***********************************************************************
How do ideas of ‘structure’ and ‘agency’ enable us to understand the degree of freedom people enjoy in our society?
The aim of this essay will be to explain how ‘structure’ within society inhibits a person’s ability to exercise their own free will or ‘agency’ before moving on to explain ‘agency’ and its role in the process individual’s decision making and actions. Firstly this essay will explain what is meant by ‘structures’ and what role they play in shaping the action of an individual and how this limits their choices. After this the essay will explain how people’s perceptions of what is acceptable can shape the choices he or she makes throughout their life and how they may be guided by societal values. The next paragraph will then put focus upon how an individual’s choices may be determined not only by themselves, but also by a privileged few whom hold power, and how the individual’s freedom is limited by the decisions of those with power and influence. Following on this the essay will explain how some sociologists believe ‘agency’ shapes the way society is structured though the actions of the people within it. The final paragraph will highlight how ‘structure’ and ‘agency’ can both be seen to play a role in shaping the actions and lives of individuals in society and how freedom is achieved within these parameters.
To understand how ‘structure’ impacts upon a person’s freedom and autonomy first you must understand what is meant by the term structure. The term structure, within the field of sociology, refers to outside influences or perceptions of a person or group of people that live within the sphere of any particular society, these can be institutions to which the person belongs, stereotypical views based on appearance or background that the person has come from, their respective place within the societal hierarchy or methods used to control the population.
Within society there are many key structures that influence the perception of the person and therefore inhibit their freedom to exercise their ‘agency’. Parsons referred to this as “a system of patterned expectations of individuals who occupy particular statuses in the social system” (Parsons cited in May, 1996; 50), by this Parsons is explaining that an individual’s freedom can be limited by widely held notions about how he or she should act in certain circumstances, influenced by the perception others have of this individual for example, the ethnicity or gender they belong to. These ‘structures’ in society can also be held by the individual and help shape their own actions within particular contexts, whereby beliefs can influence the decisions the person takes, or the direction they choose to take, during the course of their life. Durkheim referred to these ‘structures’ as social facts, when writing about society’s influence on the individual, Durkheim referred to these social facts as having “an objective reality beyond the life’s and perceptions of individuals. Cultural norms, values, religious beliefs - all endure as social facts.” (Macionis and Plummer; 125) When referring to these social facts within society Durkheim is explaining that the power that these ‘structures’ has over the individual is due largely to the way that society itself is structured, because these influences are beliefs or norms and values held by the majority of people in society, it makes it harder for the individual to choose whether or not to exercise their free will and do what they wish to do rather than what is expected of them. To do so is to risk being ostracised, vilified, or at the least seen as a deviant and an outsider.
Some structures that have an effect on a person’s ability to act independently and influence their behaviour may not be imposed upon the individual by society itself, but by a privileged few who hold some power and influence within it. These structures can serve to control the ability of a person to exercise their freedom in the choices that they can make, one such example can be laws that are made by those whom are considered qualified or have been chosen to make these decisions on behalf of the entire population. Laws within a society serve the purpose of a deterrent and guide the actions of an individual, in most cases to stick within the boundaries of that societies accept behaviours as stated in Thinking Sociologically “if we break the rules that are meant to guide people’s conduct, then we may be punished. The act of punishment is intended as a confirmation that we are responsible for our actions.” (Bauman and May 2001; 18) Although usually intended to provide a level of happiness and safety for everyone in society and are beneficial to the majority of the population these laws, however, are a form of structure and therefore impede an individual’s ability to act with complete freedom.
Another form of control that is imposed upon the majority of the population is through capitalism; Marx called this a ‘superstructure’. Within capitalism individuals are subject to the control of a privileged few who control the means of production, the political sphere, and the ideological power within society. Marxist theory states that the bourgeoisie control society, by holding the power to influence and control the proletariat financially and ideologically. This ‘superstructure’, Capitalism, serves their purpose and limits the freedom of the individual within the proletariat, this is explained in Capitalism and Modern Social Theory as “it is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being that determines their consciousness” (Marx cited in Giddens 1994; 41) With this Marx was explaining how an individual’s place within the hierarchy of society has an effect on the way that the individual chooses to act. This can be either through choices available to them or through how they are expected to act in the capitalist society, always based upon their social class they were born into or are a member of.
