Social constructionism is sociological doctrines of knowledge that study how social phenomena develop in social situations. Social construction is an idea that is the making of an individual band. A main point of social constructionism is to espy methods in which persons and bands take part in the forming
of their knowing social actuality. It includes looking at the methods social phenomena are invented, established and produced into practice by humans. Socially created actuality is observed as an dynamic advance. Actuality is imagined by people acting on their explanation and their learning of it.
Degrees of social construction
Though social constructionism includes a lot of theories and convictions it can be classified into two groups: Weak social constructionism and strong social constructionism. Weak social constructionists tend to notice basic real components to actuality; strong social constructionists notice everything as to some extent, a social construction. They mean that the
concepts of “real”¯ and “unreal”¯ are themselves constructs so that enquiry of whether anything is “real”¯ is just a topic of social tradition.
Weak social constructionism. Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker writes that “ some categories are actually constructions: they subsist only because people tacitly accede to play as if they subsist. Examples contain fund, tenure, nationality, and the presidency of the United States.”¯ Stanley Fish has meant that baseball’s “balls and strikes “are social constructions. Both Fish and Pinker coincide that the kinds of things meant here can be portray as piece of what John Searle names “social reality”¯. They are, in Searle’s terms ontologically subjective but epistemologically objective. “Social facts”¯ are temporally and logically hang on “brute facts.”¯ For instance “money”¯ in the structure of its raw materials (rag, brick, and ink) as established socially for barter (for instance by a banking system) is a social fact of “money”¯ by means of collectively willing and intending to set some special purpose by essential rules above “the brute facts. ”¯Social facts have outstanding quality of having no variant among physical (brute) facts.”¯ The subsistence of language is itself essential of the social fact.
Natural or “brute”¯ facts live freely of language; thus a “river”¯ is a river in every language and in no language; it simply is what it is. Ultimately against the strong theory and for the weak theory, Searle exacts, “it could not be the sample as some have asserted, that all facts are social facts that there are no brute facts because compound of social facts opens up that they are logically hang on brute facts. To think that all facts are social would create illimitable regress or circularity in the account of social facts. So that some facts are social, there must be other facts that are brute (physical, biological, and natural). This is the result of the logical compound of social facts.