Constitutive Practices and Garfinkel’s Notion of Trust: Revisited
Author:
- 3 November 2009
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Journal of Classical Sociology
- Vol. 9 (4) , 475-499
Abstract
This article is intended to reinstate, in at least a prefatory way, some ethnomethodological (EM) considerations concerning trust. The idea of constitutive practices — as it was taken up in Garfinkel’s sociology — turned on trust as a background condition for mutually intelligible action. Starting with a consideration of Garfinkel’s 1963 study of trust, the article critically considers some formal analytic alternates to his approach. The aspects of trust that are ‘elusive’ to the formal-analytic approach are shown to result from its allusive treatment by formal analysis. In Garfinkel’s hands trust is not elusive. The critique of formal analytic studies builds on Garfinkel’s writings and certain strands of analytic and ordinary language philosophy. These sources ground the author’s suggestion that the study of trust be taken up again, albeit along respecified analytic lines. Examples are given, both of an EM and conversation-analytic (CA) kind.Keywords
This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit:
- Ethnomethodological Studies of Mediated Interaction and Mundane ExpertiseThe Sociological Review, 2006
- Surveillance UndergroundEthnography, 2003
- Comment agir en confiance avec un partenaire dont on se mefie ?Réseaux, 2001
- Complexite du role, risque et emergence de la confianceRéseaux, 2001
- Reasonable Doubts about Rational ChoicePhilosophy, 1995
- ‘Reality construction’ in L2 simulationsSystem, 1985
- Aspects of the Flexibilities of Natural Language Use: A Reply to PhillipsSociology, 1978
- Two Concepts of RulesPhilosophical Review, 1955