“L" "1:. :L‘. 3.4;“. N... 4- v . n . mt-.....-;..w W 7x.-..:..:,.,z:., «hum- :ngv- may. -~--_~ v.5. .. 3" “ ifl‘a “‘3',- v. , "v'flgti’ m 1‘» “f . 13%; JWW 3:353 4,... 1': :J:_ 2.3-: - in 4.». ca 1r. .. v- . LE ' by, at: L - -. N‘ : .‘T'. ‘fiai’t‘mécéin 57L“? 311~.a«5:‘—g7-. .. ~ ‘. Ln. _ V“ .-‘( - . .., , ’2 '7“ Tan -‘ N .5 L {1911! ’.r' l :.'b lflllllllfllflllll\\\\|\‘l|\l‘ \ 1W, W “I N H W 9’ 3 6 “Vt d c a l 3 10249 5011 T'HESI? This is to certify that the thesis entitled FAMILY AND SELF—FORMATION: A QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS DRAWING FROM THE CRITICAL THEORY OF JURGEN HABERMAS presented by Margaret Elizabeth Watters has been accepted towards fulfillment 2.91. therequirements for 'Ph.D. degreein Family Ecology [4994; We“; Major professor Date February 11, 1981 0-7639 MSU RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to LIBRARIES remove this checkout from .-_ your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date F stamped below. mo '9' i€90 6:1)? 41;: ; 7““ (Y3 0 ' SGT M 2‘8 9 9 M ("M 121% S R 7]“. ; 4.11.. kléYZOS 92907 FAMILY AND SELF-FORMATION: A QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS DRAWING FROM THE CRITICAL THEORY OF JURGEN HABERMAS BY Margaret Elizabeth Watters A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Family and Child Ecology 1981 ABSTRACT FAMILY AND SELF-FORMATION: A QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS DRAWING FROM THE CRITICAL THEORY OF JURGEN HABERMAS BY Margaret Elizabeth Watters An understanding of the meaning of family activities to family members is important to professionals who work with families. Professional practice depends upon how the family's role is conceptualized and the adequacy of the conceptualization is important to the effectiveness of such practice. In this study the critical theory of Jurgen Habermas was the basis for reflecting upon the nature of the family activities of an Australian working-class family, focusing on the self-formation of family members. The purpose of the study was to contribute firstly to the understanding of self-formation in the family and secondly to the knowledge base of home economics and the development of the professional home economist is Australia. Aspects of Habermas' theory which influenced the study were his critique of positivism; his theory of knowledge; his systems of action; his emphasis on self-formation; his critique of ideology; and his beliefs in the complementarity Margaret Elizabeth Watters of theory and practice, and the need for an historical approach to the understanding of phenomena. Specifically, Habermas' theory provided a conceptual framework alternative to positivism. Further, the theory generated questions related to understanding social reality and identified the importance of language analysis for achieving such understanding. The systems of action iden- tified by Habermas were technical (instrumental), practical (symbolic), and critical (reflective). The hermeneutic method involving a dialectic between theory and data was used. The theory and data interacted to generate a typology which became the basis for inter- preting a family's activities. A Melbourne working-class family was chosen to be the source of data. The description of the family included its location in an historical sense through an account of the major social, political and economic events of the twentieth century in Australia. Data on family activities were col- lected through participant-observation and reflected upon to identify themes relevant to the self-formation of family members. Practical and technical systems of action were iden- tified in the family but technical action predominated. The apparent substitution of technical for practical action suggested that the family is dominated by technocratic ideol- ogy obscuring reality and producing depoliticization. In Margaret Elizabeth Watters these respects the family's systems of action and distor- tions of reality paralleled those which Habermas identified in society. There was no coherent ideology that tied into a systematic world-view. The study demonstrated that Habermas' way of looking at society is useful for understanding the nature of a family's activities. Furthermore, unless problems of fam- ilies are seen in their socio-historical perspective pro- fessional practice with families is abstract and it fails to address the real issues of families and their everyday lives. The study is of particular importance to home eco- nomics, a field of study which defines itself in terms of family. If home economists View themselves as enablers and facilitators for families they need to incorporate inter- pretive knowledge and critical theory with the predominant empirical-analytic knowledge in home economics. In this way it becomes possible to understand societal processes and the way these are reflected in families and in the ten- dencies of families to perpetuate the societal processes in the self-formation of their members. Recommendations for future research include the use of Habermas' theory to study families' relationships with other social institutions. Such research could be directed toward expanding knowledge of working-class families, or toward expanding knowledge on families, generally, by Margaret Elizabeth Watters focusing on another family type. Finally, the question of how home economics will have to change to incorporate the kind of knowledge generated by studies such as this one should be addressed. DEDICATION to my parents, Dorothy and Andrew Watters and my aunt, Edith Watters ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to express sincere appreciation to the follow- ing: --the Michigan State University faculty members who served on my guidance committee, namely Dr. Beatrice Paolucci, committee chairperson and co-director of the research for this dissertation for her enthusiasm, encouragement and skill; Dr. Richard Peterson, of the Philosophy Department, co-director of the research, for his remarkable patience and for challenging me to think about families in new ways; Dr. Linda Nelson for her assistance with the case-study; and Dr. Margaret Bubolz and Dr. Jean Schlater for their sound advice; --Dr. John F. A. Taylor of the M.S.U. PhilOSOphy Department, a fine scholar and teacher; --members of my family, including "family" in California for their support; --teachers and colleagues, in particular Jean Pollock for her vision and confidence in me; and Frank Walker for his encouragement, criticism and advice; iii --friends at M.S.U., in particular Betty Olson, Milla McLachlan, Marian Honsinger, Suzanne Gyeszly and Christine Leatz; --friends in Australia, in particular Glenis Granger, the Colbourne and Gilmore families, Vi Clark, Elizabeth Cochrane, Sandy Hobson and Norma Skaar; --Rusden State College for allowing me the time to complete my studies; --Omicron Nu Honor Society for the privilege of being their 1980 International Fellow; --the "Evans" family for their warmth, generosity and ready cooperation; and --Mrs. Leo Haak for her kindness and friendship. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . Chapter 1. 