Structuration Theory http://uregina.ca/~gingrich/319m606.

htm

Sociology 319 Contemporary Social Theories

March 6-8, 2006
Structuration theory of Anthony Giddens

Readings:
Adams and Sydie, p. 33 and pp. 47-55.
Anthony Giddens, Living in the World: dilemmas of the self, from Anthony Giddens. 1991. Modernity
and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age, Stanford, Stanford University Press, pp.
187-201. Also available on the internet at: http://www2.pfeiffer.edu/~lridener/courses/GIDDENS.HTML

Giddens

1. Introduction

The British social theorist Anthony Giddens has developed a theoretical structure that explains human
agency (action) in the context of social structure and integrate action and structure. In this approach,
termed structuration theory, Giddens argues that human agency and social structure are not two separate
concepts or constructs, but these are together produced by social action and interaction. In sociological
analysis, their separation may be a result of how sociologists examine and interpret social reality, with
agency and structure being two ways that social action can be studied and understood sociologically.
There is a duality of structures in society on one side there are individuals as actors in particular
situations, who enter into knowledgeable activities and participate in social action and interaction in these
situations. At the same time, the social world is composed of social systems and structures these are the
rules, resources, and social relationships that actors produce and reproduce through social interaction.
The study of structuration means examination and analysis of the ways in which social systems are
produced and reproduced in social interaction (Giddens, 1984, pp. 25-6). Giddens defines structuration as
the structuring of social relations across time and space, in virtue of the duality of structure (Giddens,
1984, p. 376).

In the assigned reading, Dilemmas of the Self, Giddens examines four seemingly contradictory aspects
of contemporary modern society. Each of these dilemmas can lead to pathological results for an
individual; at the same time, each dilemma opens new possibilities and opportunities for an individual,
possibilities that can be creative and produce a better life. In the reading, Giddens appears to argue that
individuals are generally able to resolve the dilemmas as they construct their self and their individual
identity through social action and interaction. Of the authors examined so far this semester, Giddens
appears to have the most sophisticated way of connecting a microsociological theory of social action with
a macrosociological explanation of the systems and structures of society. Even where he does not deal
with all the micro-macro issues, and while his approach may not always provide a satisfactory or complete
explanation, he openly addresses issues related to social action at the micro and macro level and attempts
to integrate them.

2. Anthony Giddens

Anthony Giddens (1938- , English) is one of the major contemporary sociological theorists. He was
professor at the University of Cambridge and, from the mid 1990s through 2003, Director of the London
School of Economics. He is a cofounder of a publishing company, Polity Press, and has written thirty-four
sociological books some are textbooks and others develop sociological theory. Capitalism and Modern
Social Theory (1971) and The Class Structure of Advanced Societies (1981) are two useful books that
summarize classical theory very well. The Constitution of Society (1984) is a more theoretical book that
presents and develops his structuration theory. Modernity and Self-Identity deals more with theories of
the self and microsociological issues in the contemporary world.

During the last decade, Giddens has sometimes been an advisor to the British Labour Party and is closely

1 of 9 23/01/2015 15:59
Structuration Theory http://uregina.ca/~gingrich/319m606.htm

connected with Tony Blair, the British Prime Minister. Giddens advocates a third way between
traditional forms of capitalism and socialism. This is generally considered a left-of-centre approach that is
not Marxist, that is, it is an attempt to renew social democracy by looking for new relationships between
the individual and community, fostering a concern for social justice and social inclusion, and creating an
active civil society in which community and state act in partnership. A summary is available at
www.lse.ac.uk/Giddens/FAQs.htm. Regardless of differences over political postion, Giddens is a leading
public intellectual who addresses topics of contemporary concern and is listened to by non-sociologists.

Giddens is masterful at summarizing, integrating, and presenting earlier theoretical perspectives and
arguments. The handout Dilemmas of the Self, from Modernity and Self-Identity (1991) refers to and
integrates concepts and analysis from Marx, Weber, Durkheim, Goffman, Simmel, Parsons, Goffman, and
other sociologists. In presenting his arguments, Giddens moves beyond earlier theorists and develops his
own perspective. He attempts to develop an all-encompassing theoretical approach without being as
abstract and obscure as Parsons. In his analysis, Giddens provides theoretical views on social action and
interaction, history, systems and structures, and political sociology. In each he attempts to solve
sociological puzzles and problems, and integrate seemingly disparate theories and perspectives into an
overall sociological theory.

