Agency and Structure in Social Theory

This assignment delves into the sociological concepts of agency and structure, examining their relationship and impact on societies. It requires students to analyze how individual actions (agency) shape social structures, while simultaneously being influenced by those structures. The assignment encourages critical engagement with Giddens' structuration theory as a framework for understanding this dynamic interplay.

Running head: AGENCY, STRUCTURE AND IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION
Agency, structure and Identity Construction
Name of the student
Name of the University
Author note

1AGENCY, STRUCTURE AND IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION
Introduction
Identity Construction is an important part of that of the human species. The
construction of identity involves that of life experiences, connections along with that
of relationships. Structure is indicative of the recurrent arrangements that limit the
choices along with opportunities of an individual (Burkitt, 2016, pp 136). Agency
refers to the capacity of that of the individuals so that they can act independently and
make free choices. The debate of structure and agency illuminates on the factor
whether the individual acts as that of a free agent or they are controlled by that of
social structure. This essay elaborates regarding the fact whether the individuals in
the modern era make their own experiences or are they controlled by that of social
structure.
Discussion
Agency states that the behaviour of an individual is owing to their own free
choices and it portrays the individual as an “embodied actor”. It lays emphasis on the
concept of individualism. Individualism is a social outlook that focuses on the arena
of human independence and portrays the importance of liberty. Agency can be well-
explained by using the Great Man Theory of Thomas Carlyle who was a Scottish
writer. According to this theory, history is largely shaped by that of the impact of
individuals who are highly influential. With the help of their charisma and intelligence,
they played an effective role in the society and they made use of their power to
create a decisive historical impact (Sztompka, 2014, pp 64). This theory was
contradicted by that of Herbert Spencer who said that the great men were products
of that of the society. According to Carlyle heroes were responsible for shaping
history by making use of their personal attributes. Giddens has stated that people

2AGENCY, STRUCTURE AND IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION
are not ‘cultural dupes’ but that they act intentionally (Giddens et al., 2016, pp 192).
Human beings can be deemed to be reflexive agents who act on the basis of their
own interpretation of a particular situation (Mitnick, 2015, pp 92). Self-identity can be
said to be reflexive understanding of that of their own biographies. Structure on the
other hand lays emphasis on the structural factors that or that of social institutions
that play a pivotal role in the shaping of the individuals in the society. Social structure
consists of rules along with practices. Social structure is embodied in the actions and
beliefs of the human beings. The social structure can organize the behaviour of
various actors. The social structure can help in assigning power to that of the
individual actors (Strasser, 2014, pp 146 ).
The theory of Hegel states that dialectics of history can be realized by finding
a “ great man” who is capable of laying forward his wills. It states that structure along
with agency enters into the domain of each other. According to the Hegelian
doctrine, time has not yet come to the point of consciousness itself and personal
contribution is necessary for the perfect realization of time. The “charismatic
legitimation” professed by that of Max Webber states the phenomena of indelible
penetration of that of social and that of the agency (Giddens et al., 2016, pp 149).
Charisma can be said to be a form in relation to authority that is socially-structured.
The socially-specified qualities can be deemed to be personal and everybody does
not possess them. The primary among these qualities can be said to be agency that
wants to throw out that of the precedent and reframe the rules.
It has been found that children who grow up with that of the animals adopt the
nature along with behaviour of the particular animal. There are incidences of wild
children who grew up with that of the wolves. Wolves are quite intelligent and they
think of the orphaned children like their own pups. Children who grow up amidst wild

