February 9th

I've been super excited lately because I'm finally seeing how 3 or 4 sociology theory classes I've taken are finally applying to me doing actual research. Some of the things I've learned over the years are coming together in the different ways we can look at society, or a particular society, in this case, Tonga. I want to outline a couple theories we have talked about and how they determine why people act the way they do.
First I want to start with Durkheim. He had a theory about what he calls "social facts." These are the natural or metaphysical laws that are formed completely external from us that we take and internalize and follow. These are the CAUSES of what we do. A problem with that is that Durkheim doesn't account for why or how we actually choose to follow them. Especially considering, sometimes some people don't.
Weber outlines a few reasons as to why we act the way we do according to our culture, based on the fact that we are pretty rational beings, capable of choosing and interpreting what we do.
Value Rational Action- This is when you do something based on the rationality that it follows your values and you wouldn't be compromising your beliefs by acting this certain way. These can be religious or just good old fashion morals.
Instrumental Action- This is where we do things as means to an end. We act a certain way as an "instrument" to achieve a desired end or goal.
Affectional Action- This usually imprudent action is based on our emotions and how we feel at the moment in which we act.
A lot of Rational Choice theorists would argue that people ALWAYS do things according to what's "rational." They define this as whatever would bring the most reward for you personally and lead to the least pain or punishment. These theorists believe people are egotistical and will always choose the needs of themselves over the needs of a group. They only belong to group settings whenever the group provides a common good that they value or need. If they can achieve this without being in a group, they would do so. These theorists don't account for people having any other connection other than gain, such as a common language that would allow for these people to even enter in a group. This is a kind of pessimistic view of humans, in that they are selfish and greedy and they don't account for abstract ideas such as love, friendship and trust.

I tend to believe in sort of a synthesis of a lot of these ideals; I'm not going to be one to say that it's one way and not the other. I do believe there are "social facts" that sort of guide how we act and what we do, however we do have reasons for doing them other than they are just "rational," like all the reasons for action that Weber outlined. We have reasons and we are able to think for ourselves and act, but there are cultural norms that influence our actions.