Time, space, local life, physical bodies, and material realities, in addition to social interaction, form a
major part of his theoretical perspective. While time and space have often been ignored in sociological
theory, receiving no more than occasional offhand or incidental reference in the writing of other
sociologists, they are central aspects to social life and Giddens incorporates into structuration. In the
handout Dilemmas of the Self, Giddens notes that Everyone still continues to live a local life, and the
constraints of the body ensure that all individuals, at every moment, are contextually situated in time and
space (lines 2-3). Giddens notes how time and space, or at least our concepts and understanding of
these, as well as their material implications, have changed dramatically in recent years, and the relation of
people to these in the contemporary social world differs from that of earlier societies. Individuals today
are more connected to geographically distant events and people and global and local issues and structures
are more connected than in earlier periods. In Dilemmas of the Self, Giddens illustrates implications of
this, not only for systems and structures but also for self and identity.

3. Social action as praxis structuration

In the study of individual social action and interaction, theorists have generally adopted two positions
action and praxis. The former emphasizes the subjective meaning of the action to the actor Weber,
Parsons, rational choice theory, and some symbolic interaction approaches emphasize this. The praxis
approach emphasizes the enactment, performance, or production of social action Goffman and Garfinkel
exemplify this approach. For both sociological approaches, there are patterns of social action, institutions
composed of these regular patterns (family, peer groups), and structures (class, patriarchy). The
difference in emphasis relates to what the sociologist examines in developing an analysis of social action.
(see Cohen, p. 74 for a fuller explanation).

Giddens adopts a praxis approach to social action, whereby social action is composed of enacted conduct
(what people do in social action and interaction), social practices, local production of praxis, and
reproduction of practices. This approaches includes an examination of the material conditions in which
social actors interact (situations, context, place), and the social and material environment that both enable
and constrain social action. He emphasizes space proximity or distance and how these are mediated by
technology and social structures and time continuity and discontinuity and the organization of
activities across time. While praxis is situated locally, since that is where actors are located and where
social interaction occurs, this action is connected to social life both locally and over broader geographic
regions, potentially, globally. These connections work in both directions local conditions and situations
are affected by ideas and structural features that are societal-wide or even global, and social praxis is the
means that institutions and social structures are produced and reproduced. While Giddens generally
adopts a praxis approach to social action, he differs from ethnomethodological, symbolic interactionist,
and microsociological perspectives in more explicitly examining how social action and social practices are

2 of 9 23/01/2015 15:59
Structuration Theory http://uregina.ca/~gingrich/319m606.htm

connected to ongoing and pervasive systems and structures.

Giddens argues that practices are continued and enduring, so that social reproduction of familiar systems
and structures occurs. Social action and interaction as tacitly enacted practices become institutions or
routines and reproduce familiar forms of social life (Cohen, p. 94). Giddens states:
The basic domain of study of the social sciences, according to the theory of structuration, is neither
the experience of the individual actor, nor the existence of any form of social totality, but social
practices ordered across space and time. Human social activities, like some self-reproducing items
in nature, are recursive. That is to say, they are not brought into being by social actors but
continually recreated by them via the very means whereby they express themselves as actors. In
and through their activities agents reproduce the conditions that make these activities possible.
(Constitution, p. 2).
This approach provides Giddens with a means of integrating human social action with the larger systems,
structures, and institutions of which we are a part. It is the continual repetition of social action and
interaction in regular and habitual forms that constitute what sociologists consider as the larger social
forms. This structuration perspective differs from the external and coercive social facts of Durkheim,
where structures appear to have an ongoing existence that is separate from the individual and has a strong
determining effect on individual action. For Giddens, structure is not outside social action, but exists only
because of social action, and it is the repeated patterns of social action that constitute the structural
reality. As with Durkheims structural determination of individual action, a structuration perspective
implies that there are constraints on social action. But structuration allows for the possibility of flexibility,
creativity, and change in individual and group action. At the institutional or societal level, a structuration
approach provides a way of explaining social change (eg. through social movements and collective
responses of large numbers of individuals).

