META THEORY AS IT IS AND SOCIETY MENDING ITSELF TO DIFFERENT NEWNESS

Triparna kalita

ABSTRACT – Meta-theory is a useful concept in social scientiﬁc research, as it allows for an expansive framework to assess existing theories and their assumptions, methods, and principles. George Ritzer’s theory of McDonaldization illustrates how contemporary societies have become more rationalized and eficient. Although symbolic interactionism and McDonaldization appear to be opposites in many respects, the former looks at how people are able to make sense of their lives in a world that is overwhelmingly dominated by calculability, predictability, control, and eficiency. It is also curious to compare McDonaldization and Apple products, which both emphasize standardization, eficiency, and predictability. Nevertheless, McDonaldization is often criticized for its effects on homogeneity, while Apple products are applauded for their user-friendly design, intuitive interface, and the freedom they offer for expression and creativity. In conclusion, we face the challenge of living in a world of increasing standards, requiring us to ﬁnd a balance between standards, originality, and creativity.

Meta-theory, as a key method in social scientific research, is an important inquiry tool that drives critical thought. Its core purpose is to provide an expansive conceptual framework for assessing the assumptions, principles, and methods of existing theories.

Examining and analyzing the underlying epistemological, ontological, and methodological aspects of existing theories is paramount to social meta-theory, enabling the examination of the theories’ strengths, weaknesses, and limitations. In addition, this enables the uncovering of potential new opportunities for enhancing and refining existing theories, as articulated by Festinger (1962). In the domain of social theory, meta-theory takes on a unique purpose.

By thoroughly investigating the fundamental principles and methodological implications of established social theories, meta-theory is able to assess the potential strengths and weaknesses of these theories. Thus, it serves as a vehicle for recognizing features of theories that can be improved, as well as recognizing areas where further analysis and inquiry is required, in order to produce more comprehensive and supportive theoretical frameworks.

META THEORY AS IT IS AND SOCIETY MENDING ITSELF TO DIFFERENT NEWNESS

George Ritzer, a renowned figure in the realm of social meta-theory, is widely acknowledged for his contributions to sociology; by developing a theory of “McDonaldization” and applying it to contemporary societies.

According to Ritzer, modern societies are becoming ever more rationalized and efficient; a process fuelled by principles of the fast-food industry. He described this process as featuring four core characteristics: efficiency, calculability, predictability, and control. At first blush, symbolic interactionism and McDonaldization may seem to be mutually exclusive, yet one can observe how the former can be used to explore the consequences of the latter in the current society.

Symbolic interactionists submit the notion that people proactively construct and ascribe meaning to symbols and gestures and that this process is influenced by their social environment.

In a McDonaldized world, this formation of meaning may be restrained by streamlined, mass-produced elements like fast-food restaurants. As such, symbolic interactionists examine how people manage to craft meaning within this type of context, and also how the values of efficiency, calculability, predictability, and control shape the said negotiation.

Symbolic interactionism is a deep and influential academic field closely tied to sociology, and it underscores the necessity of understanding how people actively fashion and assign value to symbols and gestures regarding their social milieu. This view has been employed to explore a wide array of sociological issues, and has had a huge part to play in the studies of deviance and social confinement.

George Ritzer’s work on McDonaldization has made a massive splash in the realm of sociology by providing a platform for grasping the rules that underpin modern societies. Even though these two perspectives may appear disparate, symbolic interactionism lies at the very heart of comprehending the influence of McDonaldization in contemporary societies.

As we know from the theory of symbolic interactionism, it provides a theoretical foundation for understanding how an individual actively participates in the creation and maintenance of social structure, such as McDonaldization. It can be seen how a shared culture and social practice can become standardised and institutionalised over time.

For example, the standard and scripted interactions that are characteristic of many fast-food restaurants can be seen as the manifestation of the principles introduced by Ritzer. At the same time, these practices can be seen to be shaped by the different social meanings that individuals assign to them, such as the idea that a fast-food outlet is much more convenient for a busy person than going to a fine dining restaurant.

As we explore the intricacies of the repercussions of standardized processes and user-friendly designs on modern society, it is essential to draw a distinction between normalization and creativity. To this end, drawing parallels between Ritzer’s McDonaldization and Apple’s presence provides an opportunity to examine how shared practices and cultures can be institutionalized over time.

By delving into the likenesses and dissimilarities between these prominent entities, we can gain insight into the control and motivations imposed on customers, and further explore the impacts that these have on culture and society..

The idea of McDonaldization and Apple products have been extensively studied in sociology, with numerous similarities and distinct differences. According to George Ritzer’s 1993 theory, McDonaldization is a process which affects society through four key principles of efficiency, calculability, predictability, and control. This has resulted in the homogenisation of the modern world and its culture.

Conversely, Apple has brought an elegant and sophisticated brand identity to the public domain; a brand identity which prioritises simplicity, and is consistently designed and updated with prevailing norms and values in mind.

These two concepts, though equivalent in terms of standardisation, predictability, and efficiency, differ in their respective impact on society. McDonaldization is often denounced for leading to homogeneity, whereas Apple products are welcomed for their user-friendly design and intuitive interface which has, in turn, allowed for greater expression and creativity.

Thus, McDonaldization and Apple products stand as examples of both normativity and originality in modern society, making for an interesting dichotomy and highlighting the challenge of existing in a world of ever-evolving standards.

However, there are also key differences between McDonaldization and the universe of Apple products. While both concepts prioritise standardisation, predictability, and efficiency, the motivations behind them are different. McDonaldization is driven by the pursuit of profit and the desire to minimise costs, while the universe of Apple products is driven by the desire to create aesthetically pleasing and user-friendly products.