2. HABERMAS' THE PROBLEM O C O O O O O 0 Need for the Study . . . . . Purpose of the Study . . . . Objectives of the Research . . Basic Assumptions of the Study . Limitations of the Study . . . Concepts Central to the Study . Family . . . . . Family Activities. . Self-formation. . . Social Class . . . Home Economics. . . Procedural Steps and Methods. Summary . . . . . THE FAMILY SYSTEM . . . . . Background. . . . Cognitive Interests. Rationality . . . Legitimation Crisis. . . . . Overcoming Technical Domination. Complementarity of Technical and Action . . . . . . . Technical Ideology . . . . Relationship of Habermas' Theory Activities . . . . . . . PerSpectives on Rationality . . THEORY OF SYSTEMS OF ACTION P o H o o o o o to Family Examples of Application of Habermas' Tentative Framework for Characterizing Family Activities and How They Relate to Self-formation of Family Members. V actic 0800... Theory. Page viii UlU‘lU‘ubbi-J 1" HF‘ unaxo~1w NH hm 25 25 26 30 32 35 36 37 38 38 46 49 Chapter Page 3. HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE STUDY . . . . . 52 General Historical Perspective. . . . . 52 Historical Events . . . . . . . . . 54 Federation. . . . . . . . . . . 54 World War I . . . . . . . . . . 56 The Depression . . . . . . . . . 58 World War II . . . . . . . . . . 59 Postwar Reconstruction. . . . . . . 60 The Korean War . . . . . . . . . 61 The Vietnam War . . . . . . . . . 61 The Seventies. . . . . . . . . . 62 Historical Issues . . . . . . . . . 64 Trade Unions and the Federal Arbitration and Conciliation Commission . . . . 64 Social Welfare . . . . . . . . . 67 Social Classes . . . . . . . 68 Australia's Population and Its Distri- bution . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Housing. . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Transportation , , . . . . , , . 75 Education . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Religion . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Recreation. . . . . . . . . . . 81 Working-class Families in Australia . . 82 Current Social Environment of Working-class Families . . . . . . . . 86 Societal Expectation of Working-Class Families . . . . . . . . . . . 91 smary ' o o o o o o o o o o o 93 4. ANALYSIS OF HABERMAS' THEORY AND CASE-STUDY DATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 Description of the Evans Family . . . . 94 Involvement of the Family in Describing Itself . . . . . . . . . . . 102 Diagrammatic Description of the Evans Family . . . . . . . . . 103 Systems of Action in the Evans Family . . 106 Cultural Beliefs . . . . . . . . . 109 Political System . . . . . . . . . 114 Economic Life . . . . . . . . . . 116 Social Relations With the Wider Community . 117 Family Relations . . . . . . . . . 120 vi Chapter Page 5. CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH . . . . . . . . . 128 Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . 123 Implications for Home Economics . . . . . 135 Future Research . . . . . . . . . . 137 APPENDIX. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Relationship between Cognitive Interest, Type of Knowledge and Mode of Action . . . . . 27 2. Relationship between Interest, Type of Knowledge and Mode of Action (Technical) . . . . . 28 3. Relationship between Interest, Type of Knowledge and Mode of Action (Practical) . . . . . 29 4. Relationship between Interest, Type of Knowledge and Mode of Action (Emancipatory) . . . . ‘30 5. The Technical-Economic-Socia1 Cycle . . . . 32 6. Rationality and Social Decision Making . . . 43 7. Linkages within Evans Household Including Three Dogs and One Cat . . . . . . . . 104 8. Ecomap of Evans Family. . . . . . . . . 105 viii CHAPTER 1 THE PROBLEM How does family relate to society? How are we to understand how the family is carrying out its function in society? How does family life affect the self-formation of its members? The answers to the above questions are crucial for professionals who work with families. Professional practice depends upon how the family's role is conceptu- alized and the adequacy of the conceptualization is impor- tant to the effectiveness of such practice. In this study the researcher used the critical theory of Jurgen Habermas, the German phiIOSOpher, as a basis for reflecting upon the nature of the family activities of an Australian working- class family, focusing on the self-formation of family members. Need for the Study The family's role in society has become confused as traditional tasks have been taken over by other institu- 1 tions. There is a suggestion that parents do not know how 1The expansion of education, welfare, social work, and hospitals has reduced family's reSponsibilities to its members (Zaretsky, 1973). 1 to raise children and fail in this task. Conway believes that a cohesive, secure, creative civilization depends partly on how effectively the child incorporates and refurbishes the memories of race and community. (1978, p. 23) He fears that this tradition is not being learned, that is, that the self-formation of children in families is inade- quate. Critics of the family (for example, Conway, 1978; Laing, 1969; Lasch, 1977; Poster, 1978; Rapp, Ross, & Bridenthal, 1979) range from those who blame it for its failure to those who pity it for its impotence to those who see it as pathological for what it can and does do to some of its members. Nevertheless, there is a sense that the family still should play an important part in people's lives. Drawing from Conway again: The family as the basic triad of relationship is so ancient and humanly indiSpensable that its themes and symbols not only run through the art, religion and folklore of all civilizations [but] also remain the yardstick by which all faithful, reSponsible relationships still tend to be judged. (1978, pp. 34-35) Much of contemporary literature seems to focus on the dilemmas facing family as the expressions of the larger historical setting. That is, families appear to be uncer- tain and unstable just as society is uncertain and unstable. Certainly, the western world is experiencing a period of rapid social change. The advances in technology have changed the needs of employers and contributed to high unemployment rates, inflation resists control, international mistrust and tension are at high levels, and the fear of fossil fuel depletion is contributing to general uneasiness. Rapid social change calls into question roles and functions of the major social institutions such as the education system, the legal system, and the family. How may family be looked at and understood? Various theoretical approaches have been prOposed. A way of looking at society which might provide a tool for understanding family activities has been offered by Jurgen Habermas. Habermas' theory was chosen as the basis for this study for two reasons, the first of which relates to methodology. In critiquing positivism Habermas avoided being anti-scientific. His theory provides an alternative to positivist methods which are confined to analyzing existing patterns. The humanistic framework allows a qualitative analysis by seeking understanding of what is being said and confronting peoples' interpretation of events in the historical context in which actions are located. This method allows the generation of alternatives to reproduction of the status quo and might make a sub- stantive contribution by identifying such alternatives in a rational way. Secondly Habermas has offered a framework for under- standing the dynamic historical process in a way that gives meaning to the present research. His theory provided a guide to the questions apprOpriate to ask and also the ways in which answers might be sought. Purpose of the Study The purpose of the study was to contribute firstly to the understanding of self-formation in the family and secondly to the knowledge base of home economics and the development of the professional home economist in Australia. Objectives of the Research 1. To evaluate Habermas' theory related to systems of action as a basis for reflecting upon family activities, using theoretical materials and empirical data from a case—study, dialectically, with the ultimate aim of understanding self- formation in a family. 