okay.
the main writers are Durkheim and Berger & Luckmann.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_constructionism
will give you a brief overview of the arguments for the theory of social contructionism and link you to more detailed info on these writers.
and this page
http://www.hud.ac.uk/hip/soccon/soccon.html
will give you some links to other sources of information.
my own opinion?
yes. i think it is impossible to seperate out our identity as human beings from the language that we use to discuss ourselves and the world we live in. the concepts that we use, and imagine hold some sort of objective reality, are merely reflections of what we have been taught - they only have meaning because they are imbibed with the values of our culture, our time and place.
we have no identity as human beings without placing ourselves in relation to other human beings, (someone else suggested googling 'feral children' for more on this) and the only way to do this is to assign ourselves roles - mother, daughter, girlfriend, wife, teacher, nurse, friend.... we think that it is self-evident what it means to *be* these things, but it isn't. we are *told* how to be these things by watching other people do it, seeing what kinds of behaviour get rewarded and what kinds get sanctioned. and these behaviours are different from culture to culture - they are socially constructed.
so eg, what it means to be a *wife* or a *citizen* in 21st century britain is different from what it means to be a *wife* or a *citizen* in 19th century britain, or in 21st century japan.
good luck with the essay :)
2007-03-08 10:47:19
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yes we are. I was a sociology major at UCLA and not to say that means anything but I studied this subject for two years. Just about every rule, belief, or standard we have came from another person or what we've experienced. Obviously the rules from parents and other authority figures is social construction. Our experiences are determined to be good or bad based largely on what we and others think. Example: For everything we think is wrong there's another part of the world where it is ok. The difference, if we are all humans (and we are) is in the society and the values. And that's social construction.
2007-03-07 23:11:09
·
answer #2
·
answered by jjsingh97 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
No, humans construct society from their evolved heritage. This thinking is why social science, especially sociology, is seen as intellectually sterile. Society is the parameter by which our biological and evolved selves are modified in expressions of behavior. To think other wise, while not explaining why societies do not arbitrarily vary, is incoherent.
2007-03-07 23:37:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Yes they are. Humans need interaction in order to be truly human .You can google Ferral Children or Mead's writing on The Self. Hope that helped a little.
2007-03-08 00:41:17
·
answer #4
·
answered by conair26 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
I know that I personally am not. I think it depends, cause not everyone is socially constructed. I enjoy privacy and keeping to myself more than going out and meeting new people each day. I like stability, and small crowds.. small groups of people I'm sure I can trust. More people = more chances of people burning you. But maybe I'm just negative haha.
2007-03-07 22:28:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by ames 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
No. We have great hereditary part to us from our genes. If this was not true, social scientists could be able to manipulate any child to be anyone and anything they liked. We do not have a "Tabula Rasa" on birth, it is more like an undeveloped photgraph waiting for the light of life to bring us into self realisation.
2007-03-08 13:33:30
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Yes
2007-03-07 23:43:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by anne j 2
·
1⤊
1⤋