Social constructionism | Society and Culture | MCAT | Khan Academy

Summary

This video script delves into the concept of social constructionism, a theory suggesting that much of what we consider real is actually shaped by collective human agreement. It explores how constructs like nations, books, and money only hold value within the context of society, illustrating the difference between brute facts, which exist independently of human beliefs, and institutional facts, which are born from social conventions. The script contrasts weak and strong social constructionism, with the former acknowledging some inherent realities, while the latter claims all of reality is constructed through language and social habits, challenging our perception of the world and the nature of knowledge itself.

Takeaways

• 🧐 People often question the reality of their experiences, pondering what makes something truly 'real'.
• 🤔 Social constructionism suggests that much of what we consider real is actually constructed through social consensus.
• 💬 Constructs like nations, books, and money are cited as examples of things that do not inherently exist without human society's agreement.
• 👥 The concept of 'self' and individual identity is also viewed as a social construct, shaped by societal interactions and expectations.
• 🤞 Weak social constructionism acknowledges the existence of 'brute facts' - fundamental realities independent of human interpretation.
• 🚨 Brute facts are contrasted with 'institutional facts', which are created and maintained through social conventions.
• 💯 Strong social constructionism argues that all of reality and knowledge are social constructs, dismissing the notion of brute facts entirely.
• 📚 Critics of social constructionism point out its failure to adequately account for natural phenomena and their impact on society.
• 🚧 Strong social constructionism faces challenges in explaining phenomena that do not depend on human belief or social practices.
• 🔮 The debate between weak and strong social constructionism highlights the complexity of understanding reality and knowledge as purely social constructs.

Q & A

What is the fundamental question that social constructionism attempts to answer?

Social constructionism attempts to answer what makes something real, challenging the notion that knowledge and many aspects of the world only exist because we as a society agree upon their reality.

Outlines

00:00

🌐 The Nature of Reality and Social Constructionism

This paragraph introduces the philosophical inquiry into the nature of reality, questioning what makes something real. It posits that many aspects of our world, including nations, books, and money, do not inherently possess reality but are instead imbued with it through social consensus. This is the essence of social constructionism, which argues that knowledge and the surrounding world's constructs are not real in themselves but are made real through collective human agreement. The discussion extends to the concept of self as a social construct, formed by our interactions and society's expectations. It further differentiates between weak social constructionism, which acknowledges the existence of brute facts that exist independently of human interpretation, and strong social constructionism, which contends that all of reality, including the idea of brute facts, is a product of language and social practices. The paragraph concludes with criticism of social constructionism, particularly its failure to account for natural phenomena and, in the case of strong social constructionism, its challenge in explaining reality without resorting to brute facts.

Keywords

💡Real

In the context of the video, 'real' refers to the essence or existence of something that is recognized or considered as genuine and not imaginary. The video prompts viewers to question the reality of their experiences and the constructs within society, emphasizing that many aspects of what we perceive as real are actually based on collective human agreement and social constructs. For example, the script questions if nations, money, and even the self are real beyond our social agreements and perceptions.

💡Social constructionism

Social constructionism is presented as a theory suggesting that much of what we understand about the world and ourselves is not inherently real but is constructed through social agreements and interactions. The script explains that knowledge, identities, and even material concepts like money are given meaning and considered real only through collective human belief and societal norms. This concept is central to the video's theme, exploring how our realities are shaped by social constructs.

💡Constructs

The term 'constructs' refers to ideas, concepts, or perceptions that are created by societies and individuals to understand and navigate the world. In the video, constructs are described as not real in and of themselves but are made real through social agreement. Examples given include nations, books, and money, illustrating how these widely accepted realities are, in fact, constructs of human society.

💡Nations

Nations are used in the script as an example of social constructs, defined as groups of people who share a language or history. The script challenges the intrinsic reality of nations, arguing that they exist only because we collectively agree on their existence and boundaries, thereby highlighting the arbitrary nature of what is often considered a fundamental aspect of human society.

💡Money

Money is discussed as a prime example of a social construct, described as pieces of paper and metal that hold value only because society has agreed to assign them such. This example is pivotal to understanding the video's argument that the reality of many aspects of our lives, including the economy, is based on collective belief rather than inherent value.