3AGENCY, STRUCTURE AND IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION
nature adopt the savage behaviour of the animal. This points out that an individual is
greatly influenced by the physical environment around which it is bred (Coad, Jack &
Kholeif, 2016, pp 1170). The development of language occurs between that of birth
and the five years. It is found that if the children are not rescued by the age of five,
then children hardly have any chances of learning about speech. The faculty of
abstract thinking is also developed at this stage and this accounts to be one major
reason why feral children cannot assimilate into that of the society and have to be
cared for throughout their life. Oxana Malaya hailed from Ukraine and between the
ages of 3 to that of 8 she lived in that of the dog kennel that was situated behind that
of the abusive parents of her home. She was abandoned by her parents and she
spent six years having only raw meat and residing with that of the dogs. When she
was rescued she was barking and panting and did not have the power of speech.
Oxana Malaya had learned about speech by the age of three that helped in
restoration of her speech and she learned to converse in the normal manner
(Feeney & Pierce, 2016, pp 1174). Monkeys on the other hand have legs and hands
but it is found that they do not act like that of humans when they are raised by that of
humans. It is owing to the fact that the brain of an animal cannot think higher than
what it is designed to do. Monkeys can be trained by that of humans to do things that
are human but this occurs on account of the training that it has received. It is found
that when the predatory animals are raised by that of the humans then they cannot
protect themselves when they are left in the wild (McPhee & Canary, 2014, pp 89).
The intellectual make-up of an individual has an influence on that of the
society. The wealth of the social content of an individual is conditioned by that of the
diversity of links with that of the social whole. Individual development stands as an
indicator of the development prevailing within the society. It cannot be said however

4AGENCY, STRUCTURE AND IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION
that an individual mingles with the society. An individual retains his unique
individuality and makes contributions to the whole of the society. The social structure
is responsible for shaping the life of human beings and vice versa the individual also
shapes the society (Spector, 2016, pp 254). The individual stands as a link within
that of the chain of generations. The affairs of an individual are not regulated solely
by himself but by that of the social standard. Napoleon Bonaparte was shaped by
that of the French Revolution. Napoleon Bonaparte said that he was the creature of
that of circumstances. Society carries an individual in the same manner in which a
river is carried by that of the boat. It has been argued by others that an individual is
not carried by that of the river but an individual acts like a turbulent river itself
(Samuel, 2016, pp 65). The various happenings of the social life do not come about
on their own but they have been made. History is shaped by that of the human effort
and it occurs at the expense of that of human blood.
The mystery of that of human nature is imbibed in that of the society. Society
becomes like a human being within that of social relations and on the other hand
human being acts like an embodiment of that of the social relations. Modern man is
built by that of the centuries of excellence and passes it on with the help of traditions.
The personality of the modern man is built out of the influence of different strata
prevailing within the social structure. Modern man stands as an embodiment of that
of the living memory of that of history and he acts as the focus of that of wealth of
knowledge (Bakker, 2015, pp 140). Man acts like a living atom within the system of
that of the social reality. With the help of various impulses the creative thought of the
people of the past nourishes an individual and with the help of it- contemporary
culture. Society exists outside that of the individual like that of a historically shaped
relation which is independent of the will of an individual.

5AGENCY, STRUCTURE AND IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION
Giddens conceives of “structure” as the rules that are made use of by the
actors in that of interaction. Rules are the reflexive agents that are employed as
“formulas” within that of the social system. The structural rules reveal important
properties- they are known and they are frequently used in conversations. Structure
makes use of resources that act like that of “material equipment” in order to get
things done (Bryant & Jary, 2014, pp 1140). Those who possess the necessary
resources can mobilize that of power and power is not a resource but is the result of
that of organizational facilities. Rules can be created and changed and combined
into that of different forms. Rules help in specifying the rights that act as the basis of
sanction and provide that of “interpretive schemes” that is necessary for the purpose
of effective communication (Burkitt, 2016, pp 325). The theory of structuration states
that social life is more than that of random individual act. According to Giddens,
human agency and that of social structure are integrally related to that of each other
and repetition of acts of individual agents gives rise to structure (Giddens et al.,
2016, pp 186). Traditions and moral codes exist within the social structure but these
can be changed on the occasion of people ignoring the traditions.
According to Anthony Giddens, people find it difficult to act on the basis of
their own volition and there are certain invisible social forces that provide resistance
(Giddens et al., 2016, pp 201). Giddens draws an analogy with that of language and
says that people make use of language when they speak however people react
strongly against other people who disregard the rules of language. The rules
pertaining to that of social order exists in the head of an individual in such a manner
that people are shocked when the expectations are not abided by in the society
(Sztompka, 2014 pp 360). The sociological studies of Harold Garfinkel has revealed
that on the occasion of people responding in ways that are unexpected to situations

