Social constructionism: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Social constructionists''' believe that humans develop hardened conceptualisation of each other actions over time, which leads to habitual [[LARP|role-playing]] of reciprocal social roles. This can be seen in the [[inceltears]] / [[incel]] divide, where firmly entrenched memes and roles create a split over time and define each others actions within forums.  After this, certain practices become codified, such as posting something for it to emerge on [[inceltears]].  Certain forum members behave in certain ways often because they have an oppositional social role to a member in a rival forum.  The social roles of modern blackpill and [[anti-incel]] forums become codified almost to the point of [[incels.co|subcultural]] and [[anti-incels|not traditionally moral]] [[blackpill|religious]] activity.
'''Social constructionists''' believe that humans develop hardened conceptualization of each other actions over time, which leads to habitual [[LARP|role-playing]] of overly fixed social roles.  


The theory was created by the 1960s philosophers Berger and Luckmann, who both saw modernity and the liberalization of traditional institutions as causing people to have loose moral moorings and to [[blackpill|create their own religions]].  Their books not dedicated exclusively to social constructionism mainly dealt with non-traditional religion.  They did not have a prescriptive stance towards modernity, but were rather descriptive.  The main proponents of social constructionism, saw liberalism as causing a  
This can be seen in the [[anti-incels]]/[[incels]] polarization, where firmly entrenched memes and roles create a split over time and define each others actions within forums. The social roles of modern blackpill and [[anti-incel]] forums become codified almost to the point of [[incels.co|subcultural]] and [[anti-incels|not traditionally moral]] and [[blackpill|quasi-religious]] activity.
 
Ironically, many social constructionists find ''themselves'' forming hardened worldviews as a consequence of the polarization with their intellectual opponents. This leads them to extreme assumptions such as that gender, race, class, and disability are only or predominantly ''socially constructed'' rather than a result of evolution, and that humans are for the most part ''blank slates'' and ''infinitely malleable''.
This is accompanied by a feeling of moral superiority, [[Marxism|resentment]] and pessimism, and an expectation by accepting this we can achieve a more harmonious society, even utopia.
 
The theory was created by the 1960s philosophers Berger and Luckmann, who both saw modernity and the liberalization of traditional institutions as causing people to have loose moral moorings and to create their own religions.  Their books not dedicated exclusively to social constructionism mainly dealt with non-traditional religion.  They did not have a prescriptive stance towards modernity, but were rather descriptive.  The main proponents of social constructionism, saw liberalism as causing a  


{{Quote|"homelessness of the mind."|Berger}}
{{Quote|"homelessness of the mind."|Berger}}


==Modern colloquial meaning==
==Colloquial/pejorative meaning and critique==
 
Colloquially, social constructivism also means [[Moral Relativism]], [[Lockianism|Lockian philosophy]], and/or [[gender relativism]].  All three being fairly far away from the original or academic meanings of the term, with the exception that all focus nurture arguments of human behaviour rather than nature arguments. [[Tradcon]]s colloquialize and ignore the academic side of the term as much as they do the term "post-modern".


==Criticism==
Colloquially, social constructivism also means [[Moral Relativism]], [[Lockianism|Lockian philosophy]], and/or [[gender relativism]], and is sometimes used almost synonymously with [[postmodernism]], e.g. by [[Jordan Peterson]] and other [[tradcon|tradcons]].  All of these terms are being used as fairly far away from the original or academic meanings of the term, except for the commonality that they see nurture as more important than nature.
While social constructionism doesn't have much to say about the validity of arguments about human actions being caused by nature, some have blamed social constructionism for '''ignoring''' human nature. Social constructivists have also been criticized for providing ideological foundations for cranks and pretentious people.  This became a later criticism of post-modernism.
Social constructivism and postmodernism have been criticized for providing ideological foundations for cranks and pretentious people.


== See also ==
== See also ==
17,538

edits

Navigation menu