Structuration means changes in practices as well as regularities and continuation in these. The approach
of Giddens is similar to that of the American pragmatist John Dewey. Dewey argued that society was
characterized by enduring practices, routines, and habits, but within these there were always possibilities
for individual reflection and alteration of such practices, so that there is individual and social change. If
there is a disruption in what is taken for granted, either because of changes in external conditions, or
thought and reflection on part of the actor, then there are possibilities for changes in these forms of
action. Where these are associated with more than a single actor, on a larger scale or broader basis, such
changes can be connected to social change. (Cohen, pp. 83-85).

Giddens sometimes refers to these periods of reflection as fateful moments, [that] require reflection and
imagination in order to cope and change (Cohen, p. 94). Giddens argues that fateful moments are times
when events come together in such a way that an individual stands, as it were, at a crossroads in his
existence; or where a person learns of information with fateful consequences (Giddens, 1991, p. 113).
While one might hope for a better explanation than fate, humans may have little control over future
events, or at least individuals may have little control. (Later in the semester we will discuss Denzins
epiphanies these might be similar moments). While there is a certain contingency or uncertainty
associated with such events and moments, for an individual, there is also a history, set of experiences,
abilities, and knowledge that can be used as a guide through such situations. While these fateful moments
may be stressful and tension-filled, so that some individuals have difficulty coping with them, in
Dilemmas of the Self, Giddens notes how individuals can react creatively and interpretatively to
processes of commodification which impinge on their lives (pp. 7-8). That is, these situations and fateful
moments have the possibility of creating a change in the direction an individual considers it best to
proceed; they are not just moments of blind fate and contingency, or situations where structures, norms,
and systems dictate the direction of social action (as seems to be the argument in much of the writing of
Parsons and some critical theorists).

In summary, Giddenss approach to social action is that of praxis regular patterns of enacted conduct by
active individuals who, as social actors, interact other social actors in situations involving diverse
influences that include habit and patterns but also reflection and conscious decision-making. Adams and

3 of 9 23/01/2015 15:59
Structuration Theory http://uregina.ca/~gingrich/319m606.htm

Sydie (pp. 48-49) sum up structuration by pointing to three emphases of Giddens:

Human agency, where the social actor is a rational actor who has the ability to make decisions.
Reflexivity. This involves a self-consciousness on the part of the individual and an ability to
monitor the ongoing flow of social life and, at least sometimes, take ones understanding of this flow
of social life into account when considering appropriate action and deciding on a course of action.
Structure. These are the patterns in the social world that affect individuals and are composed of
rules, resources, and agency. (see next section).

4. Systems and structures structuration

Giddens uses the closely related concepts of systems and structures in his theory of structuration.
Systems are patterns of relations in groupings of all kinds, from small, intimate groups, to social
networks, to large organizations (p. 94) whereas structures are specific practices surrounding how social
actors deal with rules and resources. Systems include social and cultural systems (similar to those of
Parsons) and structures include class structures, educational institutions, etc.

In Giddenss model, systems appear to be more dynamic than structures, with the latter being relatively
fixed and forming a framework for the social activity that occurs in systems. Analogies might be heating
or cooling systems or city transit systems both require a material structure and a transit system requires
humans as workers and procedures but each has a dynamic character of change and flow, as well as
some regularity and possibly an equilibrium. A city or metropolitan area as a whole can be regarded as a
system in having a life, entities that move in it, and social relationships among those in it, with both
tendencies toward an equilibrium state and also changes to deal with adaptation to environment and
achieving new or different ends. A city also has a structure, something fixed and established (physical
structures and procedures), and one that allows the system to operate.

