INSTRUMENTAL VARIATIONS I: RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY

1. Foundation for Rational Choice Theory: Alfred Schutz's work lays the foundation for
rational choice theory. This approach originated from the economic changes in the late
19th century, which Max Weber was familiar with. Similar ideas can be found in
behaviorist psychology, utilitarianism, and exchange theory in American sociology.
-Alfred Schutz's ideas paved the way for a theory called "rational choice theory." This theory
started to take shape due to economic changes in the late 19th century, a period Max Weber
was acquainted with. Similar concepts can be seen in behaviorist psychology, utilitarianism, and
exchange theory within American sociology.
-In simpler terms, Schutz's work laid the groundwork for a theory that focuses on how people
make decisions based on reason and self-interest. This way of thinking about decision-making
was influenced by changes in the economy during the late 1800s. Max Weber, who was a
prominent sociologist, was aware of these ideas.
-These notions of rational decision-making can also be found in other fields, like psychology,
where behaviorist psychologists study how people make choices. It's similar to the idea of
"utilitarianism," which suggests that people aim to maximize their own happiness. In sociology,
"exchange theory" looks at how individuals make decisions based on what they get in return for
their actions. All of these ideas share a common thread of understanding how people make
rational choices based on their interests.
Behaviorist Psychology: This is the idea that people's actions are influenced by rewards and
punishments. In rational choice theory, people also make choices based on what they think will
benefit them, so it's kind of like behaviorist psychology in that sense.
Utilitarianism: This is the idea that people try to make choices that will bring them the most
overall happiness or satisfaction. Rational choice theory is similar because it assumes that people
make decisions to get the most benefits or satisfaction.
Exchange Theory: This is the concept that people exchange or trade things with each other to get
what they want. Rational choice theory is related because it also looks at how people make
choices to get what they want, like trading time for money by hiring someone to do housework.

2. Basic Assumption: Rational choice theory assumes that people act in ways that bring
them benefits and avoid actions that don't. It's like making choices that maximize
personal gains.
-Rational choice theory is built on the idea that people tend to make decisions that help them
get what they want and avoid decisions that won't. It's a bit like trying to make choices that give
you the most advantage or benefit. So, people generally do things that they think will make
their lives better or avoid things that might make their lives worse. It's all about looking out for
themselves and making smart decisions to get ahead.
- Rational choice theory is a bit like a game where everyone tries to make choices that help them the
most. It's like picking the best candy from a candy store because you like it the most. People do things to
get good stuff or avoid bad stuff, just like choosing the tastiest candy. It's all about making choices that
make your life better.

3. Exchange Theory: Exchange theory is an example of rational choice theory. It suggests

that people exchange activities to maximize their gains. For instance, if I value relaxation
more than the satisfaction of doing housework, I'll hire a cleaner, and the cleaner, in
turn, values the income from the job more than their free time.
-Exchange theory is a part of rational choice theory. It's like a way of thinking that says people
make deals to get what they want. For example, if I really want to relax and I don't like doing
housework, I might pay someone to clean my house. The person I hire values the money they get from
the job more than their own free time, so it's a fair exchange. In this way, exchange theory is all about
people trading or swapping things to make themselves happier or better off.

- Exchange theory is a bit like trading things to get what you want. So, imagine you really don't like doing
chores like cleaning your room, but you love having free time to play games or relax. On the other hand,
there's someone who doesn't mind cleaning, and they like to earn some money.

So, you decide to make a deal: you pay them some money, and they clean your room. It's a win-win
because you get more free time, and they get some money they want. It's like a little trade where both
people get what they value more

4. Society as a Series of Decisions: Rational choice theory views society as a collection of

individual decisions and exchanges. People make choices based on their needs and
preferences, and these choices collectively shape society.
-Rational choice theory sees society like a big puzzle made up of individual pieces, where each
piece represents a decision someone makes. These decisions are driven by what people want
and like. When you put all these decisions together, they form the picture of how our society
works. So, it's all about how the choices people make, based on what they need and like, come
together to create the way our society functions.
- Imagine a big group of friends. Each friend makes their own decisions, like what games to play or what
snacks to have. These decisions are based on what they like and want.

