Doing Modernity: Studies in Critical Interactionism

Search Get Mendeley What is Mendeley? Papers Groups Symbolic interactionism and the concept of power by  Alex Dennis ,  Peter J Martin Social Sciences   ›   Miscellaneous Papers Save reference to library   Share Overview References 72 Related research British Journal of Sociology  ( 2005 ) Volume:  56 ,  Issue:  2 ,  Publisher:  Blackwell Publishing ,  Pages:  191-213 DOI:   10.1111/j.1468-4446.2005.00055.x PubMed:   15926904 Available from  British Journal of Sociology or  Find this paper at: Abstract Symbolic interactionism is often represented as a perspective which is limited by its restriction to micro aspects of social organization. As such, it is allegedly unable to adequately conceptualize macro phenomena such as social structure, patterns of inequality, and power. Such a view is routinely presented in undergraduate textbooks. Th...

The Following is taken from a course offered by Joshua Kjerulf Dubrow at the University of Moscow!  Here is a link: http://socialstratification.wordpress.com/2007/11/20/the-interactionist-view-of-power-and-inequality/ The Interactionist View of Power and Inequality Posted on   November 20, 2007   |   Leave a comment Sociologists typcially cite Weber in defining power as the capacity a person or a group has to realize their will despite the resistance of others (Weber 1946).  Whether power is a capacity of one actor to change the behavior of another (Dahl 1961) or is a relationship in which one actor is disproportionately able to avoid negative sanctions (Rossi 1957: 425), in all definitions, power in every-day situations is often seen in micro-level interactions.  Despite the recognition that power is often seen in micro-level phenomena, mainstream sociology typically minimizes the role symbolic interaction plays in contributing to t...

SECOND DRAFT 9/17/03 Notes for a Critical Interactionist Theory for Educators: Signification by Richard A. Quantz Educators have a dizzying array of social theories from which to choose. There are the classic theories of Durkheim, Weber, and Marx, as well as modernist theories such as Parson's functionalism, Blumer's symbolic interactionism, Luhman's (and a host of others) systems theory, the interpretive theories of phenomenologists such as Garfinkel and Burger and Luckman, as well as the critical theory of Habermas and the other members of the Frankfurt School. We have some interesting contemporary theories such as Bourdieu's field theory, Giddens's structuration theory, and, of course, the poststructuralism of Derrida and Foucault, the feminist poststructuralism of Kristeva, Irigaray, and Butler, the postcolonial theories whose roots are found in the work of Fanon and Du Bois and given its mo...