2. To identify the implications for one profession, Home Economics, in Australia. The writer followed the example of Brown and Paolucci (1978) who sought understanding of the field of home eco— homics through philosophical analysis of the field using Habermas' theory. ,The following mission, proposed for home economics, provided a basis for the study: to enable families, both as individual units and generally as a social institution, to build and maintain systems of action which lead (1) to maturing in individual self-formation and (2) to enlightened COOperative participation in the critique and formulation of social goals and means for accomplishing them. (Brown & Paolucci, 1978, p. 23) The mission statement guided the research in two ways: in its focus on self-formation, and in its use of Habermas' theory as a tool of analysis. Family Basic Assumptions of the Study The mission statement in the Brown-Paolucci paper has relevance for Australian home economics. Habermas' analysis of late capitalist society applies to Australia. Data collected were representative of the family. Limitations of the Study The obscurity of Habermas' theory makes it neces- sary to accept as given a number of issues that bear on his philosophical model. No attempt is made to assess the theory philosophically. The researcher depended on English translations as the source of Habermas' theory. Concepts Central to the Study Family Family activities Self-formation Social class Home economics The way to conceptualize the basic features of family "remains an unsettled and highly controversial question among social scientists generally" (Peterson, 1978). The various ways of defining family depend upon the experi- ence, needs, and ends of the definer. One way of defining the family focuses on the structure of the group. A family is composed of a heterosexual couple, legally-bound, and their biological or legally adopted children. Allen (1979) describes this as the "legal family." Such a definition excludes many similar groups who perceive themselves as families: for example, a two-generation group comprising one adult and children, or a childless couple. An alternative definition emphasizes the functions of the group labelled "family." Family is the group of persons which reproduces itself, protects and socializes the young, is the approved setting for sexual expression between adults, and is an economic unit. In Allen's framework this is the "functional model" (1979). Several of the activities identified may take place outside of family, and again, there are groups in society who perceive themselves as families but are excluded by this definition because they do not meet all the criteria. An attempt to define family in terms of composition, functions, and social—psychological relationships was offered by Bivens, Newkirk, Paolucci, Riggs, St. Marie, and Vaughn (1975). Family . . . [is] a unit of intimate, transacting, and interdependent persons who share some values, goals, resources, responsibility for decisions, and have commitment to one another over time. This last way of defining family encompasses the range of family types and at the same time is broad and abstract. It allows one to differentiate between the basic economic unit, a subset which may be defined as "a group of people bound by common work efforts from which common consumption derives" (Allen, 1979) and the larger group of people, including relatives who are not part of the immediate eco- nomic group but are nevertheless "family." The present study focuses on the subset identified by Allen. This subset comprises a household with strong ties and emotional, physical and economic interdependence. Family Activities In this study the term "family activities" includes aspects of production and consumption, involving activity of technical and/or practical nature, and resulting in an economic and/or social product. Furthermore, these activi- ties are carried out by family members within the household. Household production was defined by Reid in 1934 as those unpaid activities which are carried on, by and for the members, which activities might be replaced by market goods, or paid services, if circumstances such as income, market conditions and personal inclina- tions permit the service being delegated to someone outside the household group. (p. 11) However, the range of activities allowed by Reid's defini- tion as household production excludes any service which could not be bought. Furthermore, it does not allow for looking at household activities from the point of view of household consumption. The distinction between production and consumption depends upon the perSpective taken. For example, construction of clothing can be viewed as both production in its transformation of materials (thus investing them with a use-value for later on) and consumption of those materials. In limiting household production to activities which might be replaced by paid services, Reid has focused on the technical or instrumental2 activities within the household with their economic product, thus neglecting the practical activities with their social product. The social dimension of household activities is referred to by Dubnoff. He made a distinction between household production and market production. Normally, household production is rewarded primarily by "love" or "sense of duty done" (1979), whereas market production is rewarded by money. Beutler and Owen (1980) offered a refinement of Dubnoff's theory in prOposing a "home production activity model." They incorporated the "social and psychological dimensions of the household that preclude exclusive attention to its economic functions." They differentiated household pro- duction from aspects of home production in which the particular3 persons involved were crucial for a satisfactory 2The distinction between technical (instrumental) activity and practical activity is central to Habermas' analysis of systems of action and will be discussed in detail in Chapter 2. Simply, technical activity is activity that is merely expedient and efficient (in contrast to practical activity following judgment incorporating normative motiva- tions of the actor). 3When the participation of a particular person in an activity is crucial to a satisfactory outcome, the activity takes on a "particularistic" dimension. By contrast, when the person involved is unidentified or the identity of the outcome. An example of the latter is "playing ball with a child in an effort to maintain a relationship and to help the child to develop co-ordination." Thus Beutler and Owen's "home production" has inseparable social and economic products. In practice, in either household production or home production a social product results from location within a set of intimate social relations. Therefore, Beutler and Owen's distinction is problematic. The central social product of family activities--the self-formation of family members--is the focus of the present study. A discussion of self-formation follows. Self-formation Self-formation refers to the life-Spanning creation of the unique person. Self-formation is a social product of an individual's interactions with the physical, social, and cultural circumstances of his or her environment. Relations with other persons are of major importance because "no one can construct an identity independently of the identifica- tions that others make of him" (Habermas, 1976/1979, p. 107). The "self" is both an acting, initiating subject as well as a reacting, responding object in the process, that is, self- formation is a dialectic between the individual and the external factors of his or her environment. person is not important, the activity takes on a "univer- salistic" dimension. Particularism Is assoc1ated With social products and universalism with econom1c products. 