Now, when you put all these decisions together, it creates the way the whole group behaves and what
they do together. So, it's like everyone's choices add up to create the rules and activities of the group.
That's how rational choice theory sees society – as a bunch of individual decisions that shape how the
whole group acts
 5. Economics of Supply and Demand: This theory aligns with the principles of supply and
demand in economics. Individuals, acting in their self-interest, make choices based on
their income, needs, and preferences, ultimately determining prices in a "perfect
market."
-NEOCLASSICAL ECONOMICS
-This theory is a lot like the rules of supply and demand in economics. It says that people, when
they act in ways that benefit themselves, decide what to buy and how much to pay based on
what they can afford, what they want, and what they like. When many people do this, it sets the
prices for things in what's called a "perfect market." In other words, it's all about how individual
choices, driven by income and personal preferences, influence the prices of things in a well-
functioning marketplace.
-a "perfect market" is like a fairytale marketplace where there are lots of buyers and sellers,
everyone knows everything about the products, and the products are all exactly the same. No
one can push the prices up or down too much, and anyone can start selling or stop selling
without any trouble. It's a place where people act very smartly to get the best deals. This is a
helpful idea in economics to understand how markets work in an ideal world, even though real
markets are rarely this perfect.
- imagine you're at a big market with lots of different things to buy, like toys, snacks, and clothes. Now,
the prices for these things depend on how much people want them and how many of them are
available.

So, if many kids want a special toy, but there are only a few, the price might go up because it's really
wanted. But if there are lots of snacks, and not many kids want them, the price might be lower.

It's like a big game where everyone tries to get what they want while trying to pay less. That's how prices
in the market are decided. It's a bit like everyone is a detective trying to find the best deals for
themselves

6. Weber's Broader View: While Weber recognized the importance of rational action in
society, he had a broader conception of rationality. He believed that human action
wasn't solely about calculating benefits but also about pursuing values and goals
beyond self-interest.
-while Weber understood that people often act in a smart and calculated way, he saw a bigger
picture. He thought that human actions weren't just about being clever to get personal benefits.
He believed that people also act based on their values and goals, not just what's good for
themselves. So, it's not just about being self-centered; it's also about following what you believe
in and striving for bigger things.
- Weber, a very smart person, said that people do things for more than just getting stuff for themselves.
Yes, they like to get what they want, like toys or candy, but they also do things because they believe in
something important or have big dreams.
So, it's not just about 'what's in it for me,' but also 'what's important to me.' It's like wanting to help
others, make the world a better place, or achieve something really special. That's what Weber thought –
people have big, important reasons for their actions, not just getting goodies for themselves

7. Challenges of Rational Choice Theory: Rational choice theory has been criticized for
oversimplifying human motivations, limiting the role of values, and not fully addressing
internal conflicts in human psychology. It tends to assume a behaviorist psychology that
explains human actions through rewards and punishments, which is closer to a natural
science cause-and-effect model.
-rational choice theory has faced some criticisms. People say it's too simple because it focuses
too much on self-interest and not enough on what people value or believe in. It also doesn't
account for the inner conflicts that can affect why we do things. It's a bit like looking at people
as if they're machines, responding to rewards and punishments, rather than considering the
complexity of human thoughts and feelings. Some say it's more like a science experiment than a
complete understanding of how people make choices.
- Rational choice theory is like a way to understand why people do things, but some people think it's a bit
too simple. It's kind of like saying people only do things to get rewards and avoid punishments, like
getting a cookie for good behavior or a timeout for bad behavior.

