Goals and Behaviour
In the first part of this paper I intend to argue that anthropologists have a predominantly causal conception of explanation and that the only feasible way to avoid this is to apply consistently the assumption of goal-orientation of behaviour, that is to hold what could broadly be called a teleologi...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | ces |
Published: |
Karolinum Press
2014-12-01
|
Series: | Historicka Sociologie |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.karolinum.cz/doi/10.14712/23363525.2014.1 |
id |
doaj-700d11105ca74c80881b056f2dbf7320 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-700d11105ca74c80881b056f2dbf73202020-11-25T03:06:11ZcesKarolinum PressHistoricka Sociologie1804-06162336-35252014-12-012014294210.14712/23363525.2014.1301Goals and BehaviourMilan StuchlíkIn the first part of this paper I intend to argue that anthropologists have a predominantly causal conception of explanation and that the only feasible way to avoid this is to apply consistently the assumption of goal-orientation of behaviour, that is to hold what could broadly be called a teleological conception of explanation – a view that developments are due to the purpose or design that is served by them. Further on I will try to show that groups and norms do not exist and act independently of people. They have no existence as “things” apart from forming a part of the relevant stock of knowledge of the members of society. They can be brought to bear on actions only by people invoking them. Thus we have to make a sharp distinction between the conceptual or notional level of phenomena, and the transactional or processual level, sometimes known as cultural and social respectively.http://www.karolinum.cz/doi/10.14712/23363525.2014.1goal orientation of behaviourgroupsnormscausal explanation of behaviourindividual strategies |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
ces |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Milan Stuchlík |
spellingShingle |
Milan Stuchlík Goals and Behaviour Historicka Sociologie goal orientation of behaviour groups norms causal explanation of behaviour individual strategies |
author_facet |
Milan Stuchlík |
author_sort |
Milan Stuchlík |
title |
Goals and Behaviour |
title_short |
Goals and Behaviour |
title_full |
Goals and Behaviour |
title_fullStr |
Goals and Behaviour |
title_full_unstemmed |
Goals and Behaviour |
title_sort |
goals and behaviour |
publisher |
Karolinum Press |
series |
Historicka Sociologie |
issn |
1804-0616 2336-3525 |
publishDate |
2014-12-01 |
description |
In the first part of this paper I intend to argue that anthropologists have a predominantly causal conception of explanation and that the only feasible way to avoid this is to apply consistently the assumption of goal-orientation of behaviour, that is to hold what could broadly be called a teleological conception of explanation – a view that developments are due to the purpose or design that is served by them. Further on I will try to show that groups and norms do not exist and act independently of people. They have no existence as “things” apart from forming a part of the relevant stock of knowledge of the members of society. They can be brought to bear on actions only by people invoking them. Thus we have to make a sharp distinction between the conceptual or notional level of phenomena, and the transactional or processual level, sometimes known as cultural and social respectively. |
topic |
goal orientation of behaviour groups norms causal explanation of behaviour individual strategies |
url |
http://www.karolinum.cz/doi/10.14712/23363525.2014.1 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT milanstuchlik goalsandbehaviour |
_version_ |
1724674784030097408 |