0:01
Good evening. This is
Radio Free Beszel. I

0:04
am Alphonse. Tonight:
social construction.

0:09
When people say that something
is socially

0:11
constructed, like capitalism
or race,

0:14
they're usually implying
that in some

0:17
sense it's not real
- it's artificial,

0:19
made of some kind of
social stuff that is

0:22
in the consciousness of
the minds of people.

0:26
But if social constructions,
like race for

0:29
example, aren't real,
how is it that they

0:31
are so stable, they're
so long-lasting, and

0:34
they have such a large
impact on our lives?

0:38
Social things often seem
to have a bigger impact

0:41
and be more powerful than
physical things.

0:45
I'm going to talk about
the answer of Bruno

0:47
Latour in his book, Reassembling
the Social,

0:51
but I'm going to start by
illustrating that with money.

0:55
I'm hoping that we can
agree that money is

0:58
socially constructed - that
we can't eat bills or

1:01
coins, we can't shelter under
them. The question

1:05
is, why does money have
so much value for us?

1:10
Well, we could say
perhaps that it's

1:12
because there's some
kind of agreement,

1:14
there's some kind of
consciousness that we have

1:17
that we've decided that
money is valuable and

1:20
can be exchanged for
goods and services.

1:22
So it exists, in a sense,
in our minds.

1:24
It's made of that kind
of social stuff that

1:26
other socially constructed
things are made of.

1:30
And a thought experiment
would seem to support

1:32
this. Imagine that we all
went to bed one night,

1:35
and when we woke up the
money was still there,

1:38
but we had no recollection
of what it was for.

1:42
We'd forgotten what money
was. Well, then

1:44
it would lose its value,
wouldn't it.

1:47
So that suggests that
its value really

1:50
does come from inside
our minds.

1:54
But consider a second thought
experiment. Again

1:57
we go to sleep. Again we
all wake up and the

2:00
money is still there. And
we remember what it's

2:04
for - but the banks don't
exist. There are no

2:07
cash registers, the tax
department isn't there

2:09
anymore, and the tax department
demands payment

2:12
in the currency which
is one of the things

2:15
that forces people to
use it. And we can't

2:18
use the websites to buy
things because they're

2:20
gone too. Then the money
would also lose its

2:23
value. That suggests that
part of the value of

2:26
money actually is embedded
in physical things.

2:31
But I'm going to go
one step farther.

2:34
Imagine a third instance
we go to sleep,

2:36
we wake up in the morning:
the money's still

2:39
there, we know what it's
for, the banks are

2:42
still there, the cash registers
and so forth - but

2:45
nobody's exchanging money.
People aren't making

2:49
transactions, or at least
they're not making many

2:51
of them. Maybe it's some
sort of economic crisis.

2:56
Well in that case, the
value of money goes

2:58
down. It goes down because
it's not moving.

3:03
It turns out that much
of the value of money

3:05
comes from its movement
through the economy,

3:07
what economists call the
velocity of money.

3:12
The point I'm trying to
make is that if we

3:14
agree that money is a
social construction,

3:17
much of that construction
actually

3:19
is material. It is
actually anchored

3:21
in real things - but not
only in real things, in

3:25
interactions of people and
technology and things.

3:31
This is my attempt to
outline Latour's idea

3:33
of what actually makes
something social.

3:37
I'll give a second example -
Google and the World Wide Web.

3:41
I think we can agree that
Google is one of the

3:44
most important, if not the
most important site

3:46
on the Web. I'm talking
about the search engine here.

3:51
What makes Google so valuable
or so important? Is

3:55
it the number of pages they
have? I don't think

3:58
so. There's an unlimited
number of pages that

4:00
Google can generate - but
that's true of many

4:02
sites. Is it the value of
the content that Google

4:06
has? Not so much, because
the content is actually

4:09
on the sites that they link
to. It's not in Google

4:13
itself. Is it all the links
to Google or the links

4:17
from Google? Well, in part.
The fact that Google

4:20
is highly connected to the
rest of the Internet

4:23
is surely part of what
makes it important.

4:25
But the thing that
really matters

4:27
is traffic. If people
stopped going to

4:30
Google it would cease
to be important,

4:32
even if it maintained all
those linkages, even

4:35
if it was able to generate
all of those pages.

4:40
This, Latour says, is what makes
something social. This is what

4:43
social means. It has to do
with the associations

4:47
of things and people and
their interactions.

4:52
But sociology, and social
science, he says,

4:55
has made a mistake. Because
sociology - most of

4:59
it - treats the social as
if it's not material.

5:04
What sociologists do, he
says, is they look at

5:07
behavior, activities, phenomena
in the world,

5:10
and then they replaced
them with their set of

5:13
categories that they already
have - things like

5:16
capitalism and power and
oppression and so

5:19
forth. And then they treat
those categories

5:22
as though they're forces
in the world that make

5:26
people do things. The extreme
case he describes

5:29
is what he calls critical
sociology, or critical

5:33
social theory. What critical
social theory does,

5:37
Latour says, is first it
replaces phenomena in

5:40
the world with its set of
categories - things like

5:43
racism and oppression and
power and capitalism

5:46
and so forth. And second,
it ignores the protests

5:50
of the people involved
in those practices

5:52
who say, Hey, that's not
what we're doing!

5:55
And third, it takes that
as proof that it's

5:58
right, saying that those
people are unable to

6:01
face the reality of what they're
really doing, and

6:04
that's why they claim to
be doing something else.

6:08
For example, say someone says
something to someone

6:10
else. And the sociologist
looks at it and says,

6:12
"That's racist. You're
perpetuating racism."