10 Hegel (in Weiss, 1974), describes self-formation as dependent upon self-consciousness as the result of an indi- vidual's labor (the transformation of nature by that individual) in a social setting. In other words, self- formation is the understanding by a person of his or her own capacities through labor and the integration of the self as agent (subject) and self as product (object). As persons with whom the individual has most and earliest interaction (Leichter, 1977), the family constitutes the most important influence in his or her self-formation. In both product and process, the forming of the self influ- ences the way the self will subsequently grow. Self-formation is related to four other concepts which are often used interchangeably because of the overlap and complementarity of their meanings. The four concepts are: human development, socialization, enculturation, and edu- cation.4 Human development refers to "increasing size and com- plexity of structure and function" (Smart & Smart, 1972, p. 662). Socialization is the individual's learning to "fit" into his or her society and an introduction to a shared tradition mediated by family (Habermas, 1970/1980). In other words, socialization is the learning of social roles. Enculturation refers to the process of acquiring the cultural 4Paolucci (1978) used the concept "education" to sub- sume aspects of the other three concepts as befitted the emphasis of her paper. 11 traditions of a society (Theodorson & Theodorson, 1969, p. 131). In this respect it is synonymous with socializa- tion, the difference being one of disciplinary preference only. Education is a part of socialization/enculturation but is often distinguished from them because it usually represents the formally structured part of an individual's learning in contrast to the informal, unstructured, and frequently unconscious dimensions of the other two pro- cesses. Elements of all four of the above processes are present in self-formation as the concept is used in this study. Self-formation is the central social product of family activities. Social Class The concept of "social class" is often used to explain differences in society. Marx (1867/1967) claimed that a capitalist society was composed of two grOUps (classes). One group has control of the means of production (the bourgeoisie) and the other sells its labor-power for use in the production process (the proletariat). This analysis is inadequate in late capitalist society, however, due to the development of the bureaucratic public service component of Society. This component does not fit easily into the Marxist proletariat because of the range of sub-groups within it. Sub-groups are as widely separated as, for example, 12 "white-collar" clerks and "blue-collar" assembly—line workers. The two groups have difficulty perceiving themselves as members of the same social class because wide differences in occupation, education and income levels exist among them. The three factors of occupation, education and income levels are closely linked, with the result that income level alone is frequently a major index of level of living. A key, although subtle, distinction between those who, in Spite of lacking control of the means of production, perceive themselves as "above" working-class (that is, "middle-class") and the "working-class" in Australia lies in the type of remuneration. A middle-class worker's remuneration is generally eXpressed as an annual salary, while the working-class person is paid weekly wages which may be supplemented by overtime earnings. Other defining characteristics of the working-class are subjective. PeOple may define themselves as "working-class" as a challenge to those whom they believe or fear are their "betters." In addition, many working-class people, most of whom are employed in physical labor, have a sense of diminished expectations of quality of life--a peculiar mind-set (Wild, 1978). In this study, the focus is on a subset of the working- class delineated by income level. 13 Home Economics Ellen H. Richards and her co-founders of home economics in the United States defined the subject as the study of the laws, conditions, principles and ideals which are concerned on the one hand with man's immediate physical environment and on the other with his nature as a social being, and is the study speci- fically of the relation between these two factors. (Lake Placid, 1889-1908, p. 70) In the three-quarters of a century since this seminal statement, various interpretations of the general definition, appropriate to contextual variables such as technological and social changes, have guided professionals in their practice of home economics. One key statement was published in 1959. The American Home Economics Association, in its New Directions declared that: Home Economics synthesizes knowledge drawn from its own research, from the physical, biological and social sciences and applies this knowledge to improv- ing the lives of families and individuals. (A.H.E.A., 1959, p. 4) The above statement defines what home economics is, pri- marily by what home economists g9, and in this way is an interpretation of the Richards definition. New Directions II was published in 1975 as part of the continuing self- examination. It stated explicitly that the family eco- system was the core of home economics, representing a rein- forcement of the centrality of "family" as the focus of home economics. Furthermore, Home Economics is the study of the reciprocal relations of family to its natural and man made environments, the effects of these singly or in unison as they shape the internal functioning of families, and the interplays 14 between the family and other social institutions and the physical environment. (Bivens et al., 1975) In 1978 the American Home Economics Association commissioned Brown and Paolucci to clarify the definition of home econo— mics. Their philOSOphical analysis of the field of study from its origin, using the critical theory of Habermas as a model, led them to take the position that home economics is‘a practical5 science concerned with the persistent problems of home and family. Their mission statement (see page 4) reflects a shift in the interpretation of professional practice from the 1959 emphasis on what home economists do to strengthen families to a view of home economists as facilitators of families gaining control of their own lives. The recognition and acceptance of home economics in Australia has been hampered by the conquion in terminology, and the absence of wide-spread acceptance of the term "home economics" as it is used internationally. The term is a corporate one and in usage includes such aSpects as family living, food, nutrition, management, clothing, textiles, fashion, and institution manage- ment. Domestic Science, Domestic Arts, Homecraft, Home Arts, Home Management, Housecraft, Home Econo- mics, Needlework, and Textiles and Design are all terms used for part or total courses within the subject area Home Economics. (HOpper, 1972) Initially, Australia sought direction and leadership for its home economics from Britain although its development 5“Practical" refers to the type of problem-solving action taken after normative judgment. 