For Giddens, systems are patterns of relations in groupings of all kinds, from small, intimate groups, to
social networks, to large organizations. That is, it is the patterns of enacted conduct, the repeated forms
of social action and interaction, or the enduring cycles of reproduced relations that form social systems.
These could be systems such as families, peer groups, communities, or cities, either at a face-to-face level
or existing via networks over space and time. While a social system may not have the completeness or
closure of a biological or ecological system, system reproduction generally proceeds via enduring cycles
of reproduced relations in which recurrent practices constitute links and nodes (references from Cohen,
p. 94).

Goffmans interaction order of face-to-face encounters, can be considered as one form of a local system.
Networks that people establish through print or electronic communication, or occasional person-to-person
meetings associated with conventions or conferences, are examples of systems that have become more
common with the development and expansion of new and inexpensive forms of communication and
transportation. Goffman makes some reference to these as mediated forms of encounters, but does not
pay much attention to these, concentrating instead on face in personal encounters. It is the patterns of
relationships and repeated forms of interaction themselves that form the systems.

For Giddens, structure is more specific and detailed than system, referring to structured practices. Rules
and resources are the two primary features of structures such as market exchange, class structures,
political organizations and processes, and educational institutions.
Procedural rules how the practice is performed. Give and take of encounters, language rules,
walking in a crowd. Goffman (face, roles, role distance) and ethnomethodologists analyze these.
Moral rules appropriate forms of enactment of social action. Laws, what is permissible and what
is not. These do not refer ultimate values (eg. spiritual or sacred values), but refer to appropriate
ways of carrying out social action and interaction. Durkheim and Parsons emphasized the
importance of these norms, mores, customs, laws.

4 of 9 23/01/2015 15:59
Structuration Theory http://uregina.ca/~gingrich/319m606.htm

Material resources allocation of resources among activities and members of society. Means of
production, commodities, income, consumer and capital goods. Marxian analysis demonstrates the
inequalities associated with allocation.
Resources of authority. Formal organizations, how time and space are organized, production and
reproduction, social mobility, legitimacy, and authority. Weber analyzed the latter issues in the
context of power and its exercise. Wright included these resources as assets in his explanation of
contradictory class locations.

Each structure has the above aspects, involving different combinations of rules and resources. These
structures are formed by structured practices that is, they do not just exist in and of themselves and they
cannot exist without enacted conduct. While we may abstract from these practices and refer to these as
structures that frame and affect society, Giddens is interested in how they are reproduced. It is enacted
human conduct in the form of structured practices that maintains and reproduces these structures. But if
these enacted forms of conduct change, either because individuals make conscious decisions to change,
because of fateful moments, or through less conscious forms of adjustment, adaptation, and practice, then
this can produce structural change. Social movements, collective action, or parallel changes by many
individuals could have this result. Giddens notes that there are sometimes critical suspensions of routine
and occasions on which actors mobilize their efforts and focus their thoughts on responses to problesm
which will diminish their anxiety, and ultimately bring about social change (Cohen, p. 97).

Summary of structuration. For Giddens, structured practices are primary units of analysis, perhaps
the parallel of the unit act in the Parsonian theory of social action (Cohen). In terms of structuration
theory as a whole, structures and systems are reminiscent of Parsons in that they provide an
all-encompassing theoretical framework that can be used to analyze various aspects of social organization
and social change. One major difference between the two is that Giddens makes unequal distribution of
resources and power a central feature of his analysis, whereas Parsons pays little attention to this.
Giddenss structures and systems also appear to be more dynamic and less closed than those of Parsons,
so that they can accommodate many different forms of power and social change.

One way to think of these systems and structures is as a means of bridging the structure-agency gap,
focusing on systems and structures as patterns of enacted conduct. While we may consider systems and
structures as external to the individual, imposing constraints on the individuals, and existing apart from the
individual, if social action and interaction were to end, social structures would no longer exist. In order to
think like Giddens, consider structures as structured practices. That is, praxis does not exist apart from
structure, and structure is enduring patterns of action guided by rules and resources. The social
relationships that occur within these are the systems of structuration theory.

