Power: Interpersonal, Organizational, and Global Dimensions Monday, 21 November 2005 TOPIC: Transformations in location and sources of authority. First we discussed transformations in what look like the organizational structure of society, role of family, community, religion. Then we discussed the emergence of professional experts as new sources of knowledge that substitute for these traditional organizations, mediating institutions. Then, we discussed two examples about how the location of authority had shifted in the modern world to professionals. We left off with professional authority in family relations. Today we add another perspective to the same question: a transformation in social life produced (in the end) by technology (and maybe all along by technology). What happens when you regularly, repeatedly, observe yourselves, when function and instrumental knowledge become dominant over the taken for granted, habitual, organizations (institutions) and explanations? We are slowly moving from discussion of organizational shifts (in forms of aggregation and membership) along with associated types of authority to questions about reflexivity and feedback in this system. Most of the time, individuals live in a world that is taken for granted. Today we’ll take another cut at this taken for granted world and how might it have changed over time. Alred Schutz (German philosopher) – the fundamental structures/organizations/patterns in which social life takes place are not questioned but are lived as seemingly natural and self-evident aspects of life. This taken for granted quality pertains to our interpersonal relations (e.g. when we talk we face each other, or looking into eyes is so patterned that it’s taken as sign of sexuality/affection). This taken for granted quality pertains to interpersonal/micro arena as well as the larger/macro world of nations, states, and societies. e.g. classroom = familiar routine, unlikely that participants in this situation reflect upon what is going on unless something happens to interrupt routine. – Most interactions are not codified (vs. the syllabus), like what we should wear, coming to class and sitting in seats, using pens instead of crayons – these behaviors are not directly discussed about but actually go on day to day. – We have so much assumption of what ought to happen that we do not speak about what goes on. The large context of institutions (e.g. universities, economies, families) serve as the background of this classroom and will go unquestioned most of the time. This taken for granted world is being massively questioned because it is changing so rapidly. So many unaccustomed things are happening, interactions with little precedent. Thus, we are left with few ways to interpret or understand what is happening (no legitimizing myths or norms); we cannot make sense of experience or have meaning. Family, religion, and state are often questioned because they no longer seem to perform taken for granted tasks, and this becomes a problem we must think about, solve, get rid of. Change produces lots of things we’re not used to. To THINK about society was itself a cultural revolution; the beginnings of aspiration for a science of society. Recall Marx: superstructure and base. We have to protect the organization of society, this 11/21/05, page 1 of 8taken for granted quality of life. Society has a whole set of explanations, justifications, promises, myths to be applied to those instances when someone does raise a question. e.g. the recognition that babies come from somewhere is an extraordinary notion for 5 year old, a problem she must ponder. We have available in every society a set of stories, explanations, ready tales from where babies come from – or don’t we? Maybe those stories are changing and are a good indication! 50 years ago = stork brings a baby, or married people love each other and have a baby. not really where babies come from. 1960s = this story faded and the biology story began to proliferate, sometimes in the context of a family and sometimes not (single parenthood) What happens with this change and why does it change? These devices are used to maintain this taken for granted quality of life – they are called legitimations (sometimes myths or not). They range from “things have always been like this and always will be” (as Weber tells us) to moral statements, “the good way” of doing things to religious systems, “God made it this way, good people do it this way” Throughout history, religion most often offered these legitimations. Their mechanisms of operation are simple and common. Structures and institutions of society are interrelated as being part of the basic order of the universe: oneness of people, the way they do things, nature and gods, linking routine social experience by the very nature of things willed by the gods. e.g. ancient Egypt = notion of wholeness of universe was called ma’at, “the right order of things,” extends world of gods to world of man embracing both in an all encompassing meaning. – the gods in accordance with ma’at in the ways they run the universe. To be in conformity with ma’at was to be in proper communion with the gods. – ma’at also extended to institutional relationships in society, e.g. the king was embodiment of the gods. All proper ways of doing things were extensions of ma’at, e.g. how to build house or organize a family. Thus, you could read order in nature as well as social structure and government. – approved ways of living (social conventions chosen), the underlying order of things that linked the individual to the entire universe. The linkage between society and the cosmos prevailed in the Western world up through the Middle Ages. In the Western world, ma’at was called natural law. This persists to this day in jurisprudence, e.g. decisions that courts make should be consistent with the natural law of the universe (e.g. what is naturally male or female, what is a marriage). The peculiar crisis of modern society began with the disintegration of this vision of unity in society, i.e. the disintegration of Christiandom and then the split of states from religions governance. The progressive weakening of religious rule is the beginning of modern history (1500s onward) and has created an ever deepening crisis of legitimation. The past 500 years have thus been very different from the