15 there was "haphazard and not unified" (HOpper, 1972). Recently the United States' influence has been much stronger. In Victoria, Australia, the conceptualization of home economics has borrowed heavily from the American statements. In 1972 a prOposed course in home economics for Grade 12 level defined home economics as "the field of study con— cerned with strengthening family life" (V.U.S.E.B., 1972). A redraft of the document substituted the following: Home Economics can be seen as a syn0ptic study which integrates subject matter from disciplines such as sociological, biological, and physical sciences. (V.U.S.E.B., 1975) The shift evident here is a de-emphasis on the "family" focus. Some of the ambivalence among home economists in Victoria is illustrated by the fact that Rusden State College, the main tertiary institution for study of home economics in Victoria, defines the field of study and describes its practice in terms of the family as follows: Home Economics is a field of study concerned with the problems that people encounter in their everyday lives--the problems of eating, clothing, sheltering themselves and finding and developing satisfying human relationships. Since most peOple encounter and solve. these problems of daily living within the context of the family, home economics defines itself in terms of the family. Professional home economists aim to assist families to Optimize their quality of life by applying knowledge, gained from research and eXperience, to responsible decision making in the use of resources to meet everyday needs. (1980) This last statement is what is meant by "home economics" throughout the remainder of this study. 16 Procedural Steps and Methods The English translations of a selection of Jurgen Habermas' works were consulted. These works were supple- mented by reviewing the materials of a number of writers about the critical theory of Habermas, and the materials of several other scholars who used his theoretical framework to explore and interpret various phenomena. In examining Habermas' theory the focus was on his writings relative to systems of action and their relationship to knowledge. A framework was tentatively proposed in anticipation of its interactive use with family case-study data to characterize the nature of family activities (Chapter 2). A review of Australian historical writings was under- taken to place the family to be studied in the context of the late twentieth century Australian society, thus avoiding an ahistorial conception of family. The family concept is too broad to characterize a Specific family, so the SCOpe of the study was confined to "working-Class" families. The advice of two Specialists in Australian history was sought on appropriate sources to consult for the compilation of a summary of major historical, social, and economic events of the twentieth century in Australia. Further materials were identified as the review proceeded. The guiding question during the search was "What elements shaped the 1980's working-class environment in Melbourne, Australia?" The historical summary provided the context for the present study (Chapter 3). 17 For the purposes of the study any "historically— concrete" family would have been appropriate, given that a computer search6 of the literature failed to identify any previous study in the area which might have suggested Speci- fic lines to pursue. A working-class family was chosen. The precise definition of "working-class" families, or any other subset of a society, is a contentious theoretical issue so a subset of society which has official definition was chosen as the focus of this study. The group of low- income families who are eligible for public housing was the working-class subset selected. The ethnographic method was selected for the collection of case-study data. The data on one working-class family were to be used interactively with the tentatively prOposed framework based on the theory. The object was to achieve a more complete model for characterizing the nature of the family in relation to the self-formation of its members. The reasons for the choice of the ethnographic method and for limiting the data collection to one family are outlined below. The study was of an exploratory nature and therefore required a flexible, adaptive method of data collection. 6Descriptors used were housework/household activities/ working-class families. Systems searched were AUSINET and ERIC. The topic was also searched in the Australian Public Affairs Information Service, Bibliography of Urban Studies in Australia, and Union list of higher degree theses in Australian libraries. 18 The object in collecting the data was to be able to reflect upon them, with Habermas' theory in mind, in the attempt to interpret and understand the meaning of the phenomena observed. The advantage of such an unstructured method is that the researcher can "assume as little as possible, include as much information as can be managed and maintain the integrity of peOples' life experiences" (Piotrkowski, 1979, p. 289). This method differs from the positivist method which deveIOps hypotheses about relationships between vari- ables and then operationalizes them so that the hypotheses may be tested empirically. A weakness of such a positivist approach is that existing theory may not match the actual experience of the group under consideration: all that can be achieved is an answer as to whether or not some delineated piece of behavior in a context defined by the researcher does or does not support already-held ideas (Agar, 1980, p. 76). The imposition of a previously selected Classificatory structure increases the risk of overlooking important points. This imposition is of particular concern in the area of family research due to the limitations already existing, such as the lack of well-developed theory restricting the scope of positivist research, and the many complex relation- ships existing in families. The ethnographic method was chosen for the present study as likely to be more fruitful for contributing to existing theory. 