5. Modernity (notes from Adams and Sydie, p. 49)

The main focus of the writing of Giddens is on the current period of late modernity. He refers to the
current as a continuation of the modern, rather than as post-modern or post-structuralist or
post-industrial. At the same time, he identifies some important changes that characterize the current
period global influences and connections that have created a more interdependent world and
developments in communication and technology that alter our perceptions of, and the influence of, time
and space.

While Giddens does not deny that tradition is still an important influence in modern life, he considers
modernity to represent a qualitative change from earlier periods. Much along the same lines as argued by
critical and world-system theorists, he argues that the modern era is characterized by continuous change,
the expansion of capitalism, and the development of industrialism or machine technology to control and
transform nature (Adams and Sydie, p. 49). The traditional social setting involved religion, community,
and family as dominant forces guiding individuals and group action and interaction in local settings.
While these traditional features still carry influence, their dominance has been displaced by new systems
and structures related to capitalism, industrialism, and communication.

5 of 9 23/01/2015 15:59
Structuration Theory http://uregina.ca/~gingrich/319m606.htm

While Giddens draws on the insights of world-system and critical theorists, he adopts a more optimistic
point of view about our period of late modernity. At one level the new structures and systems act as
constraints on human action, or at least individuals and groups must alter ideas and actions to deal with
the new social realities. At the same time, it is through enacted social practices that these systems and
structures are reproduced. This creates the possibility of change, as human action and interaction alter
these ongoing practices while some aspects of system and structure are reproduced in unaltered form,
others change as new social practices emerge. In examining modernity in this setting, Giddens argues that
social structures and systems can also be considered to constitute opportunities within which individuals
and groups can exercise greater freedom and flexibility than in traditional settings.

Giddens identifies four aspects of modern society that differ from earlier, traditional forms of social
organization (Adams and Sydie, pp. 49-50).

Distanciation. This refers to social relationships being local and global. Relationships and
influences can be immediate or direct, as they were in traditional society. But modernity has
created the possibility of distant influences and distant relationships. The first page of Dilemmas
of the Self describes this distanciated influences, mediated experiences, and multiple images.
Yet the individual is generally able to make sense of these, find a means of sorting through and
organizing these images and influences. Giddens argues that this is not a random or passive
process on the part of an individual but each reader imposes his own order on this diversity and
this is part of the protective cocoon which helps regulate ontological security. (Dilemmas, p. 1).
Also note Giddenss reference to the networked diaspora of the French immigrants.

Power/agency is the capacity or ability to make decisions and do things (Adams and Sydie, p.
49). In this context, social structures provide resources (material and authority) and rules
(procedural and moral), but within this context, individuals have the capacity to act and make
decisions about their actions. Within traditional settings, people were not individuals in the
modern sense and generally had little power to make decisions that would change their social
setting. In modern societies, some are more powerful than others, and systems and structures
exercise domination. At the same time, individuals have a range of ways of exercising the
capacity to act, make decisions, and change their course of action a transformative capacity
and ability to make things happen (Adams and Sydie, p. 50).

Risk is a new element that modernity introduces. While traditional societies were subject to
external forces (natural disasters, weather, seasons), most of these were outside individual control.
In modernity, many of these are now subject to control by individuals or society and it is often
possible to calculate or determine risks associated with alternative possible course of action. The
insurance industry, probability and statistics, and political processes all demonstrate a shift from
uncertainty (not calculable) to risk (calculable). While individuals can make calculations to
protect them from risks, modern society has also created many new forms of risk (eg. ecological
and terrorism), against which individuals or society may not be able to protect themselves by
planning and. However, Giddens points to ways that individuals make decisions aimed at risk
reduction and peace of mind (Adams and Sydie, p. 50).

Trust. Given the risks associated with modernity, and the fact that our knowledge about the
factors that affect us can often not be known or understood locally by individuals, it is necessary
for people to exercise trust in others. We vest trust in experts, known sources, friends, authorities,
institutions, and structures. For Giddens, this is a necessary feature of modernity, but one that also
can create difficulties, especially when trust is eroded.