But in real life, people do things for many reasons, not just to get rewards or avoid trouble. They also
have feelings, beliefs, and big ideas they care about. So, some folks say that this theory is like looking at
people as if they're robots who only respond to rewards and punishments, and it doesn't capture all the
complex and interesting reasons why people act the way they do.

INSTRUMENTAL VARIATIONS II: PRAGMATISM AND SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISM

1. Pragmatism and Symbolic Interactionism: Pragmatism is a philosophy that emerged in
the late 19th century, associated with thinkers like Charles S. Pierce, William James, and
John Dewey. It's closely related to symbolic interactionism, an approach within social
science.
-Pragmatism is a way of thinking that started in the late 1800s, and it's all about focusing on
practical and real-world experiences to understand things. Thinkers like Charles S. Pierce, William
James, and John Dewey were big on this.
-Symbolic Interactionism is a way of studying how people communicate and interact in society,
like in social science. It says we understand the world by using symbols (like words and gestures)
and how we interact with others.
- Pragmatism, believed in using practical and useful ideas to solve problems and make life
better. Think of it as being like a handy toolbox filled with ideas that help you do things.
-Now, symbolic interactionism is a bit like a special way of using those pragmatic ideas, but it's
all about understanding how people talk and interact with each other. It's like studying how
people use words, symbols, and gestures to communicate and make sense of the world. So,
while pragmatism is a set of handy tools, symbolic interactionism is using those tools to
understand how people communicate and connect with each other.

2. Pragmatic View of Truth: Pragmatism suggests that the truth of something is closely tied
to its practical consequences. What works in a given context is considered true in that
context. This view is different from absolute truth but focuses on what's effective in
specific situations.
-The pragmatic view of truth is all about what actually works in real life. It says that something is
considered true if it's useful or effective in a particular situation. So, it's not about some big,
absolute truth, but more about what's practical and helpful in specific circumstances.
- Pragmatism is a way of thinking that says something is true if it's useful and works well in a
certain situation. It's like saying, 'If it helps and gets the job done, then it's true for that
moment.' It's not about one big, unchanging truth for everything, but what's best for the job
right now.
3. Shared Culture and Knowledge: Pragmatism, similar to Max Weber's ideas, emphasizes
that there's no inherent, fixed structure of society. Instead, knowledge in social science
is based on the shared culture of a community, which is an evolving process.
-Shared culture and knowledge, according to pragmatism and ideas similar to Max Weber's,
suggest that there's no one-size-fits-all, unchanging way that society is organized. Instead, in
social science, what we understand as knowledge comes from the common culture of a group
of people. This shared culture is always changing and evolving over time. So, there's no fixed
rulebook for society; it's more about how a community's culture shapes what they know and
do.
- Pragmatism, like Max Weber, says that there's no one-size-fits-all rule for how a group of
people act. It's more like a club where everyone agrees on how things work. And this club's
rules can change over time as people learn and grow. So, knowledge about how people act
comes from what the group believes and does, and it can change as they do.

