From Schütz to Goffman: The Search for Social Order

The revival of the ideas of Alfred Schütz among Austrian economists is examined. In particular, this paper looks at Schütz’s work on intersubjectivity as an alternative approach to market coordination. As opposed to the rational maximization of individuals, some have argued that Schütz’s concept of intersubjective structures of meaning offers a better model for understanding how individuals act in the social world. This paper questions the soundness of utilizing Schütz’s approach and suggests that the work of the sociologist Erving Goffman offers a potential model of social interaction that encompasses many elements of Schütz’s framework but does not share the same limitations. Drawing on selected works of Goffman, a tentative model of social interaction and decision-making is put forward for discussion and further research. JEL classification: B52, B31. In recent years, the discipline of economics has been paying greater attention to the work of Alfred Schütz. More specifically, the social theorist has been “rediscovered” principally by a small number of economists affiliated with the Austrian school of economics. The term “rediscovered” is used because Schütz’s contributions to economics, although prominent in the 1930s and 40s, have largely been forgotten. However, as a member of the Mises circle, Schütz was a well-known contributor to the formulation of some of the school’s main theoretical tenets. In particular, Schütz’s work on intersubjectivity provided the underpinnings of the Austrian school’s approach to market coordination, as well as larger methodological issues (Foss 1996, Pietrykowski 1996, Prendergast 1986). The contemporary interest in Schütz stems, in part, from a growing insurgence against the approach to market coordination offered by mainstream neoclassical economics. As opposed to the rational maximization of individuals, Schütz posits the existence of intersubjective structures of meaning—social recipes—that enable individuals to act in the social world (Schütz 1970[1943]:108). While Schütz’s theories languished within economics for decades, however, they provided the impetus for a phenomenological approach to sociology (Collins 1993). In developing the foundation for ethnomethodology, Harold Garfinkel adopted Schütz’s approach to the phenomenology of the life world, particularly such features as social routine and the problem of intersubjectivity. However, as Randall Collins points out, the ethnomethodologists empiricized Schütz’s approach (Collins 1993). For instance, Garfinkel conducted a number of new, and often bizarre studies, such as the so-called “breaching” experiments—activities principally designed to disrupt cognitive routines. Further, Garfinkel modulated some of ∗The author is currently a doctoral student in sociology. The author acknowledges, without implicating, Roger Koppl and Randall Collins for helpful comments and suggestions.