19 In the ethnographic method, data collection and analy- sis are concurrent rather than separate parts of the research (Agar, 1980, p. 9). Thus the interaction made possible is consistent with the dialectic thinking of criti— cal theory. Research using only one subject produces information of a different type from, but complementary to, that derived from many subjects. Research of this type can make sub- stantial contributions to the study of behavior (Dukes, 1965). Hess and Handel argued that: The detailed examination of cases suggests lines of thought, urges re-examination of contemporary theory, reveals areas of behavior in which our knowledge is sparse and stimulates hypotheses that may be tested in other research formats. Case analysis serves another function, perhaps more important: it translates abstractions into the concrete components of actual lives. . . . Case study and analysis serve to remind us that our subject is human action and feeling. (1959, p. v) Furthermore, the Opportunities for flexibility and Spontaneity in observing and questioning were maximized in the present study by limiting it to one "case" since this eliminated the need to standardize across observers or to match subjects. Another advantage of confining the obser- vations to one "case" was the flexibility for collecting data over time in a variety of situations. The researcher began the case-study observations with general ideas shaped by her own experience of "family" and her reading of the literature about family forms and functions, and with Habermas' language cues (see p. 50, 20 Chapter 2) in mind. The intention during the observations was to record as much as possible of what was going on among the family members when the researcher was with them. The records were based on notes taken while with the family and through recall immediately after the observation period. The actual words spoken by the family members were recorded as far as possible. The major objective was to examine the possibilities of using the tentative framework to achieve understandings of the family's activities. The intention was to allow the model to emerge from the interaction of the tentative framework and the data. In addition to the family's belonging to the "working- class" and meeting the eligibility criterion for occupancy of the Victorian Housing Commission's property7 the re- searcher decided that the family should consist of at least two generations including at least one school-aged child. This family composition was most appropriate to the re- searcher's interest in the self-formation function of families. An application was made to the Michigan State Univer- sity's Committee on Research involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS), for approval to undertake the case-study along the lines outlined. Approval was granted July 1, 1980 (see Appendix). 7The Victorian Housing Commission is the public housing authority. Eligibility for occupancy is a maximum weekly income. In the 1977-78 report this was stated as $174 per week. 21 Referrals were sought and narrowed to the Turner and Evans8 families. Both were contacted. Mrs. Turner indicated that her family would be willing to become involved in the project but as it was vacation time it would be at least three weeks before their family would be together again. Mrs. Turner referred the researcher to friends of hers whom she believed would be willing to participate. The researcher did not take up either offer because the Evans family met the selection criteria more closely in terms of their eligibility for and occupancy of public housing and their closer location to the researcher. Initially the Evans family was contacted by telephone and an appointment was made for the researcher to meet the family as a group. During the first meeting the nature of the project was explained and the researcher's role and expectations outlined. The rights of participants were explained to the family: (1) the right to withdraw from the project at any time, (2) the protection of their anonymity by the use of fictitious names when the researcher wrote or spoke of them outside, (3) the right to ask the researcher to leave at any time, (4) the right to refuse the researcher entry to their home, (5) the researcher's obligation to set up appointments before visiting the family for observation sessions, and (6) the family's right of access to the results 8Unless otherwise indicated all names and place-names connected with the case-study are fictitious as part of the researcher's effort to protect the anonymity of the families. 22 of the research. The family agreed to participate, at which point each of the family members read the "Consent Form" and signed, indicating their agreement. Two Of the children were unable to sign their names but, with the parents' approval, an older sibling entered their names on the form. In all, the researcher spent slightly over 40 hours in the Evans home and made 15 phone-calls during September and October, 1980. The lengths of time of the 10 visits varied from 15 minutes to a maximum of seven and a half hours and covered early morning to late night. The scheduling of the visits was flexible. The inclusion of a visit on a school holiday, however, was deliberate. In general, the guiding principle was integrating the convenience of the Evans family and the researcher's schedule. Twice Mrs. Evans telephoned the researcher to ask her to postpone a proposed visit to a different day, and once, when the researcher had telephoned to confirm an arrangement, Mrs. Evans asked her to delay her prOposed arrival for two and a half hours. In the first two cases the postponement was requested because of illness; a vague reason was given for the third postponement. At the Evans home the researcher spent most of her time with the Evans family seated in the family lounge- room.9 The research had a phenomenological orientation. The researcher's role was that of a participant-observer. 9Living room. 23 The data were gathered through what Piotrkowski (1979) described as "unstructured interviewing and observations of peOple as they live" (p. 189). The interactionist dimension of the research was the involvement of the family in reading and commenting upon the description of them as written by the researcher. The observations tended to focus on Mrs. Evans for two reasons: her being at home became an unconscious criterion of what was a convenient time to visit and it was apparent quite early that the majority of family interactions involved her. The observational record was based on the researcher's notes taken while in the house and on recall immediately after leaving the home. At times it seemed inappropriate to write notes during a conversation involving the researcher for fear that rapport would be lost. The notebook and pen, however, were always visible to remind the family of the reason for the researcher's presence. Occasionally the observational notes were read by the children who were overtly curious about what the researcher was writing. The unstructured nature of the observation periods was maintained almost without exception. In general, when autobiographical material was offered, (for example, Mr. Evans' account of his life from age four to the present) it was following a simple question by the researcher pursuing a comment from an earlier meeting, that is, "How old were you when you left Eaglehawk?" Occasional follow-up questions were interspersed but they were directly related to the 24 previous discussion and were usually only questions of clari- fication. The actual words used by the family members were recorded as far as possible because the linguistic symbols used were a major concern of the study for their importance in Habermas' theory. The description of the case-study family and the discussion of the relationship between Habermas' theory and the case-study data are in Chapter 4. Finally, the conclusions of the study were drawn, implications were identified and lines for future research were recommended (Chapter 5). W In this chapter the need for the study, the purpose of the study, and the objectives of the research have been pre- sented. The assumptions underlying the research and the limi- tations of the study have been identified, concepts central to the study analyzed, and the procedural steps and methods summarized. Chapter 2 focuses on the critical theory of Jurgen Habermas related to systems of action and concludes with the generation of a tentative framework for reflection on the meaning of family activities related to the self- formation of family members. CHAPTER 2 