The Sage Handbook of Social Constructionist Practice. Группа авторов
be prepared to subvert their functioning. Let us briefly consider four forms of obstruction.
The Stranglehold of Modernism
Cultural traditions commonly resist change. And while this is not a critique of traditions themselves, it is often difficult for those within a tradition to reflect on its shortcomings. This is especially so when assumptions and values have been transformed into organizations, and the organizations are located in concrete structures, linked interdependently to other institutions, given a place in the economic process, and defended by law. Those sharing the tradition of positivist science occupy exactly this space. The tradition is linked to institutions of education, commerce, government, law, and more. As commonly put, positivist science is a central constituent of modernist culture. For many modernists, constructionist theory and practices are the harbingers of a relativistic chaos. Should we not anticipate that cultural modernism will soon enough snuff out the constructionist flames?
This is not the context for discussing the erosion of cultural modernism, but it is useful to focus on one matter of more local consequence. The relationship between positivist (foundationalist, realist) and constructionist communities has traditionally been contentious. Critique and counter-critique have been accompanied by mutual dismissal, ridicule, and demonizing. In these exchanges, constructionists have often succumbed to this tradition of mutual annihilation, though it is not congenial with constructionism itself. There is nothing about a constructionist orientation in general that would eliminate positivist theory or practice. At play is simply the reality of another community of meaning-making, one that offers logics, values, and practices of rich potential in confronting the future. Thus, rather than caving to the romance of vanquishing the enemy, far better to make clear the benefits of expanding potentials. Mixed methods researchers already partake of these benefits. Theirs is a message worth sharing across the divide.
The Foibles of Fixity
Innovations in professional practice are typically embraced because they represent improvements; they solve a pressing problem, are more effective, expand potential, and so on. And so it is with most of the practices explored within the present volume. However, when a new and desirable practice is found worthy, there is an accompanying tendency to lock it in place. This may be realized through extensive accounts in books and journals, and through operating principles, codifications, procedural rules, graphic summaries, and so on. One may see this tendency as only natural: ‘if a practice works, let's make sure we can repeat it’. The modernist worldview just discussed adds further weight: ‘If we can standardize it, we can install it in multiple locations, with a correspondingly high yield.’
Yet, this same penchant for a fixed procedure presents a danger to continuing innovation. On the most obvious level, and spurred by the neoliberal emphasis on economic gain, there are pervasive moves to monetize the practice. ‘How can we use the practice to make money?’ For practitioners, steps in this direction often include trademarking, developing training programs, and certification. There are several unfortunate results. The use of the practice becomes limited to only those who can afford the certified training. And, because they in turn will charge those who wish to make use of their services, the practice will ultimately be limited to the economically advantaged. In the service of expanding profits and/or control, the practice ceases to be transformative.
There is a more subtle problem at play in systematizing a successful practice, one that may be termed repetition regression. In general, any action – verbal or otherwise – shifts in significance as it is repeated. In the same way, any practice that is brimming with success when it is first employed, faces the problem of waning efficacy over time. The reasons are several. When a practice becomes a ritual it often loses excitement. Over time, boredom is invited. The first time one experiences an Appreciative Inquiry practice, for example, may be riveting. The tenth time, one may even feel resistant. Further, in many contexts the importance of a practitioner's words depends on their authenticity, that is, whether the expressions are specifically relevant to the unique individual or conditions at hand. When a teacher praises a student, for example, or a therapist expresses regard for a client, much depends on whether the praise or regard are seen as programmed – what the teacher or therapist always says – as opposed to being specific to the individual or situation in question. Finally, when a practice becomes formalized, it also becomes open to instrumentalization. It becomes a tactical tool for changing others, and thus subject to the same pitfalls discussed above regarding the presumption of causality.
It is essential, then, to avoid memorializing favored practices, and to embrace the possibilities of hybridization and continuous reforming.
The Enchantment of Righteousness
Working within a constructionist framework, most practitioners are keenly aware of the values that are realized in their efforts. Practices may be intended, for example, to support those in need, achieve social justice, create social solidarity, achieve peace, and so on. As proposed above, it is just such values that have motivated the development of new practices. However, the satisfaction derived from such efforts also carries dangers. The sense of ‘doing good’ can suppress critical reflection on one's efforts. Alternative points of view and practices may be dismissed or demonized. The general antipathy among many constructionists to strategic, mechanistic, individualist, materialist, structural, or hierarchical practices is illustrative. Further, the unreflective championing of one's ‘good’ practices may blind one to their ‘bad’ consequences. Supporting those in need may sustain the very systems responsible for their condition; the empowering of a group may lead to the dis-empowering of another group; alternatives to diagnostic categories threaten the well-being of those reassured by such categories; and so on. Unless we sustain a posture of humility in our valued endeavors, we risk becoming yet another encampment in the battles for moral superiority.
Absence of the Agora
As we have seen, constructionist ideas and practices have emerged in widely disparate professions around the world. Further, there are numerous communities – both professional and informal – in which practices congenial with constructionist ideas are continuing to emerge. Yet, communication between and among these many cousins is effortful. Books and journals are significant vehicles for information transfer, but their costs are often prohibitive, they lack broad visibility, they require translation, and the writing is often technical and opaque. The result is essentially a general state of mutual ignorance both within and across the domains of theory and practice, and across cultures. Metaphorically there is little that functions as an agora or public space for sharing and discussing developments. As constructionists emphasize, it is just such dialogues that kindle curiosity and enthusiasm, build confidence, spark innovation, and generate thoughtful reflection.
The present volume is a contribution to building this public space, and while broadly representative, the chief site of dialogue may be between readers and the authors. There are increasing numbers of conferences built around constructionist-friendly practices – in education, therapy and healthcare for example. Likewise, there are many websites that gather and feature relevant practices from broad sectors. And the Taos Institute has long attempted to bring together scholars and practitioners from around the world to share their work and inspire further growth. However, sustaining and developing the impetus to innovation will importantly depend on generating more plentiful sites for trans-disciplinary and trans-cultural dialogue. Most efficient and least environmentally harmful may be the offerings of the ever-expanding vistas of web-based communication.
Constructionist Practices: The Vital Challenge
While there are obstacles to the continued flourishing of relevant practices, there are profound reasons for energetically pressing ahead. We confront a world in which the world's peoples are both closer together and further apart than ever before. Not only are there more people moving across the globe than at any point in history, but technology enables instantaneous communication among people at virtually any location. These same technologies, however, enable the convictions of any group to be sustained and intensified through continuous interchange. The relations among