ms a stage on which the players' roles are defined by the game itself; you may be my best friend among the players, but if we're on opposite teams, I'll do all I can to put you "out," because that is a part of the game, and is reinforced by my teammates' cheers--even if they are mere acquaintances.
The advantages of each of these approaches correspond to the disadvantages of the other. Rational action theory explains why I'd choose to play the game in the first place, but it cannot explain why I adopt the values of the game while I'm playing. Likewise, symbolic interaction theory explains how I play the game, but not why I play in the first place. Symbolic interactionists tend to suggest that we are born into the broad social game; if we are Romans, we do as Romans do. Rational actionists argue that social conditioning is not so absolute as to eliminate the power of individual self-interest and choice.
Each theory thus leaves some questions unanswered. Loosely speaking, rational action theory is best suited to explaining how and why social encounters develop in the first place, while symbolic interactionism is best suited to explaining how social encounters influence and define the behavior of the people taking part in them.
2. Compare, contrast, and evaluate the Verstehen tradition with the predictive understanding of logical empiricists.
Verstehen is the German word for "to understand." As a technical term in sociology it is part of the legacy o
...