HABERMAS' THEORY OF SYSTEMS OF ACTION AND THE FAMILY SYSTEM The first part of this chapter contains a discussion of Habermas' theory related to systems of action. Three examples of the use of Habermas' theoretical model for exploration and interpretation of phenomena follow. Third, the relevance of Habermas' theory to the family system is established. Finally, a tentative framework to guide the collection of case-study data is generated. Background Bernstein (1978) described Jurgen Habermas (1929--), the West German philOSOpher and social theorist, as the most prominent and controversial thinker to emerge from the Institute for Social Research, Frankfurt (p. xvii). Habermas is critical of positivism. He rejects the positivist claim that the methods of the natural sciences ("empirical-analytical" sciences) is the 22$! legitimate way of understanding social action, but does not reject the empirical-analytical sciences per se. Both hermeneutical (interpretive) and empirical-analytical sciences "represent 25 26 legitimate modes of investigation . . . but they focus on different realms of . . . reality" (Bleicher, 1980, p. 158). In this respect the two modes are complementary but not the same. [Habermas'] central criticism of positivist philosophy is that it is unable to account for the epistemological status of its own claims. [It is a principle of many logical positivists that] all statements are either empirical (synthetic), a priori (analytic), or mean- ingless. . . . This principle conforms to neither of the two "meaningful" types of statements allowed by it. It thus has the paradoxical character of being mean- ingless if true (Keat & Urry, 1975, p. 224). Positivism is inadequate in two respects: (1) it fails as philosophy in that it disallows reflection on the nature of rationality, and (2) it disregards symbolic interaction and the possibility of a dialectic of the critique of ideo- logy in society thus failing to offer appropriate procedures for social study. Habermas' view is that "the truth of social rules depends not on testable laboratory processes, but on the promotion of mutual understanding of obligations and expectations" (Keane, 1975). Cognitive Interests Habermas' cognitive interests (or the knowledge- constitutive interests) are basic to the system he developed. They "shape and determine what counts as the objects and types of knowledge: they determine the categories relevant to what we take to be knowledge as well as the procedures for discovering and warranting knowledge claims" (Bernstein, 1978, p. 192). Bernstein's elaboration does not remove the 27 ambiguity of Habermas' conceptualization of knowledge inte- rests but it is adequate for the purposes of this study. Each cognitive interest stands in relation to an abstract expression (characteristic objects and types of knowledge) and a concrete expression (specific mode of action). Between the two expressions is a mutual reinforce- ment. The relationship between the three elements can be represented diagrammatically (Figure l). Cognitive Interest / \ shapes abstract prompts concrete expression expression Objects and types mutuallyg Mode of action OR of Knowledge reinforcing Dimension of Existence Figure 1. Relationship between Cognitive Interest, Type of Knowledge and Mode of Action. Habermas based his system of knowledge on three cognitive interests: the technical, the practical, and the emancipa- 3:25;. Technical interest had its roots in the Greek techne, "the skillful production of artifacts and expert mastery of objectified tasks" (Habermas, 1963/1973, p. 42). The objects and types of knowledge shaped by the technical interest are the empirical and analytic sciences, and the mode of action prompted was identified by Habermas as work. By work, or purposive-rational action I understand instrumental action or rational choice or their 28 conjunction. Instrumental work is governed by tech- nical rules based on empirical knowledge. In every case they imply conditional predictions about observ- able events, physical or social. These predictions can prove correct or incorrect. The conduct of rational choice is governed by strategies based on analytic knowledge. They imply deductions from preference rules (value systems) and decision procedures: these pro- positions are either correctly or incorrectly deduced. Purposive-rational action realizes defined goals under given conditions. But while instrumental action organizes means that are apprOpriate or inapprOpriate according to criteria of an effective control of reality, strategic action depends only upon the correct evaluation of possible alternative choices, which results from calculation supplemented by values and maxims. (Habermas, 1968/1970, pp. 91-92) Figure 2 illustrates the relationship of the technical interest and its abstract and concrete expressions. Technical Interest / \ shapes prompts / empirical and instrumental analytic rggfiggiign strategic activity sciences 9 WORK Figure 2. Relationship between Interest, Type of Knowledge and Mode of Action (Technical). The roots of practical interest were in the Greek praxis--action directed to achieving an order of virtuous conduct emanating from prudent understanding and reflecting goodness and justice (McCarthy, 1979). The objects and types of knowledge to which the practical interest gives rise are the historical and hermeneutic (interpretive) 29 sciences, and the mode of action elicited is the symbolic interaction. According to Habermas, interaction is governed by binding consensual norms, which define reciprocal expectations about behavior and which must be understood and recognized by at least two acting subjects. Social norms are enforced through sanctions. Their meaning is objectified in ordinary language communication. . . . (T)he validity of social norms is grounded only in the intersubjectivity of the mutual understanding of intentions and secured by the general reCOgnition of obligations. (Habermas, 1968/1970, p. 92) He went on to say that "we can distinguish between social systems according to whether purposive-rational action or interaction predominates." In other words, which of the human activities, work in a mechanistic sense, or interaction communicating meaning related to social norms, predominates? Figure 3 illustrates the relationship of the practical interest and its abstract and concrete expressions. Practical Interest / \ shapes prompts historical symbolic hermeneutic re?:§::ii§ INTERACTION sciences g Figure 3. Relationship between Interest, Type of Knowledge and Mode of Action (Practical). The two interests described above are linked. They have their anthropological status in common, and they are complementary. Their respective modes of action, work and interaction were described by Habermas 30 as fundamental conditions of cultural existence (McCarthy, 1978, p. 93). Work and interaction are the means by which persons "consciously objectify their world in the double sense that it is simultaneously constituted and disclosed to them" (Keane, 1975). The third cognitive interest, the emancipatory interest, leads to another kind of knowledge but is derived from the conjunction of technical and practical interest. Critical reflection examines whether the existing system of social relations justified by the reigning ideology is most appropriate to existing technical capacities. .In other words, critical reflection confronts ideology with social reality. "Through self-reflection a subject becomes aware of the unconscious pre-suppositions of completed acts" (Habermas, 1970/1980) which is the key to recognition of domination. The emancipatory interest is represented in Figure 4. The form of knowledge associated with the emancipatory interest is critical theory. Emancipatory Interest \ shapes prompts critical reflective activit mutuall y theory reinforcifig CRITIQUE OF DOMI NATI ON Figure 4. Relationship between Interest, Type of Knowledge and Mode of Action (Emancipatory). 