Although the structures in place can inhibit a person’s ability to freely make decisions that would allow them to do, or achieve, what they wish, an individual’s ‘agency’ has a significant impact on the choices that they make every day. A person has free will; they have a mind capable of making decisions based upon their own circumstances and their own goals in life. To say ‘structure’ shapes every person’s choices in life would be to assume that every individual within a society is merely a programmable machine. It does not wholly take into consideration the differences in behaviour between people whom may have come from a similar economic background, ethnicity, or belong to a particular institution that expects its members to act in a certain manner. Individuals within these groups, although sharing many common sets of beliefs, may make choices radically different from the next person within the same group. Some sociologists would argue that societal structures do not exist as a unifying overpowering element in the lives of those within a society, but that instead society is made of individuals, and that their choices and actions shape the society around them. This view was discussed by Becker in which it states that “social reality is made up of actors’ point of views” (Sharrock and Button 1993; 138). An argument which claims that an individual’s actions are controlled only by his or her perceptions, and as such society is shaped by the actions of every individual, stating that individuals have complete control of their actions and their own ‘agency’.
Actions are unlikely to be shaped simply by only ‘agency’ or ‘structure’, but are most likely a combination of both being resolved in way that is most suitable for the individual making the choices. There is no denying that every person within society, capable of enacting their free will and choosing to make decisions for themselves based upon what would most likely bring them the greatest level of happiness, would do so, however, these choices would have been made on informed decisions or moral grounds by the ‘structures’ they encounter every day. Most people would choose to act within the set, acceptable, behaviours within their respective society. They would do so because of the structures in place. Structures they are taught, through socialisation, to adhere as the normative structure of their society, or indeed are bound to comply with due to restrictions on their behaviour by the laws in place. This process of guiding an individual’s actions by the societal structures does allow for the individual to still make some choice and exercise their freedom, there may be, for example, more than one option to choose from after the unacceptable options, according to the structure of society, have been eliminated from the decision making process. This is highlighted within ethnomethodology in which they see the action of an individual as being simply guided, but not limited, by social ‘structures’. Sharrock and Button explained this, they see “‘social structure’ as a casual force which might pre-empt agency” (Sharrock and Button 1993; 163). If social ‘structure’ and ‘agency’ do play a role in shaping an individual’s actions, firstly by the ‘structure’ pre-empting any decision making process, it shows that an individual does get, an albeit limited, say in the choices available to him or her. This although inhibiting the freedom of the person making the choice of action, does not mean that that person has no ability to act in a free manner, therefore allowing for some room for the individuals ‘agency’.
To conclude this essay I believe that the amount of freedom that an individual has is limited by the ‘structures’ in place within society, they play a key role in guiding people’s behaviour in to actions deemed acceptable by the majority of societies individual’s, their culture, or the institutions they belong to. These ‘structures’ control the choices made to various levels of extremes from very little influence, although enough to still be present, for example whether a female makes a decision on working in a traditionally male-domination sector of work, to the choices made on behalf of an individual by those in a position of power that can affect their course of actions. However, I do not believe these to be the only influence over a person’s actions, I believe that every individual, even when the choices they make are guided by the structures in place, still has the ability to act freely to an extent, as such I cannot say that freedom is wholly inhibited by the ‘structures’ people encounter everyday within life. Whilst they are guided by these into what is deemed acceptable, people retain an ability to refuse and rebel against the structures of society.
References
Bauman, Z and May, T. (2001) Thinking Sociologically. 2nd Ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing
Giddens, A. (1994) Capitalism and Modern Social Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Macionis, J and Plummer, K. (2011) Sociology: A Global Introduction. 5th Ed. Harlow: Prentice Hall
May, T. (1996) Situating Social Theory. Buckingham: Open University Press
Sharrock, W and Button, G. The Social Actor: Social Action in Real Time. In: Button, G. ed. (1993) Ethnomothodology and the Human Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
No comments:
Post a Comment