Introduction
Anthony Giddens is an English sociologist and the headmaster of The London School of Economics and Political Science. The scientist is considered to be one of the most significant figures in contemporary sociology. He has written 34 books, which have been published in 29 different languages. In 2007, Anthony Giddens occupied fifth place in the list of the most referent scientists in the field of human sciences. Consequently, his contribution to the development of sociology cannot be underestimated. Anthony Giddens is famous for his theory of structuration and the comprehensive original concept of modern communities. This way, the purpose of this paper is to review the theory of structuration, compare it to the views of other theorists, and advance possible corrections and improvements in this regard.
The Theory of Structuration
In the theory, Anthony Giddens is determined to prevent the separation of structure and action. The sociologist believes that neither structure nor action can exist independently. Social actions create structures, and only social actions are capable of producing structures. To describe the process of cooperation between these two terms, he uses the word ‘structuration’ (Gezgin, 2016). The scientist draws attention to the duality of structure, meaning structures make social actions possible, and social actions establish the same structures.
In social life, Anthony Giddens differentiates two types of structures, which are rules and resources. The rules imply the procedures, which may be followed by individuals in real life. Occasionally, these interpretations of rules may obtain a written form, for instance, laws or bureaucratical rules (Gezgin, 2016). Structural rules may be produced by the member of the community and changed via actions. The second type, namely resources, also appear as a result of human activities and may be corrected by people. They can be localized or imperious, and the former includes soil, natural recourses, and other things, which can exist independently of humans.
The latter reveals that in case an individual dominates others, and people become resources, which can be used by other people (Gezgin, 2016). Consequently, imperious resources may exist only whether they are produced during cooperation between people.
Anthony Giddens gives an explanation of the nature of social systems and institutes. According to the sociologist, a social system is an example of social relationships, existing in the exact time and a certain place (Gezgin, 2016). It also should be noted that state and bureaucratism are seen as behavioral patterns, which last only for a period of time. In the view of the duality of the structure, systems and institutes are connected with human activity (Gezgin, 2016). The sociologist usually calls them agents, highlighting their active position. Anthony Giddens claims that structure influences the behavior of people due to knowledge about society, which is acquired by agents. This allows agents to navigate routine life and interact this the surrounding objects. They also leverage both material and imperious resources, which are parts of society’s structure.
In addition, the scientist supposes that people are determined to obtain a certain extent of stability in their social life. He predicts that this aspect is highly likely to be connected with innate concerns about physical security (Gezgin, 2016). The existence of general knowledge and the need for security contributes to an increase in preassigned pattern production in social life. Behavioral patterns tend to repeat, and social structures, social systems and institutes are established. The concept of duality of structure allows resolving the argument between determinists, which belief in dependence on fate, and voluntaries, considering that people act in accordance with their wishes. This way, the information described above presents the base of the theory of structuration established by Anthony Giddens.
Other Theorists and Differences in Views
Erving Goffman is another prominent sociologist, whose works appear to be especially meaningful in this field. He is Canadian and represents the second generation of the School of Chicago in sociology. He also presents his personal view on the same subject as Anthony Giddens does in his Social Action Theory, though their perspectives contain differences. First of all, unlike the previously mentioned scientist, Erving Goffman states that “human behavior depends on personal scenarios and relationships” (Exploring Your Mind, 2017, para. 6).
All the individuals should take into consideration the image, which they are transmitting before the other people. Therefore, “this interaction that each individual performs with his environment pushes him to seek the definition of each situation with the aim of achieving control over it” (Exploring Your Mind, 2017, para. 7). This way, people tend to control the impressions they are going to create.
Another differentiating feature between the theories regards the behavior of people in society. Exploring Your Mind compares this event to the theatre: “we could say that we are actors playing our role in front of an audience of one or more people” (2017, para. 8). Consequently, individuals attempt to create as best image as they can. People are determined to create impressions that are capable of forming public disturbances. These behavioral patterns are based on the assumption that such images may be beneficial for ones, who create them. All thus, it is evident that the theorist approaches the issue of social action in a different way.
Possible Improvements and Practical Application
The phenomenon of Anthony Giddens’ activity implies the fact that the scientist adheres to the interdisciplinary method. For this reason, his theory may be considered as comprehensive as possible. Therefore, there is no necessity to be improved to a large extent, as it involves multiple points of view on one aspect. Instead, it is worthy of paying attention to the application of this concept to practice. It is advisable to act in the frames of structure, obey its formal and informal rules, use all the available resources in a particular context, and reflect the daily routine. This way, an individual reproduces certain social practice, which is a part of the structure, where a person releases his or her activity.
This approach may be effectively applied to exploring the individual practices of a contemporary person. It will be helpful in revealing how the individual actions and a range of premediated circumstances of these actions form the comprehensive picture and tendencies of social system development. Apart from this, this methodology allows to find out, which structural conditions influence individual strategies of behavior and how it works.
Conclusion
The topic of social actions presents a matter of multiple discussion among sociologists. Anthony Giddens managed to advance a comprehensive theory of structuration, which gives an explanation of the connection between social actions and structures. Although some scientists may have a different opinion to some extent, for instance, the Social Action Theory introduced by Erving Goffman, Anthony Giddens’ approach may be successfully applied to practice and lead to beneficial results.
References
Exploring Your Mind. (2017). Erving Goffman and the Social Action Theory . Web.
Gezgin, E. (2016). On Anthony Giddens and the theory of structuration. Border Crossing, 6(1), 79-93.