Logo image
Re-presenting culture and the self: (Dis)agreeing in theory and in practice
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

Re-presenting culture and the self: (Dis)agreeing in theory and in practice

A. McHoul and M. Rapley
Theory & Psychology, Vol.15(4), pp.431-447
2005
pdf
representing_culture.pdfDownloadView
Author’s Version Open Access
url
Link to Published Version *Subscription may be requiredView

Abstract

We try to show that the fundamental grounds of psychological thinking about the domains of ‘culture’ and ‘the self’ (and their possible connections) are necessarily representationalist in the Cartesian sense. Rehearsing Heidegger’s critique of representationalism as the basic wrong turning taken by modern thinking generally (and by psychology in particular) with respect to what human being is, we move on to the possibility of a counter-representationalist re-specification of the concept of culture. Here we mobilize ideas from Husserl and Heidegger (again), and also from the basic ethnomethodological theory of Sacks and Garfinkel, to argue for the primacy of culture as an order of practical-actional affairs that makes conceptualizations of a putative ‘self’ always an effect of, and subsequent to, that very (cultural) order. Accordingly, we end by briefly analysing an actual case of an explicitly cultural use of a supposedly intensional term, ‘agree’.

Details

Metrics

296 File views/ downloads
50 Record Views

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Collaboration types
Domestic collaboration
Citation topics
6 Social Sciences
6.69 Language & Linguistics
6.69.610 Discourse Pragmatics
Web Of Science research areas
Psychology, Multidisciplinary
ESI research areas
Psychiatry/Psychology
Logo image