Another difference is the level of control that these concepts exert over customers. McDonaldization is characterised by a high degree of control over customers, with standardised menus, service, and environments that leave little room for customisation or personalisation. In contrast, the universe of Apple products offers customers a high degree of control over their devices, allowing them to customise and personalise their user experience through various settings and options. Apple products also offer a range of third-party apps and services, which further extend the customisation and personalisation options available to users.

In addition to the similarities and differences between McDonaldization and the universe of Apple products, it is worth considering another perspective on Apple products: community fetishism. According to marketing scholar Robert Kozinets, community fetishism is a form of consumption that emphasises the social connections and relationships that arise from shared consumption practices.

In the case of Apple products, community fetishism refers to the strong sense of identity and belonging that is fostered among Apple users. Apple products are synonymous with a certain lifestyle and culture – creative, innovative, and sophisticated (Lindstrom, 2011). Brand identity surrounding them focuses on emotional and social benefits; a distinct status symbol, denoted by their high prices and exclusivity (Lindstrom, 2011).

Connecting this brand to its devotees is a vibrant community spread across forums, social media, and events – an outlet for users to share experiences, tips, and show-off their latest Apple acquisitions. The Apple community is filled with an unprecedented level of enthusiasm, loyalty, and attachment to their prized devices (Kozinets, 2002)

This sense of community and belonging is a powerful motivator for consumers, as it taps into deeper emotional and social needs. By creating a sense of identity and belonging around its products, Apple has been able to cultivate a highly engaged and loyal customer base. This has helped to sustain Apple’s success and market dominance in the tech industry.

While the fervent enthusiasm surrounding Apple products may appear to reflect admiration and unity, it is important to recognise that a sense of community fetishism can also lead to instances of elitism and exclusion for those who do not use or cannot access Apple products. It is essential to acknowledge and tackle the societal challenges of inequality and isolation that arise from the marketing and consumption of Apple products.

Meta theory is an essential tool that allows us to critically evaluate the existing theories, paradigms, and assumptions (Bhaskar, 2013; Giddens, 1984). It is particularly valuable when examining economic theories and their effects on society.

Marx’s meta-theory of historical materialism is an example of such a critical analysis, as it provides an insight into the historical, social and even psychological circumstances which give rise to the mechanism of commodity exchange as well as the negative side-effects of such an economy (Marx, 1976).

By studying the underlying assumptions of economic frameworks and the prevailing ideology, meta theory enables us to gain an understanding of the problems of commodity fetishism and its evident role in capitalist societies. With a more well-rounded understanding, the drawbacks of an economy centered on money and profit-seeking can be addressed (Marx, 1976).

Analysing McDonaldization and Apple products illuminates the clash between normativity and creativity in contemporary society (Ritzer, 1993, p. 1). While on the surface they may appear the same, with a focus on standardisation, predictability, and efficiency, there are considerable differences between the two in their global effects.

Critics of McDonaldization typically focus on its tendency to promote homogeneity, whereas Apple products are often praised for their intuitive design and enabling of consumer personalization. Interestingly, both serve as examples of how, over time, shared practices and values can become normalised in the broader population.

Nevertheless, despite their differences, meta-theory can be applied to compare the respective theories of the two entities and to assess their individual strengths and weaknesses (Blumer, 1969, p. 2). This critical appraisal allows us to identify the motivations and power structures that are at the foundation of each, which could ultimately help us to create and support theoretical frameworks that explain their widespread success and influence.

By exploring the core principles and methodological implications of established theories and examining any discrepancies, we better our understanding of society, and as a result, find ways to continue improving our collective wisdom (Giddens, 1976, p. 3).

In conclusion, taking meta theory as a crucial tool for understanding and addressing complex societal issues such as examining the underlying assumptions and principles that guide different theories and frameworks, we can develop a more critical perspective on different issues and limitations that may prevent us from fully understanding them.

In this way, meta theory can help us to build a more extensive and sustainable vision of society that is grounded in a deep understanding of its underlying dynamics and structures.

Works cited

Festinger, L. (1962). Theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
Ritzer, G. (1993). The McDonaldization of society. Pine Forge Press.
Habermas, J. (1981). The theory of communicative action: Reason and the rationalisation of society. Beacon Press.
Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Stanford University Press.
Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. University of California Press.
Kivisto, P. (1994). McDonaldization: A reply to Ritzer. Acta Sociologica, 37(3), 249-256.
Beverland, M. (2005). Crafting brand authenticity: The case of luxury wines. Journal of Management Studies, 42(5), 1003-1029.
Ritzer, G. (1993). The McDonaldization of society. Pine Forge Press.
Kozinets, R. V. (2002). Can consumers escape the market? Emancipatory illuminations from burning man. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(1), 20-38.
Lindstrom, M. (2011). Brandwashed: tricks companies use to manipulate our minds and persuade us to buy. Crown Business
Bhaskar, R. (2013). A Realist Theory of Science. Routledge.
Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. University of California Press.
Marx, K. (1976). Capital: A Critique of Political Economy. Penguin Classics.

[Triparna Kalita, a curious learner from Guwahati, India, completed her undergraduate studies in 2020. Inspired by her passion for Liberal Arts, she is currently pursuing a Master’s degree at the Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati. Despite her background in history, she is eagerly exploring the multidisciplinary nature of the program and conducting research on the impact of historical events on personal and social growth. Her email id- kalitatriparnaa@gmail.com]

Images from different sources

Mahabahu.com is an Online Magazine with collection of premium Assamese and English articles and posts with cultural base and modern thinking. You can send your articles to editor@mahabahu.com / editor@mahabahoo.com ( For Assamese article, Unicode font is necessary)