6. Acting subject and the self

Giddenss approach to the acting subject is less like Weber and Parsons, and more like Dewey, Mead, or

6 of 9 23/01/2015 15:59
Structuration Theory http://uregina.ca/~gingrich/319m606.htm

Goffman (Cohen, pp. 96-97). Adams and Sydie (pp. 50-51) identify his approach as being similar to that
of Mead in that the self is reflexive. This means that the actor builds a self by incorporating societal
influences but does not do this in a passive manner. The actor is thoughtful and reflects on how to best
respond to symbols. Adams and Sydie (p. 51) point out that the approach of Giddens differs somewhat
from this in that an individual creates a self or identity by being both object and agent, and is concerned
with self-actualization. While this may be a difficult process for individuals, there are three aspects of
consciousness that are related to this.
Practical consciousness. This refers to the way the routine and habit occur a tacit awareness
(Cohen, p. 96) of these routine forms of conduct along with a regular and continued set of practices
of which an actor may not be fully conscious. These include the enacted conduct noted by
ethnomethodologists.
Unconscious activity. Giddens argues that from infancy there is a primordial, unconscious need
for feelings of familiarity and practical mastery of the stable features of the social world. As these
practices are repeated, this means social reproduction of these, and such routine tends to eliminate
anxiety-producing anomie (Cohen, p. 97).
Discursive consciousness. This is the active, considered consciousness, similar to that described by
Weber and Parsons. For Giddens, actors are not inherently engaged in existential reflection on the
meaning of their conduct from moment to moment in everyday life. Rather, discursive
consciousness emerges at critical times expected or unexpected. In these circumstances, actors
mobilize their efforts and focus their thoughts on responses to problems which will diminish their
anxiety, and ultimately bring about social change (Cohen, p. 97). Being able to use trust is an
important feature of this. This may be at the local level, with trust in family, friends, or associates,
or trust in institutions and structures that have been found to be reliable.
In terms of socialization and the development of the self from childhood, there is a primordial need for
familiarity, practical mastery of surroundings, and a sense of security. This is obtained from development
of familiar routines, which accommodate the child to his or her surroundings and meet his or her needs.
This also is a means by which reproduction of the social order occurs, since the social order is the set of
practices and procedures that are ongoing and continued. To the extent that these meet the needs of the
child, the child develops trust in these routines; where the routines and needs are not met, this may
produce anxiety. Where security is disturbed in this way, this may produce anxiety and fear, but it is
partly through these that the child learns to deal with these problems. As individuals develop a practical
mastery of surrounding, through habit and routine and through discursive consciousness, they develop a
self-identity.
From these considerations, Giddens is not downplaying subjective consciousness as a source of meaning
and action, rather he recognizes the importance of both consciousness and a praxis approach in terms of
explaining large parts of human social action and interaction.

7. Dilemmas of the self

In this reading, Giddens sets out four dilemmas of the self in modern society. Among the issues to note
are the following.

Modern, global society, in contrast to tradition and traditional society. Connection between local and
global. The global may threaten the local but the global also provides a means of selecting,
appropriating, and ordering issues for the individual. That is, the global provides resources. Giddens
does not look on the global as necessarily good or bad, but as existing and individuals must learn how
to deal with it.

Self. The modern leads to individualism and the project of the self (p. 6). In traditional societies, a
sense of self is maintained largely through the stability of the social positions of individuals in the
community. Where tradition lapses, and lifestyle choice prevails, the self isnt exempt. Self-identity
has to be created and recreated on a more active basis than before (Giddens, 2000, p. 65). While this

7 of 9 23/01/2015 15:59
Structuration Theory http://uregina.ca/~gingrich/319m606.htm

creates tensions and difficulties for the self, the modern, global world also provides information,
flexibility, and options for the individual. As a result, Giddens does not consider these so much as
difficulties for the self but as dilemmas that the self has to understand and master (p. 1, near bottom).

Security of ones being as one over-riding aim establish a protective cocoon, but one that is not too
protective. Risk, trust, uncertainty, fate all figure in equation.

Accomplished, regular actions, routine like ethnomethodology.

Dilemmas are like the pattern variables of Parsons polar opposite ideal types associated with
traditional and modern.

Positive and negative aspects of dilemmas, with a polar opposite set of pathological results possible in
each. But Giddens appears to be arguing that most selves develop a degree of normality, or at least an
ability to exist within this framework.

