Compare and Contrast Goffman's and Foucaults Explanation of How Social Order Is Made and Remade

Compare and Contrast Goffman's and Foucaults Explanation of How Social Order Is Made and Remade
In: Social Issues
Compare and Contrast Goffman's and Foucaults Explanation of How Social Order Is Made and Remade
Introduction
* Whose theories of social order I will be using as the focus of my assignment. (Goffman and Foucault)
Main Content
* Goffmans views on what constitutes social order being made and remade through individuals, and how Mondermans’ Thesis relates to how Goffman views social order.
* Foucaults’ views on what constitutes social order being made and remade through institutions and how Buchanans’ report relates to how Foucault views social order.
* The differences and similarities with Goffman and Foucaults findings.
Summary
* Summarise what both theorists have said regarding social order and what I understand about these findings.
There are many ways in which social order is produced and maintained. Social scientists are interested in a broader view of society, they look at what leads to problems and the things that need some sort of solution creating to improve them (Reflections on Ordered Lives); I am going to describe how social order is made by using the explanations of Michael Foucault and Erving Goffman, who are social scientists that have attempted to explain how social order is created and where it has come from, I will also be discussing how their views both differ in their approach and how they are similar.
I am beginning with Goffmans’ explanations, from the detailed studies he undertook working within the framework of the functions of rituals and order in everyday life; he has tried to show ways in which societies are ordered through multiple performances in contexts such as everyday interactions and where orderliness of encounters come from. He sees social order as being built through the process of building social interactions, which lead to the ordering of social life. His approach is an analytical one of interaction order

Cited: by Silva, 2009, p319). The similarities in their work are centred on being concerned with the wider questions of understanding how society has been established. They both look for wider ways of understanding the issues that arise from social interaction and explaining the link between individual and social situations but their findings have found different explanations to social order and how it is maintained (Online Activity 23). To summarise what I have learned from the research into social order by these theorists I have come to understand that social order involves a sense of how individuals all fit together in shared spaces, it could not be made and repaired unless individuals are able to make sense of and make use of the shared norms that govern our behaviour. These shared norms and expectations mean that we take social order for granted as it is part of our everyday lives and interactions with other people. It also appears that we only seem to become aware of social order when it has been disrupted or broken in some way. But sometimes people do not want to be ordered and may disagree about what sort of social order they want to live in (Reflections on Ordered Lives). To conclude the key points of these theories Goffman thinks social order is produced through regular practices and interactions of people in their day to day lives and people being able to negotiate with each other, whereas Foucault believes social order is shaped through authoritive knowledge and establishments that can govern people’s behaviour. I can see where both points of views can be valued, with Foucault I agree that we do need institutions setting guidelines and rules that we should follow for an ordered society as without establishments like schools, the police and local councils we would have disorder, but I also agree like Goffman we need to be in charge of our own social interactions and be responsible for our own behaviour