Abstract:cess Berger calls externalization. By objectivation the social world so constructed is clothed with a palpable reality of its own. Then, by means of internalization, the social world feeds back upon people, determining the forms human consciousness will take by means of lifelong socialization. “Lifelong” is an important element of this formulation, because Berger claims that the social world may collapse if people do not constantly reassure each other ofits existence through social interaction predicated on its particular qualities. Mary Douglas is presented as pressing forward the Durkheimian proposal that religion, science, and everyday classifications serve to protect the social order. Dirt is matter out of place. Crime, as behavior out ofplace, is really a special sort of dirt. In times of crisis society may not even wait for actual malfeasance but launch witch-hunts against innocents in order to demonstrate where the boundaries lie. Group and grid, as measures of the strength of barriers between and within social units, constitute a matrix for classifying collectivities and studying change. Michel Foucault also attends to how society purifies itself. In this case the society in question is that of the West, and the means of purification is fundamentally the exclusion of whomever happens to be classified as outcaste at a given moment in history: lepers, the insane, or criminals. Determinations about what human conditions and behaviors are to count as normal or deviant are made by those in possession of knowledge, such as scientists and physicians. And knowledge constitutes power, the power to control and repress. The process results, however, not from the conscious amassing of power by a particular group but from the self-realization of the episteme or dominant orientation of each historical epoch. Jurgen Habermas is another student of history, but perhaps more than Foucault he aims to use theory not just to understand what has happened in history but also as midwife to the process of social evolution and human liberation. A key to social evolution is communication, which may be enhanced by the critical analysis of language and other symbolic forms. Successful communication generates consensus as to the basic conditions of existence at any historical stage, a consensus that includes a critique of the problems specific to that stage of development. From that critique grows concerted-often revolutionary-action to eradicate those problems, and this action moves society to a higher stage of evolution. On the other hand, distorted communication or ideology obscures the conditions of existence. This hinders the development of their critique and therefore operates as a brake on history. T h e book closes with the chapter “An Emerging Framework,” which attempts to make generalizations about the four theorists. Berger’s concern with the subjective experience of individuals is contrasted with the greater interest of the other three in the structure of social institutions. The nonpositivist orientation of all four authors is discussed, as well as their view ofculture as a distinct aspect of social reality worthy of study in itself. From the chapters on individual thinkers it is clear that most or all of them share interest in several issues, such as the legitimation of power and the ways in which society controls or even represses its members. Unfortunately the effort is not made in the final chapter to compare their views on such matters. As with the introductory chapter, a few statements in the conclusion are likely to grate on anthropologists, such as the analysis of culture being a ‘hascent orientation to the study ofhuman behavior”; it is too early to tell how productive it will be (p. 259). Shortcomings in the introductory and concluding chapters compromise the effectiveness of the volume as an integrated whole. Still, the chapters devoted to the four theorists are clear and informative and constitute useful introductions to their work for professionals and students alike.

Participant Objectivation*

Objectivity, Reflexivity, and Fiction: Humanity, Inhumanity, and the Science of the Social

Bourdieu's reflexive sociology and ‘spaces of points of view’: whose reflexivity, which perspective?

Reflexivity — Engaging with Pierre Bourdieu

Reflexivity and the "Acting Subject": Conceptualizing the Unit of Analysis in Qualitative Health Research

Who Knows? Reflexivity in Feminist Standpoint Theory and Bourdieu

Objecting, subjecting, and epistemic diversity

Portraying Reflexivity in Health Services Research

Myth of objectivity and the origin of symbols

Functionalism Historicized : Essays on British Social Anthropology

Foucauldian Discourse Analysis in Psychology: Reflecting on a Hybrid Reading of Foucault When Researching “Ethical Subjects”

Routine, Reflexivity, and Realism

Pierre Bourdieu: Expanding the scope of nursing research and practice

The shiny new object: Deconstructing the patient-oriented paradigm in health sciences

Epistemological Alienation in Scientific Psychology

LANGUAGE AS THE OBSERVER’S WORLD AND THE WORLD AS THE OBSERVER’S LANGUAGE: TOWARDS AN EXPERIENTIAL APPROACH TO LINGUISTIC PHENOMENA

Now I see it, now I don’t: researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research

‘Put that in your fucking research’: reflexivity, ethnography and disability sport coaching

“The Real is Relational”: An Epistemological Analysis of Pierre Bourdieu's Generative Structuralism

Adjust your own oxygen mask before helping those around you: an autoethnography of participatory research

The Epistemic Predicament of a Pseudoscience: Social Constructivism Confronts Freudian Psychoanalysis