Symbolic Interactionism and the Myth Of Astructural Bias

Abstract

Symbolic interactionism continues to be criticized from both inside and outside of interactionist circles by those who claim that the perspective does not address issues of social structure and fails to recognize constraints on human agency. In this paper, we critically address these claims and defend Blumerian symbolic interactionism from three versions of the charge of astructural bias and demonstrate how the perspective accounts for social structural forces. In doing so, we make reference to the classical roots of the perspective. We conclude with an illustrative and didactic example that demonstrates how even the most micro-oriented of interactionist research can still take account of social structural issues.