💡Identity

The concept of identity in the video is described as a social construct, formed through interactions with others and societal expectations. This perspective suggests that our sense of self is not an inherent truth but is shaped by the social and cultural context, emphasizing the fluidity and constructed nature of personal identity.

💡Weak social constructionism

Weak social constructionism is a viewpoint that recognizes the existence of brute facts, which are fundamental truths not dependent on human interpretation, alongside social constructs. The script mentions this theory to differentiate between aspects of reality that can exist independently of human belief and those that cannot, illustrating the theory's attempt to balance the influence of inherent truths and social agreements.

💡Brute facts

Brute facts are described as the most basic and fundamental truths that exist independently of human beliefs or social constructs. The script uses the complexity of explaining phenomena like quarks as an illustration of brute facts, highlighting the distinction between the inherent realities of the natural world and the constructed realities of social phenomena.

💡Strong social constructionism

Strong social constructionism is presented as the belief that all of reality, including the existence of things like quarks, is entirely dependent on language and social habits. This perspective argues that there are no brute facts, and everything we consider real is a result of human construction. This radical viewpoint underscores the video's exploration of the extent to which our perceptions of reality are shaped by social constructs.

💡Natural phenomenon

Natural phenomenon refers to events or occurrences in the natural world that exist independently of human action or belief. The video critiques strong social constructionism by pointing out its difficulty in explaining natural phenomena, which do not rely on human agreement to exist. This highlights the tension between understanding the world as entirely constructed by social agreement and recognizing the autonomous existence of natural phenomena.

Highlights

Invites listeners to question the nature of reality.

Introduces the concept of social constructionism.

Provides examples of social constructs: nations, books, money.

Describes the self as a construct shaped by society.

Distinguishes between weak and strong social constructionism.

Explains the concept of brute facts.

Introduces institutional facts as dependent on social conventions.

Outlines strong social constructionism's reliance on language and habits.

Summarizes criticisms of social constructionism.

Highlights strong social constructionism's difficulty with natural phenomena.

Suggests our understanding of the world is influenced by social constructs.

Emphasizes the necessity of social agreement.

Discusses the complexity and abstract nature of brute facts.

Captures the debate within social constructionism.

Invites contemplation on social constructionism's implications.

Transcripts

I'm sure everyone has thought at some time, is this real?

But the important question is what makes something real?

Most of the time the things we experience in this world

are just constructs.

We have opinions about everything,

and we experience the world through that lens.

Social constructionism is a theory

that knowledge and many aspects of the world around us

are not real in and of themselves.

They only exist because we give them

reality through social agreement.

Things like nations, books, even money

don't exist in the absence of human society.

Nations are groups of people who happen

to share a language or history.

Books are paper with scribbles.

And money is just pieces of paper and metal

that have no value other than what we have assigned them.

The concept of the self can be considered

a social construct, too.

Our identity is created by interactions

with other people and our reactions

to the expectations of society.

There are two threads of social constructionism, the weak

and the strong.

Weak social constructionism proposes that social constructs

are dependent on brute facts, which

are the most basic and fundamental

and don't rely on any other facts.

Brute facts are kind of difficult to understand

because it is so strange to think about something that

can't be explained by something else.

So for example, take the computer screen

you're looking at.

Your screen works because of changing voltages and bits

of metal, which can be explained by movements

of subatomic particles, which are made from quarks, so

on and so forth.

None of those are brute facts.

The brute fact is what explains quarks

or what explains the explanation of quarks.

Those brute facts are separate from institutional facts which

are created by social conventions

and do rely on other facts.

So for example, money depends on the paper

that we have given value.

Strong social constructionism, on the other hand,

states that the whole of reality is dependent on language

and social habits, that all knowledge

is a social construct, and that there are no brute facts.

So it would say that we created the idea of quarks

and everything we use to explain it.

There are no facts that just exist.

The main criticism to social constructionism

is that it doesn't consider the effect of natural phenomenon

on society.

And, at least for strong social constructionism,

it even has difficulty explaining those phenomena

because they don't depend on human speed or action.

Strong social constructionism only explains reality

through the thoughts of humans, not

by using fundamental brute facts.