Sociological Perspectives on Social Reality Essentialism Vs Social constructionism Vincent M. Mugisha PhD Student/GTA, Educational Leadership and Policy Studies

Essentialism a belief that certain phenomena e.g. race, gender, sexuality are natural, inevitable, universal, and biologically determined (Irvine, 1990) a belief in underlying true forms or essences not subject to change. things have essences, understood as fixed properties that define and limit what a thing is, sharply delineating it from what it is not

Social Constructionism the ways in which we think about social phenomena and use categories to structure our experience of them (Berger & Luckmann, 1966) Social Phenomena are what we make of them, are not fixed, are fluid, context-based, and malleable

Constructionist vs. Essentialist Essentialism: the tenet that human behavior is “natural,” predetermined by genetic, biological, or physiological mechanisms and thus not subject to change. Social construction theory: suggests that what we see as “real” is the result of human interaction. Two umpires…two views Some are balls some are strikes and… #1- “I call them as they are” #2- “I call ‘em as I see’ em”

“I call them as they are” Balls and strike are entities that exist in the world independently of themselves This umpire regards knowledge as objective and independent of mind. For him balls and strikes exist in the world; he simply observes their presence. The essentialist “presumes” that items in a category all share some “essential” quality. So…how does an essentialist view the categories of race, sex, sexual orientation, and social class?

“I call em as I see em” This umpire is a pure constructionist He operates from the belief that conception such as strikes or balls have no meaning except that given by the observer. For him reality cannot be separated from the way culture makes sense of it. From this view difference is created. So…how does a constructionist view the categories of race, sex, sexual orientation, and social class? Examples in you life? the beginnings or origin of something a result of thought, such as an idea, invention, or plan

If we see race, gender, class, & sexuality as socially constructed, then human identifiers…. Depend on context. Time, location, societal Make us think in terms of opposites. Creating dichotomies of bad and good Reflect social ranking and power relationships. Creating systems of dominance? Have both psychological and structural meanings. At personal levels and institutional levels

“If we define situations as real, they are real in their consequences” We respond to situations on the basis of the meaning we attach to them….their essential reality, if it exist at all, is irrelevant.

Perspectives Compared Social Constructionists: view such categories as the product of cultural/ institutional interpretations (Ann Morning, 2006) argue that races do not correspond to patterns of human biological variation, but rather that racial groupings are ‘constructed’ through social processes that take place in particular historical, political and economic contexts. (Ann Morning, 2006) Essentialists: view categories like race, gender, and sexuality as the product of essential features of an individual's biology or psychology (Ann Morning, 2006) describe races as groups of people who share certain innate, inherited biological traits (Ann Morning, 2006)

Take 2 minutes to discuss with your neighbor How would essentialists view the following? Intelligence Athleticism Homosexuality How would social constructionists view the following? Intelligence Athleticism Homosexuality