Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- 1 The Myth of Cultural Integration
- Part I Rejecting cultural conflation
- 2 ‘Downwards conflation’: on keys, codes and cohesion
- 3 ‘Upwards conflation’: the manipulated consensus
- 4 ‘Central conflation’: the duality of culture
- The different forms of conflation and their deficiencies: a summary of Part I
- Part II Reconceptualizing cultural dynamics
- Notes
- Index
The different forms of conflation and their deficiencies: a summary of Part I
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2009
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- 1 The Myth of Cultural Integration
- Part I Rejecting cultural conflation
- 2 ‘Downwards conflation’: on keys, codes and cohesion
- 3 ‘Upwards conflation’: the manipulated consensus
- 4 ‘Central conflation’: the duality of culture
- The different forms of conflation and their deficiencies: a summary of Part I
- Part II Reconceptualizing cultural dynamics
- Notes
- Index
Summary
Conflation of the two levels of analysis – of the properties of the Cultural System with Socio-Cultural activities – always takes place in a particular direction. Chapters 2 and 3 dealt with two out of the three possible methods of conflation. This pair were the antithesis of one another for in them conflation took place in precisely the opposite direction: in the one the Cultural System was held to organize the Socio-Cultural level, while in the other Socio-Cultural interaction orchestrated the Cultural System. Thus in the downwards version, Cultural Systems engulfed the Socio-Cultural domain through the basic processes of regulation and socialization, while in the upwards version, the Socio-Cultural level swallowed up the Cultural System as the result of domination and manipulation. In brief, both versions treated one level as an epiphenomenon of the other level – they differed about which of the levels was held to be epiphenomenal.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Culture and AgencyThe Place of Culture in Social Theory, pp. 97 - 100Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 1996