Notes on the four dilemmas in Dilemmas of the Self:

Unification and fragmentation. While modernization results in dispersal, individualism, and

fragmentation, there are also integrative mechanisms. Giddens appears to discuss the unifying aspects
more as integrative than standardizing. Rather than considering the effect as primarily creating
multiple or fragmented selves, Giddens notes how individuals have an ability to deal with different
situations and contexts like Simmel. That is, Giddenss cosmopolitan person may be similar to
Simmels metropolitan man. Dangers include become a rigid traditionalist (some fundamentalist
religious persons) or becoming an evaporated self (no self-identity but merely a mimic of fashions
and trends). Note that Giddens solution is that of Mead: The individual only feels psychologically
secure in his self-identity in so far as others recognise his behaviour as appropriate or reasonable. (p.
3).

Powerlessness and appropriation. Modern society can create alienation, anomie, rationalization
and an iron cage, or mass society. But Giddens notes that individuals in traditional societies were
powerless as well, found it difficult to challenge tradition, and had limited resources and
communication to affect change. While globalization and the modern create risk and uncertainty, with
seemingly little control, they also produce the possibility of construction of self through appropriation
and mastery over life circumstances. Giddens uses the same example that Simmel does, that of
money. Trust and regularity is required, but money also creates new capacities, aims, projects, and
aspirations. Cohen notes how even the seemingly powerless can often exercise some degree of
control over their lives. Pathological forms include engulfment (complete loss of control) or
omnipotence (a fantasy).

Authority and uncertainty. Uncertainty existed in traditional societies and, as Durkheim argues,
religion may have initially emerged as an attempt to explain uncertain and unknowable cosmic forces.
Also, single authorities tended to dominate religion, community, kinship. These were often very
diffuse in their effects (as Parsons argued) and left the individual little room for manoeuvre. Modern
society is charaterized by a pluralism of authority, with specialization and fragmentation of expertise.
It may be difficult to negotiate ones way through this but routine, lifestyle, and trust can help create
some form of protective cocoon. This allows for greater flexibility than in traditional societies, but can
be associated with pathologies of dogmatic authoritarianism or immobilization.

Personalized and commoditized. As they become autonomous and powerful, markets generally
attack and destroy traditional social relations, including family and self. While markets expand the
scope for individual initiative and decision-making, they also bend these in a particular direction.
Giddens mentions the self as consumer, lifestyle as commodity, self-activity as a consumer package,
and reshaping daily life in line with market directions. But he also argues there are limits to this

8 of 9 23/01/2015 15:59
Structuration Theory http://uregina.ca/~gingrich/319m606.htm

markets are both standardizing and fragmenting, and individuals develop means to limit their effects.
As a result, the commodity is not all-triumphant. Pathologies though are narcissism (self-love and
egoism) or excessive individualism, whereby the integrative aspects of modernity are not effective.

Giddenss overall judgment about late modernity seems relatively positive, in much the same manner as
Durkheim. That is, there are divisive and abnormal effects in modernity, but there are also integrative
forces that provide possibilities for individual self development and social integration. As compared with
Durkheims emphasis on the division of labour as a means of accomplishing this, Giddens relies more on
the possibilities for development of the self. At the same time, he notes the powerful effects of
commoditization and the resulting economic inequalities that can emerge. While a solution to these is not
contained in this reading, he points towards forms of social democratic political and social solutions for
these problems.

References
Cohen, Ira J. 2000. Theories of Action and Praxis, in Bryan S. Turner, The Blackwell Companion to
Social Theory, Blackwell Publishers, Malden, Massachusetts.
Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Berkeley,
University of California Press
Giddens, Anthony, 1991. Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age,
Stanford University Press, Stanford, California
Giddens, Anthony, 2000. Runaway World, Routledge, New York

Giddens, Anthony. 2006. Interview in New Political Quarterly. Available at http://www.digitalnpq.org

/articles/global/33/11-09-2005/anthony_giddens

Last edited March 8, 2006

9 of 9 23/01/2015 15:59