Making sense

26/2/2025

‘We don’t see things as they are – we see them as we are.’ (Anaïs Nin)

Social constructionism is a way looking at how we construe reality to help us make sense of it. The ‘we’ is important here because it’s not just what I do but what we do, what others around us do and what others before us have done. If I haven’t lost you already, imagine seeing a person hand someone else a bunch of flowers. Neuroscience can shed little or no light on understanding this event. That’s because the meaning of giving someone flowers is socially-constructed – that is, it’s something we attribute to the act within a specific culture and context, rather than something that is inherent to the act per se.

In my own UK culture, giving a person flowers could mean, for instance: a gesture of romantic love; or of thanks and appreciation; or to celebrate a special occasion; or a token of apology; or a wish for someone who is sick that they’ll get well soon; or a sign of empathy if someone has died. In some cultures or contexts, it could signify wealth (e.g. ‘I have enough money to buy you to a gift’) or imply a request for a response (e.g. ‘Will you marry me?’). Types, colours and numbers of flowers convey different meanings in different cultures too. So, social constructionism: a way of making sense of human sense-making.

16 Comments

Jonathan Reeves

26/2/2025 06:58:23 pm

Fascinating post, Nickt! This aligns with Wittgenstein’s notion that meaning is rooted in use. A rose is just a rose, until we collectively agree otherwise. Social constructionism suggests that reality isn’t fixed but negotiated, which raises interesting epistemological questions: To what extent do we construct all meaning? Is there anything truly objective? The flower-giving example is elegant. It shows how even simple acts are culturally loaded. Yet, if all meaning is socially derived, can we ever escape our own constructed paradigms to see "things as they are"?

Nick Wright

26/2/2025 08:36:09 pm

Thank you, Jonathan. 'If all meaning is socially derived, can we ever escape our own constructed paradigms to see "things as they are"?' That's a great epistemological question. I guess radical proponents of social constructionism may argue that to frame a question that includes 'to see things as they are' presupposes things have an essential meaning - which is a form of circular argument. On this theme, I love Kenneth Gergen's explanation in this short video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AsKFFX9Ib0

Li Wei

26/2/2025 07:12:39 pm

Hi Nick. This article reminds me of how white flowers symbolize death in China, while red flowers bring joy. In Japan, gifting an even number of flowers is bad luck, while in Russia, even numbers are for funerals. Social constructionism isn’t just academic theory. It’s how we navigate life’s unspoken rules. Misunderstanding these cues can cause unintended offense, especially in cross-cultural interactions. A single bouquet can speak a thousand languages, but only if we know how to listen. Thank you Nick.

26/2/2025 08:37:17 pm

Thank you, Li. 'A single bouquet can speak a thousand languages, but only if we know how to listen.' I think you expressed that beautifully.

Deborah Carter

26/2/2025 07:28:05 pm

Nick. Flowers are a nice gesture. Period. They show thoughtfulness and people generally like receiving them. Whether it’s romance or sympathy, the core message is care. Overanalyzing ruins the moment. Just give the flowers!

26/2/2025 08:38:46 pm

Thank you for those grounding comments, Deborah. You made me smile! :)

Omar Hassan

26/2/2025 07:43:30 pm

I agree Nick that Anaïs Nin's assertion that "we don't see things as they are – we see them as we are" encapsulates the essence of social constructionism. Our perceptions of reality are shaped by collective human interpretations rather than objective truths. This viewpoint, prominent in modern sociology and psychology, emphasizes that our understanding of the world is mediated through social, cultural and linguistic contexts.

Your good example of gifting flowers illustrates how meanings are not inherent but are ascribed through social conventions. Vivien Burr (2015) discusses how social constructionism posits that our perceptions are products of cultural and temporal contexts, suggesting that the significance of actions like flower-giving is constructed through shared language and societal norms.