4. Focus on Process: Symbolic interactionism emphasizes processes over fixed structures.

It acknowledges that knowledge, both about external objects and the social world, is
continually changing as we engage with these objects and interact with others.
-The focus on process in symbolic interactionism means it's more interested in how things
happen rather than sticking to rigid rules or structures. It understands that what we know,
whether it's about things in the world or how we interact with people, is always changing
because of our experiences and interactions. In other words, it's about how our actions and
connections with the world keep things evolving, rather than staying the same.
- Symbolic interactionism is a way of thinking that says we should pay more attention to how
things happen rather than thinking of things as always staying the same. It's like watching how a
flower grows - it doesn't stay the same, it changes. In the same way, our understanding of
things, like stuff around us and how people act, keeps changing as we talk, learn, and interact
with others. So, it's like seeing life as a big, exciting process that's always moving and changing.
5. Social Construction of Meaning: Pragmatism aligns with the idea of social
constructionism. It proposes that during our actions and interactions, we negotiate and
construct the meanings of objects in our world. Social scientists aim to make these
meanings intelligible.
-The social construction of meaning, which pragmatism supports, is like saying that the
meanings of things are created by people through their actions and interactions. It's not
something fixed, but something we shape as we go along. Social scientists try to understand and
explain these meanings, making them clear and understandable. So, it's all about how we, as a
society, decide what things mean as we interact with each other.
- Pragmatism is like saying we all work together to create the meanings of things. It's as if we
have a big conversation about what things mean in our world. Social scientists, like detectives,
want to understand these meanings by joining in on the conversation. So, it's like we're all
building a big dictionary of what things stand for in our world.
6. Self as a Process: In interactionist social psychology, the self is seen as a process, not a
fixed entity. It's the result of an ongoing internal conversation between how others
perceive us and how we interpret that information while pursuing practical goals.
-In interactionist social psychology, the idea of the self is seen as something that's always
changing, not something that stays the same. It's like an ongoing talk inside our heads where we
think about how others see us and what we want to achieve. So, the self isn't a fixed thing; it's
more like a conversation we have with ourselves as we navigate through life and our goals.
- In interactionist social psychology, we think of ourselves as not being a set thing that never
changes. Instead, we're like a puzzle that keeps getting put together. This happens because we
talk to others, and they give us ideas about who we are. We take those ideas and use them to
figure out who we want to be. So, it's like we're always changing and becoming the person we
want to be as we chat with others and follow our goals.
7. Different Rationalities in Different Situations: Pragmatism acknowledges that various
means-end chains exist, and they can vary from one situation to another. It doesn't focus
on a single form of rationality but explores the different rationalities that arise in different
contexts.
-Pragmatism recognizes that there can be different ways of thinking or being rational depending
on the situation. It's not stuck on one fixed idea of what's rational. Instead, it looks at how
different situations can lead to different ways of thinking and problem-solving. So, it's all about
being flexible and adapting your approach based on what makes sense in a particular context,
rather than sticking to one rigid rule of what's rational.
- Pragmatism tells us that there isn't just one 'right way' to do things. It's like having different
tools for different jobs. What makes sense in one situation might not make sense in another. So,
we look at what works best for each specific job or situation, rather than trying to use the same
rule for everything.
8. Social Sciences' Purpose: Just like other approaches, pragmatism aims to understand
meaningful human action. It asserts that if society exists, it's made up of individual
actions in relation to each other. These meanings and relationships are understood in
the context of pursuing practical purposes in the world.
-The purpose of social sciences, including pragmatism, is to figure out why people do what they
do in a way that makes sense. Pragmatism says that if you look at society, it's really a bunch of
individual actions that people take while interacting with each other. To understand what these
actions mean and how people connect, you need to see it all in the context of people trying to
achieve practical goals or purposes in their lives. In simpler terms, it's about studying how
people's actions and connections with each other make sense as they pursue their everyday
goals.

REASONS AND CAUSES

1. Debate on Causality: There is a philosophical debate about whether there is a causal
relationship between what a person desires to achieve and the actions they take to
achieve it.
-people argue about whether what we want (our desires) directly causes our actions. Some say
that when we want something, it makes us do things to get it. It's like saying hunger (desire)
makes you grab a snack (action). But others say it's not always that straightforward, and there
can be other factors influencing our actions. So, it's a big question: does what we want directly
make us do things, or is it more complicated than that?