6:16
And the person who said
the thing says,

6:18
"No that's not what i
intended at all." But

6:22
the sociologist says,
"Aha, now yes you are

6:26
you really are racist
and that's why you're

6:28
saying that you're not."
This maps one to one

6:31
to Latour's description
of how critical

6:34
social theory operates
more generally.

6:37
But he's not making an
ideological criticism. He's

6:41
not complaining that their
politics are wrong.

6:44
He's saying that this
is something more

6:46
deep-seated in how the
field operates.

6:49
Latour says that sociology
is a relatively

6:52
young discipline. The
natural sciences

6:55
were already well-established.
They were high

6:58
profile and high status.
So social scientists,

7:01
when they came along, wanted
similar status. And

7:04
to try to achieve that they
carved out a space

7:07
for themselves. Where
natural scientists

7:10
were concerned with
the material world,

7:13
sociologists would be concerned
with something

7:15
they would call "social."
And it wouldn't be

7:18
material, it would be separate.
This would be

7:21
a special domain where
they were the experts.

7:26
And then sociologists
went about the world

7:28
studying phenomena. But
they almost always

7:31
studied down. They would
study what at the time

7:34
would have been considered
as primitive beliefs

7:36
and myths. They would study
religion. And they

7:39
would reveal that what these
people believed was

7:42
false - and in fact the
sociologists themselves

7:45
had special knowledge above
and beyond. They had

7:48
a kind of God's eye view
of the truth, and they

7:51
could inform those people
and others as to why

7:54
those people were mistaken
in their beliefs, and

7:56
the real forces that it were
at work behind them.

8:01
Which isn't to say that
these sociologists were

8:04
entirely wrong. There certainly
are myths there

8:07
certainly are reasons that
people do things that

8:09
don't comport with the
claims that they made.

8:13
But the sociologists became
too confident in

8:16
their method. And Latour
says the moment he

8:19
realized it was when he saw
their encounter with

8:22
science. Because when
sociologists encountered

8:25
the natural sciences and
tried to explain them

8:28
the same way that they'd
explained religion,

8:30
they got it wrong. The
idea that science is

8:33
just a social construction
just a myth like

8:36
religion or other myths,
and that its claims

8:39
to its ability to explain
the natural world

8:42
are not true was a bridge
too far for Latour. And

8:46
when he looked at that failure,
he figured that

8:49
if sociology couldn't explain
science, perhaps it

8:52
had problems explaining a
lot of other things too.

8:56
It had worked when it
was studying down but

8:59
it had failed when it
tried studying up.

9:04
Its idea of social phenomena
is somehow uniquely

9:07
human and existing in
consciousness and thought

9:11
and not actually material
entities in

9:13
the world effectively
meant that it was

9:15
inventing a metaphysics.
Go too far down

9:18
that road and that's not
a science at all.

9:23
And it has real implications
for human free

9:26
will, because if forces like
capitalism or racism

9:31
are operating in the world
and making people

9:33
do things, then people
become like puppets.

9:38
And because these forces
aren't material,

9:40
there's not much we
can do about them.

9:42
Latour says, I quote,
"if you have to

9:45
fight against a force
that is invisible,

9:47
untraceable, ubiquitous
and total, you

9:50
will be powerless and
roundly defeated."

9:55
If we actually want to
change or challenge

9:58
things like racism or capitalism
and so forth,

10:02
we actually have to
understand how

10:03
they exist in the
material world.

10:06
We have to understand
what social

10:08
constructions are constructed
of. And Latur

10:12
says that they are constructed
of real things

10:15
- people, technology, objects,
relationships,

10:19
interactions. To understand
them we need to come

10:22
down from the God's eye view,
down to the ground

10:25
level view where people
operate, and not simply

10:28
ignore what they have to
say about what they do.

10:33
Meanwhile, sociology and
the categories it has

10:36
created, things like racism
and capitalism and

10:40
so forth, although they may
not be abstract forces

10:43
out there in the world like
gods or angels that

10:47
are influencing human behavior,
they do in fact

10:50
influence human behavior
because they themselves

10:53
are social constructions.
And like other social

10:56
constructions they are made
of things. They are

10:59
made of tenure committees.
They're made of

11:01
universities. They operate
in buildings.

11:03
They're in journals. People
make money and careers

11:07
publishing them. They are,
in other words, real:

11:11
but they're real on a
level with the things

11:14
that they describe, not
above them. Brought

11:17
down to that level they're
an obvious target

11:19
for studying using exactly
the same techniques

11:22
that they use on other
phenomena. But Latour

11:26
does caution that the categories
that they use

11:29
are not useless. In fact,
they are very useful

11:33
as descriptions, not as
forces in the world.

11:37
In other words, when
people trade and act

11:40
in markets we call that
capitalism. We use

11:42
capitalism as description
to capture a wide

11:45
variety of behaviors that
have similarities.

11:48
And as a description it's
a very useful term.

11:51
But to treat it as something
that acts on its

11:54
own doesn't make sense.
That's like taking Adam

11:57
Smith's invisible hand
a metaphor intended to

12:00
illustrate the action of
the market and turn

12:03
it into an actual force
in the world. There is

12:07
no invisible hand that makes
buyers and sellers

12:10
agree on prices. It's just
a useful description.

12:15
And these are very useful
descriptions.

12:17
But where they fall
down, Latour says,

12:20
is in dealing with new
phenomena. Because when

12:23
behavior changes, when
interactions change, when

12:27
people construct social
things differently, if

12:30
we stick with the same old
catalog of categories

12:34
then we're going to be misled,
and we're not going

12:37
to understand how things
happen. And of course

12:40
we're not going to be able
to change them. This

12:45
is Alphonse for Radio Free
Beszel, www.beszel.ca.

12:51
Good night.