The interplay between social constructionism and neuroscience has also garnered attention. Burr (2015) explores how the rise of neuroscience challenges social constructionist perspectives, prompting a dialogue between biological determinism and socially constructed meanings. This intersection raises questions about the extent to which our experiences are shaped by neurological processes versus social interactions. Critiques of social constructionism often centre on its perceived epistemic relativism. Hansson (2020) addresses concerns that social constructionist approaches may inadvertently contribute to science denial, such as climate change scepticism. This critique underscores the importance of balancing an understanding of socially constructed meanings with empirical scientific evidence.

References:

Burr, V. (2015). Social Constructionism (3rd ed.). Routledge.

Hansson, S. O. (2020). Social constructionism and climate science denial. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 10, Article 37.

Romaioli, D., & Contarello, A. (2021). Social Constructionism and Social Representation Theory: Convergences and Divergences in the Study of Change. In Embracing Change: Knowledge, Continuity, and Social Representations (pp. 181–201). Oxford University Press.

26/2/2025 08:51:01 pm

Hi Omar and thank you for posting such a thoughtful response. Vivien Burr is one of my favourite writers on this theme, along with Kenneth Gergen. On the relationship between social constructionism and epistemic relativism, I found this article interesting: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/relativism/#SocCon

Mitch Dawson

26/2/2025 07:45:47 pm

Neuroscience does have something to say here. Our brains process symbols, emotions and social cues. Constructionism is interesting but let’s not overdo it. Some things just are.

26/2/2025 08:28:23 pm

Hi Mitch. That's a fair challenge. In that sense, however, neuroscience is more about mechanics than meaning?

Anastasia

26/2/2025 08:26:45 pm

Hello Nick. You have a gift for making the complicated comprehensible for those of us who are interested but haven't studied in these fields. Thank you for doing that.

26/2/2025 08:40:24 pm

Thank you, Anastasia. I appreciate your encouraging feedback.

Marsha Urquhart

26/2/2025 09:35:23 pm

Interesting article, Nick. I understand the principle. Could you share an example of how you could use it in a coaching conversation?

26/2/2025 09:41:16 pm

Hi Marsha. That's a good question. How about this as a coaching scenario: A client from a collectivist culture (e.g. Japan) believes that pursuing an unconventional career in that context (e.g. arts, entrepreneurship) is selfish because 'success' means having a stable job that supports family expectations.

Coach: 'What messages have you received about what it means to be successful?'
Client: 'In my family, success means having a well-paying stable job, something practical like being a doctor or an engineer.'
Coach: 'Where do you think that idea comes from?'
Client: 'My culture values security and contributing to the family.'
Coach: 'That sounds like a deeply-rooted value. Is there a way to honour that value while also pursuing something meaningful to you?'
Client: 'Maybe if I build my business gradually and show my family that it can provide stability, they may see it differently.'
Coach: 'So rather than choosing between their definition and yours, how can we merge them into a path that feels right for you?'

Outcome: the client recognises that the idea of 'success' is socially constructed, and can redefine it in a way that integrates both cultural values and personal aspirations. How does that sound?

Amanda Kennedy

28/2/2025 02:38:39 pm

Hi Nick. Love the blog. I understand the concept (I think!). Struggling a bit to imagine what it could look like in a workplace. Can you give some examples? Thanks!

28/2/2025 02:42:59 pm

Thanks Amanda. That's a good question. How about these as examples?

*Leadership: The idea that leaders must be extroverted, decisive or authoritative is a social construct that varies across cultures.

*Professionalism: What is considered ‘professional’ dress, behaviour or communication is determined by societal expectations.

*Performance metrics: Success is often measured by KPIs, appraisals or hierarchical promotions, all of which are constructed frameworks rather than absolute measures of worth.

*Workplace hierarchies: The assumption that managers should have more decision-making power than employees stems from historical social structures rather than a universal truth.

*Gender roles: Beliefs about the roles of men and women in the workplace (e.g. women being more suited to HR roles, while men excel in technical fields) are socially-constructed rather than biologically determined.

I hope that helps. If we are able to surface social constructs at work, to see how well they serve us (or not), it can open up radical alternative ideas and ways to achieve our goals.

Making sense

Leave a Reply.

Nick Wright

Archives

Categories

Making sense

Leave a Reply.

​Nick Wright

​Archives

Categories

Nick Wright

Archives