2. Causal Relationship, but Non-Positivist: Some argue that there is a causal relationship,
but it shouldn't be understood in the positivist sense of a contingent regularity. It's not
about strict cause and effect.
-some people believe there is a cause-and-effect relationship between what we want and what
we do, but they don't see it as a rigid, predictable pattern. It's not like a switch that always turns
on when you want something. Instead, it's a bit more flexible and can vary depending on
different circumstances. So, yes, there's a connection between desires and actions, but it's not
as simple and predictable as a basic cause-and-effect relationship.
-so sometimes things are connected, like when you eat a healthy breakfast and feel energetic.
That's a cause-and-effect relationship. But, imagine you eat breakfast, and you don't always feel
super energetic, it's a bit unpredictable. That's what some people are talking about. They say
there's a connection, but it's not like turning a light switch on and off – it's more like a surprise
box. You do something, and something might happen, but it's not always the same or
guaranteed.
- A causal relationship, means that one thing makes another thing happen. It's like saying that if
you push a domino, it causes the next one to fall. So, it's about one event or action leading to
another.
- A "non-positivist causal" means looking at why things happen in a way that isn't just about
straightforward, clear causes. It's like understanding that there can be many different reasons for
something to occur, and it's not as simple as saying, "This caused that." It's like solving a puzzle
with lots of pieces that fit together in a more complex way.
3. Natural vs. Social Sciences: The positivist view tends to create a distinction between the
natural sciences, which deal with contingent regularities and universal laws, and the
social sciences, which deal with people's ideas, logic, and concepts.
-a positivist is someone who believes in using a scientific and objective approach to study and
understand the world. They rely on facts, data, and observable evidence to form their
conclusions, rather than personal opinions or feelings. Positivists often seek to discover general
laws and patterns in various fields of study.
-the positivist view makes a difference between two types of sciences:
Natural Sciences: These deal with things in the physical world, like gravity or chemical reactions.
They often look for consistent patterns and universal laws that explain how these things work.
Social Sciences: These deal with people and how they think, behave, and interact. Social
sciences are more about understanding human ideas, thoughts, and relationships. It's not
always as predictable as the natural sciences because people's behaviors and beliefs can be
more variable and influenced by many factors. So, the positivist view sees a distinction between
the two, with natural sciences seeking consistent laws and social sciences dealing with the
complexities of human behavior and thought.

4. Non-Positivist Causal Explanation: Some suggest that we can have a non-positivist

causal explanation of human action. This means that rational agents' beliefs and desires
cause them to act in certain ways. However, the relationship is not simplistic.
-some people argue that we can explain why people do things without relying solely on strict
scientific patterns. They believe that what people believe and desire (their thoughts and wants)
influence their actions. However, it's not as simple as saying, "If you want something, you'll
always do it." It can depend on many factors, and it's not as predictable as following a set rule.
So, it's a more complex and nuanced way of understanding why people behave the way they do.
- a non-positivist causal explanation is when we try to understand why something happens, like
why people do certain things, without relying on clear, straightforward scientific rules. It's like
looking at the complex and varied reasons behind an action, rather than just following a simple
cause-and-effect pattern. It takes into account the intricate and less predictable aspects of
human behavior.
5. Complexities in Human Action: Human action is more complex than a simple cause-and-
effect relationship. People can have desires of which they are not consciously aware,
have conflicting desires, or be driven by desires that go against reasons for acting in a
certain way.
-why people do things is not as simple as A causes B. It's more like a puzzle with many pieces.
People may want things they don't even realize, or they might have desires that are at odds
with each other. Sometimes, they act in ways that don't seem to make sense because their
feelings and thoughts can be really complicated. So, human actions are like a mix of different
desires and thoughts, not just one straightforward reason.
- when people do things, it's not always like pressing a button and getting a specific reaction. It's
more like a big jigsaw puzzle. Sometimes, they want things, but they don't even realize they
want them. Other times, they want different things that don't quite fit together. And, believe it
or not, sometimes they do things even when it doesn't seem to make sense, because they have
tricky feelings that make them act in unexpected ways. So, human actions are like solving a
puzzle with lots of mixed-up pieces, and it's not as easy as just connecting the dots.
6. Language and Interpretation: Language and interpretation add another layer of
complexity. The way people represent and talk about their lives can't be fully
understood through traditional notions of causality.
-the words we use and how we understand them make things even more complicated. People
describe their experiences and feelings in their own unique ways, and it's not always easy to fit
them into neat cause-and-effect explanations. Language and interpretation introduce a kind of
"twist" to understanding because it's not just about what's happening but also about how we
express and understand it, and that can be quite individual and complex.
- think of language like a secret code. Each person has their own way of talking and explaining
things. When people talk about their lives, it's like they're using their own secret code to
describe what's happening. This can make it a bit tricky to figure out why they do what they do
because their words might not always match up with the regular 'cause and effect' rules we use
to understand things. So, it's like a puzzle with a lot of different pieces, and understanding it
isn't as simple as just connecting the dots.
INDIVIDUALISM, HOLISM, AND FUNCTIONAL EXPLANATION
1. INDIVIDUALISM VS. HOLISM: Some sociologists, like Weber, focus on understanding
society through individual actions and their meanings. Others prefer a holistic approach,
looking at the larger social context. The text questions whether these approaches are
completely incompatible.
-In sociology, there are two main ways to study society. One way, favored by sociologists like
Weber, looks at society by understanding the actions and meanings of individual people. The
other way, called holistic, examines the big picture of the whole society. The text is asking if
these two approaches can actually work together or if they're entirely different and can't be
used together.

2. SOCIAL COMPLEXITY: The social world consists of different elements like social
structures, processes, and individuals, and they interact in complex ways.
-Social complexity means that the world of society is made up of many different parts, like how
people organize themselves, what they do, and the individual people themselves. These parts
all mix and interact in complicated ways. In simpler terms, it's like a big puzzle where all the
pieces fit together, but it's not always easy to see how.
- The social world is like a big, complicated puzzle. It's made up of lots of pieces, like rules,
things people do, and, of course, people themselves. And all of these pieces fit together in
many, many ways, just like how a lot of different puzzle pieces come together to make a big,
complex picture.

3. CHALLENGES OF INDIVIDUALISM: Relying solely on individualistic explanations can be

challenging because they may not account for social patterns and uniformities that
sociologists like Durkheim have identified.
-Using only individual explanations can be tricky because they might not explain why lots of
people in a society act in similar ways. Sociologists like Durkheim found that there are certain
common behaviors and patterns in groups of people, and individual explanations might miss
those bigger trends. In other words, it's like looking at each tree but missing the whole forest.
- Sometimes, just looking at what each person does doesn't tell us the whole story. Imagine you
have a big group of friends, and they all do different things. But if you only focus on what each
friend does, you might miss the cool games or activities they all like to do together. That's why
some smart people say it's important to look at both what people do on their own and what
they do as a group to really understand what's going on.
4. CHALLENGES OF HOLISM: Holistic approaches can struggle to explain how and why
social change occurs, as they sometimes treat society like a biological organism and use
functional explanations, which may not always hold true.
-Holistic ways of looking at society, which consider the whole picture, can sometimes have a
hard time explaining how and why social change happens. This is because they might treat
society like a living thing, sort of like a body, and use explanations that focus on how things work
together smoothly. But in reality, this approach might not always explain the messy and
unexpected ways that society changes. It's like trying to predict how a group of people will act
as if they're a machine, when people are more unpredictable than that.
- Imagine if you're trying to understand why a group of your friends changed the way they play a
game. Holistic thinking is like looking at the whole group and how they act together, which can
be a bit like thinking of the group as a living thing. But sometimes, this way of thinking might
not always explain why the changes happened, because it's more like saying, 'Well, the group
changed because that's how they work together.' It doesn't always tell us the real reasons
behind the changes, and that's one challenge of this way of looking at things.
5. FUNCTIONAL EXPLANATIONS: Functional explanations suggest that society has certain
needs to survive, but it's not always clear that these needs must be met in a particular
way. For instance, different societies might develop different educational systems to
meet the needs of capitalism.
-Functional explanations are like saying that society has specific requirements to keep going,
sort of like how a car needs fuel. However, these explanations don't always tell us exactly how
those needs should be met. For example, different societies might have different ways of
organizing their schools and education to support their economic system, like capitalism. So, it's
not a one-size-fits-all approach; it can vary depending on the society.
-Functional explanations are kind of like saying a society has to do certain things to stay healthy,
just like you need to eat, sleep, and play to stay healthy. But, here's the tricky part, it doesn't
mean every society has to do these things in the exact same way. It's like how you and your
friends might all eat different foods to stay healthy, but you're all still okay. So, different
societies can find their own ways to meet these needs, just like choosing different foods to stay
healthy.
6. CONDITIONS OF EXISTENCE: Instead of emphasizing "needs," some thinkers discuss
"conditions of existence," which don't cause something to happen but create a space
for it to occur and interact with other processes to produce outcomes.
-Instead of focusing on things society "needs," some thinkers talk about "conditions of
existence." These conditions don't make something happen by themselves, but they create a
kind of environment where certain things can take place and mix with other processes, leading
to specific results. It's like setting the stage for a play – the stage doesn't perform the play, but
it's where the actors and everything else come together to make the show happen.
- the "condition of existence" refers to the factors or requirements that must be met for
something to exist or be possible. It can be the necessary circumstances, elements, or
prerequisites that allow something to come into being or continue to exist
Here are some examples:
Fire: The condition of existence for fire is the presence of fuel, heat, and oxygen. Without these
three elements, fire cannot exist.
Life: For life to exist, it generally requires water, a suitable temperature range, and organic
molecules. In the case of humans, it also requires oxygen, but the conditions can vary for
different forms of life on Earth.
Plants: Plants need sunlight, water, and nutrients from the soil to exist and grow. Without these
conditions, they can't survive.
Rainbows: The condition of existence for a rainbow is sunlight and raindrops. When sunlight
passes through raindrops at a specific angle, a rainbow appears.
Internet Connection: To have an internet connection, you need a device (like a computer or
smartphone), a modem, a service provider, and a working network infrastructure. Without
these, you can't access the internet.
- Think of 'conditions of existence' like setting up a playground. When you create a playground,
it doesn't make kids play, but it gives them a place to play. So, it's not a rule that says, 'You have
to play this way,' but it makes it possible for them to play, and they can decide how to play and
have fun on their own. It's like making a good space for things to happen, even if you don't force
them to happen.

CONCLUSION:
1. SOCIAL SCIENCES VS. NATURAL SCIENCES: Social sciences study people, who think and
give meaning to their actions, making the approach different from natural sciences that
focus on non-conscious objects.
-Social sciences study humans and how they think and make sense of their actions. This is
different from natural sciences, which study things that don't think or have meaning on their
own, like rocks or chemicals. So, social sciences look at what goes on in people's minds and why
they do what they do, while natural sciences deal with things that don't have thoughts or
intentions.
- Social sciences are like detective work where we try to understand why people do what they
do and what it means to them. It's because people think and have feelings, so we need to figure
out what's going on inside their heads.
In contrast, natural sciences study things that don't think or feel, like rocks and chemicals. We
can't ask a rock how it feels, so it's a bit like studying objects that don't have thoughts and
feelings. That's why social sciences and natural sciences are different.

