist because he based his theories on human behavior, past experiences and values rather than on production. Human beings interact with one another in certain ways because we have been socialized not only with our own firsthand knowledge of the world, but also with knowledge that is common-sense. He calls society a construct of
Image of page 4
Image of page 5

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture