Social construction as process: some new possibilities for research and development

Here we outline one variant of social constructionism - one that emphasises social ontologys as constructed in ongoing co-ordinations of act and supplement. We stress that such processes may be constructed both in written and spoken words, in non-verbal actions and artefacts. Relational processes often construct persons and worlds in either/or relations, however ‘both/and’ also is possible. We explore some ‘new’ both/and possibilities in various areas of practice showing, for example, that research: can be viewed as construction; does not have to strive to enact the standard view of science, and; instead might construct inclusive, multilogical, and heterarchical relations constructing "power to" go on in new ways. Whilst social constructionist arguments do not demand any particular methods or relations, we suggest that there are good reasons why approaches of the sort described might be of value, might be more ecological, in todays ‘fast’, postcolonial, multi-cultural worlds

Discourses of relations and relational

This is a story of relations and relating. There is no wolf, no Little Red Riding Hood; there are no bears, nor little piggies. It is not a heroic tale of how one particular discourse proves its superiority by vanquishing other discourses; it is not a tale told from behind the wings, the modernist author’s pen, or the realist painter’s brush. This story, like all stories, is told from a particular point of view or standpoint – one that I shall try to make explicit – one that I shall call ‘critical relational constructionism’ (CRC). From this standpoint I shall provide a schematic overview of different discourses of relations by discussing three ‘intelligibility nuclei’ (Gergen, 1995) in terms of their interrelated ‘lines of distinction’ (Deetz, 2000). I shall call these discourses (1) ‘this and that thinking’; (2) constructivism; and (3) critical relational constructionism

Bounded entities, constructivist revisions and radical re-constructions

This article seeks clearly to distinguish constructivism and constructionism and to give the reader a more extended and detailed knowledge of the latter. It does so by outlining three different discourses: entitative, constructivism and critical relational constructionism (CRC). In the first, relations are storied as ‘going on’ between independently existing entities in Subject- Object (S-O) relation. The second involves a shift from naïve to (some sort of) critical realism and so blurs some S-O constructions. The third discourse (CRC) is the least well known. It is the only one that reflexively treats its own themes and assumptions and those of ‘science’ as constructions that could be otherwise – hence the term “critical”. CRC is presented as a different language game. Instead of centring relatively stable entities, minds and ‘real’ reality, CRC centres ongoing relational processes as they construct and re-construct multiple Self - Other relations - as relational realities