|
|
THE INTERNET ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF
PERSONAL CONSTRUCT PSYCHOLOGY |
 |
| Main Page |
| Contents |
| Alphabetical Index |
| Hints for prints |
| |
| Impressum |
| Social constructions | |
| Social constructions can be
construed simply as the mechanisms that sustain the possibility of
constructionist reality. In the literature of the critical social
sciences,
notably feminist research, however, theorists look at social
constructions as
constructions that have far-ranging practical outcomes. Significant in
their
view, is the fact that constructions
of social categories often
determine life chances.
Citing categories such as gender, race, class, and ethnicity
especially, researchers
emphasize that in every society, these are social constructions rather
than
descriptions of "essences". The point is that there is no purchase on
construing any group as irrevocably characterized by particular
qualities. This
type of analysis has implications both political and theoretical in
connection
with how groups are regarded or "rated" in society as a whole. Given
the
recognition that categories are no more (and no less) than social
constructions, it is incumbent on those who assess behavior and judge
accomplishments of individuals clustered in a socially defined category
to assume
that factors in the social context – political maneuvering, economic
circumstances, prejudice and discrimination – are likely to have
affected
outcomes and to have shaped traits that may mistakenly be construed as
innate. On the theoretical level, the construal of categories as social constructions constitutes a validation of elements in both versions of social constructionism. In accordance with the stronger version, social categories are the community generated and maintained linguistic entities that determine define reality through discourse. Therefore, they are subject to discursive review in shifting social situations. In accordance with the weaker version, social categories are the product of adaptations to physical reality that are constructed by dominant groups and therefore can and, in many cases, should be reconstructed in order to enable a more egalitarian construal of social groups that suffer deprivation. Although Kelly does not deal with the political issues involved in the concern with social constructions, the theory of Personal Construct Psychology provides a basis for examining them as stereotypical constructs. The principal of constructive alternativism provides for the possibility of finding constructs to replace those that are socially injurious. Moreover, as shown by Warren (1998) as well as Willutzki and Duda (1996), Personal Construct Theory can be construed as providing methods for promoting egalitarianism not only in the meeting of the psychotherapist and the client, but also in the meetings of social groups. Awareness of the pervasiveness of social constructions and of their effects are of the utmost importance. |
|
| References |
|
|
|
|
Devorah
Kalekin-Fishman
|
|
|