2. FOUR PHILOSOPHICAL APPROACHES: The chapter discusses four approaches under the
label 'instrumental rationality.' They all assume that social science studies the actions
of individuals trying to achieve real-world goals.
In this chapter, there are four ways of looking at things, all called "instrumental rationality."
They all share the idea that social science is about studying how individual people make
decisions and take actions to achieve their practical, real-life objectives. So, they all focus on
understanding how people try to reach their goals in the everyday world.
3. RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY: This approach is simple and strict, focusing on choices that
bring the most benefit to the individual.
-Rational choice theory is a straightforward approach that looks at decisions people make to get
the most personal benefit or gain. It's all about making choices that will help you the most.
4. WEBERIAN SOCIOLOGY: Weber's approach is broader, closer to common-sense ideas of
rational action, but it acknowledges the influence of emotions, tradition, and irrational
values.
-Weberian sociology, based on Max Weber's ideas, is a more flexible approach that's closer to
how most people think about rational behavior. It recognizes that besides logical choices, our
feelings, customs, and sometimes illogical values can also play a part in our actions. So, it's a bit
more realistic and takes into account that people aren't always purely logical in their decisions.
- Weberian sociology is like a way of understanding why people do things that's not so strict. It's
a bit like thinking about what you would do in everyday life. It knows that sometimes we do
things not just because they're super smart, but also because we feel a certain way or because
it's a tradition or something we just really want to do, even if it doesn't make total sense.
5. FOCUS ON MEANING: Some approaches, like phenomenology and pragmatism,
emphasize the development and construction of meaning. They look at how people give
meaning to their actions.
-Some ways of looking at things, like phenomenology and pragmatism, really care about how
meaning is created and shaped. They're interested in how people understand and give purpose
to what they do. So, they focus on how we make sense of our actions and experiences in life.
- Imagine you have a secret code or language with your friends that only you understand. These
approaches are like trying to figure out what those secret messages mean. They're curious
about how people create and understand the special meanings in their actions, kind of like
discovering the hidden messages in your secret code.
6. CONTEXTUAL RATIONALITY: Rationality varies with the context, so what's considered
rational depends on the specific situation.
-Contextual rationality means that what's considered a rational or logical choice can change
depending on the situation. In other words, what makes sense or seems like a good decision can
be different in different circumstances. It's all about adjusting our thinking to fit the context
we're in.
- Contextual rationality means that what's considered a smart or reasonable choice can change
depending on where you are and what's happening. So, something that makes sense at school
might not be the best choice at a birthday party. It's like using different rules for different
games.
7. IMPORTANCE OF HUMAN PERSPECTIVE: It's crucial in social science to consider what
people think of themselves and their actions. However, this doesn't mean we can't use
positivist methods or explore the impact of social structures on human behavior.
-In social science, it's really important to take into account how people see themselves and their
actions. But that doesn't mean we can't also use methods that aim to be completely objective
or study how larger social systems influence how people behave. In essence, we need to
understand people's thoughts and feelings, but we can still use scientific methods to study
society.
- Imagine you're trying to solve a mystery, like a detective. It's really important to think about
what the people involved in the mystery are thinking and why they do what they do. It's like
understanding their point of view.
But, it doesn't mean we can't also use scientific methods or study how the rules and systems
around them affect what they do. So, it's like looking at the mystery from different angles to get
the full picture

8. NO NEED TO CHOOSE: You don't have to pick just one approach. Each approach may be
suitable for different levels of analysis or specific aspects of social behavior. Weber's
ideas are generally applicable, Schutz focuses on consciousness, interactionism
examines the social generation of meaning, and rational choice theory is best for certain
economic decisions. Different approaches can coexist and offer insights into various
aspects of human behavior.
-You don't have to limit yourself to one way of studying people's behavior. Each approach can be
helpful for different situations or aspects of social behavior. Weber's ideas are good for many
things, Schutz looks at how people think, interactionism explores how we create meaning in
society, and rational choice theory is best for some economic decisions. So, you can use
different approaches together to understand various aspects of how people behave. It's like
having a toolbox with different tools for different tasks.
- It's like having a toolbox with different tools. Each tool is good for a different job. For example,
one tool is great for fixing your bike, another for painting, and one for building. In the same way,
these approaches are like those tools.
You can use Weber's ideas when you want to understand people in general, Schutz's for
understanding what people are thinking, interactionism for figuring out how people talk and
understand each other, and rational choice theory for money decisions.
So, it's like using the right tool for the job, and you don't have to pick just one – you can use
them all to learn different things about people."