Perinbanayagam1981
Revision as of 00:48, 22 November 2019 by AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=INCOLLECTION |Author(s)=Robert S. Perinbanayagam |Title=The definition of the situation: an analysis of the ethnomethodological and dramaturgical view |Edi...")
| Perinbanayagam1981 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | INCOLLECTION |
| Key | Perinbanayagam1981 |
| Author(s) | Robert S. Perinbanayagam |
| Title | The definition of the situation: an analysis of the ethnomethodological and dramaturgical view |
| Editor(s) | Adrian Furnham, Michael Argyle |
| Tag(s) | EMCA |
| Publisher | Pergamon |
| Year | 1981 |
| Language | English |
| City | Oxford |
| Month | |
| Journal | |
| Volume | |
| Number | |
| Pages | 322–345 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1016/B978-0-08-023719-0.50036-X |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | The Psychology of Social Situations: Selected Readings |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
The dramaturgical and the ethnomethodological positions of the definition of the situation is discussed, after a brief history of the concept. The ethnomethodologists claim to take their cues from Wittgenstein and Schutz, whereas the dramaturgists take theirs from G. H. Mead; these positions are examined in terms of their relative power to explain the problem of the definition of the situation, concluding that the Meadian position is the more powerful one. It is then argued that the essential sociological ontology—that given expression by Weber and Durkheim—is best realized by adopting some form of the dramaturgical argument.
Notes