6AGENCY, STRUCTURE AND IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION
that are everyday other reactors also react in an angry manner owing to breach of
collective understanding of that of ‘ normal behaviour’.
Giddens has made a bold observation that the relationship of structure and
actor is not a dualism. The actor does not determine the structure nor does the
structure determine that of the actor. He has put forward the theory of duality of that
of structure. It helps in connecting the production of that of social interaction that is
performed by that of knowledgeable agent with that of the reproduction of the social
system across that of time and space. The theoretical approach of Giddens suggests
that structure can act both as an enabler and that of constraining (Bryant & Jary,
2014, pp 99). According to Giddens, it is the human agency that can completely
transform the social system. This shows that human action can reproduce the social
structure and can pave the path for social changes. There is no incidence of
reductionism within the structuration theory. Gibbens has said that agency along with
structure act as forces that are complementary to each other (Coad, Jack & Kholeif,
2016, pp 1139). Structure has an influence on agency and agency can also change
the structure.
Conclusion
Agency highlights that the role that is played by an individual is due to free
choices. It puts importance on individualism that gives priority to the concept of that
of the individual. The Great Man Theory was an advocator of agency that said that
the individuals within the society can prove to be of great influence and has an
important bearing on the society. It can be deduced that social structure can play a
decisive role in assigning power to that of the individual and the individual also plays
a crucial role in framing the social structure. Both the concepts are inter-related as

7AGENCY, STRUCTURE AND IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION
the continuous and repetitive acts of that of the agents can give rise to the concept
called “structure”. Structure can act both as an enabler and as a constraining agent.
The human agency can drastically change the social system. Agency and structure
act as complementary forces that greatly influence each other.

8AGENCY, STRUCTURE AND IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION
References:
Bakker, I. (2015). Towards Gendered Global Economic Governance: A Three-
Dimensional Analysis of Social Forces. In Critical Perspectives on the Crisis
of Global Governance(pp. 134-161). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Bryant, C., & Jary, D. (Eds.). (2014). Giddens' theory of structuration: A critical
appreciation. Routledge.
Burkitt, I. (2016). Relational agency: Relational sociology, agency and
interaction. European Journal of Social Theory, 19(3), 322-339.
Coad, A., Jack, L., & Kholeif, A. (2016). Strong structuration theory in accounting
research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 29(7), 1138-1144.
Feeney, O., & Pierce, B. (2016). Strong structuration theory and accounting
information: an empirical study. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability
Journal, 29(7), 1152-1176.
Giddens, A., Duneier, M., Appelbaum, R. P., & Carr, D. S. (2016). Introduction to
sociology. WW Norton.
McPhee, R. D., & Canary, H. E. (2014). Structuration theory. The International
Encyclopedia of Communication Theory and Philosophy.
Mitnick, B. M. (2015). Agency theory. Wiley Encyclopedia of Management.
Samuel, R. (Ed.). (2016). People's History and Socialist Theory (Routledge
Revivals). Routledge.

9AGENCY, STRUCTURE AND IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION
Spector, B. A. (2016). Carlyle, Freud, and the Great Man Theory more fully
considered. Leadership, 12(2), 250-260.
Strasser, H. (2014). The Normative Structure of Sociology (RLE Social Theory):
Conservative and Emancipatory Themes in Social Thought (Vol. 47).
Routledge.
Sztompka, P. (2014). Agency and Structure (RLE Social Theory): Reorienting Social
Theory. Routledge.