31 Rationality Habermas began the development of his model of ration- ality with a discussion of the concept as used by Weber. Weber used rationality as a descriptive term to encompass the "form of capitalist economic activity, bourgeois private law, and bureaucratic authority" (Habermas, 1968/1970, p. 81). Later, Marcuse identified the inevitable outcome of employing that type of rationalization as being a "Specific form of unacknowledged political domination" (Habermas, 1968/1970, p. 82). Concentration on "the correct choice among strate- gies, the apprOpriate application of technologies and the efficient establishment of systems (with presupposed aims in giyen situations)" (loc. sit. emphasis in the original) without Opportunity to reflect upon the ends sought, leads to political control. Such domination by technocracy, meaning that all pro- blems are perceived as technical problems to be solved by instrumental means or appropriate strategies, reflects depoliticization. Under these circumstances technical progress is necessary for maintenance of the social system which in turn determines social interests. Each link in the chain is dependent on the others and is a reinforcement of the relationship. The interrelationships are represented in Figure 5. Technical interest appears to have become the only basis for rationality in society. This belief in tech- nocracy, related to positivism, is actually a technocratic 32 theory of knowledge. The concentration on empirical knowl- edge involving predictions about observable events has the effect of reducing people to objects of the material environ- ment. Therefore understanding of human capacities is obscured. . directed o . soc1al t .1 technical interests ’ progress determines necessary for economic growth to maintain the system Figure 5. The Technical-Economic-Socia1 Cycle. But rationality (meaning in obedience to, or consistent with, reason) is not confined to technical activity. Weber limited the SCOpe of rational activity by omitting the normative dimension. Actions judged as irrational when measured against technical criteria may be intelligible and reasoned when related to the appropriate form of rationality (Bernstein, 1978, p. 67). The question of "How ought it to be?" or the moral principle as the criterion for rationality is complementary to the questions of "What gives the best return?" (maximizing criterion) and "Which is the most efficient way?" (expediting criterion) characteristic of economic/technical rationality. 33 Legitimation Crisis Habermas views technical domination as a symbol of the crisis in contemporary society. He says there is implicit in the concept of crisis the "idea of an objective force which deprives a subject of some portion of the sovereign independence he normally possesses." The definition and solution of the crisis depends upon the individual's awareness of and participation in it. It follows that "the solution of the crisis brings liberation for the subject caught up in it" (Habermas, 1973/1975, p. 1). In contrast to Marx, who defined social crisis in economic terms, Habermas views it as a cultural crisis of legitimation and domination by technocracy. He feels that the legitimation crisis is manifest in the questioning of the state's definition of itself. The state appears to be faced with problems in relation to its own competence to administer and in its ability to maintain the loyalty of the electorate. As politics becomes administration, public attachment to that process is dependent upon successful govern- mental action which however is plagued by permanent fiscal crisis. In cases of failure the penalty is with- drawal of legitimation and little or no administrative production of meaning. (Keane, 1975) Loss of confidence in the integrity and competence of many political leaders has led to many serious questions about political alternatives. According to Habermas, democracy is not being fully realized in western capitalist nations. Marx' prediction about a working-class movement 34 has not been fulfilled. People are incapable of effecting change because their views of reality are distorted and they are unable to understand their own situations. They are depoliticized. They are unable to participate in matters of a practical (political) nature affecting their own lives, either individually or collectively. A symptom of the domination by technical rationality characteristic of modernization is that practical has become indistinguishable from technical. A practical action has come to mean expedient or maximizing rather than morally justified, that is, consistent with truth, justice and rightness. Traditional society has been directed by the socio- cultural life-world's cohesive uniting values. For example, monarchies are remnants of this type of legitimation of behavior. The British Royal Family haspower by birth. While the control by royalty has been eroded by the assump- tion of power by parliament and the conversion of the former empire to a commonwealth of nations (both as results of the challenge of modernization) the British system is much more tied to traditional principles than is, for example, the system in the United States. The contest between technical and normative rationality was illustrated tragically in Iran in the late 19705 and early 19805. The reaction of the religious leaders to the modernization of the Islamic state was to forcibly rein- state the socio-cultural life-world as the source of 35 authority. The monarchy was discredited through its accept- ance of technocracy but, according to Habermas, the tradi- tional legitimizing codes, once dismantled and with their mystique removed, cannot be rebuilt although alternatives may be sought (Habermas, 1968/1970, p. 102). Overcoming Technical Domination Understanding social reality depends upon using appro- priate criteria of rationality. The tendency, in modern society, toward the universal adOption of technical criteria as the basis of rationality was described by Habermas as penetration by technical rationality into all aSpects of human life. He cites as examples of technical rationality conditions of: (l) repressiveness and intolerance of ambivalence in the face of role conflict; (2) rigidity in everyday interactions; (3) behavioral cOntrol and inflexible application of norms inaccessible to reflection; and (4) an achievement ideology (Habermas, 1968/ 1970, pp. 119-122). The way of overcoming technical domination is by taking into account values, cultural traditions, and religious beliefs, and reinstituting communicative action governed by consensual norms. Language is essential for self-conscious- ness, self-understanding, self—formation and liberation of the senses because "language always expresses the conditions of social life" (Keane, 1975). Only through communicative action can humans act as reflective subjects participating in their own behavioral control by way of an organized 36 system of signs and symbols. It is only as ideologies are examined, reflected upon and people engage in discourse that ideologies can be unmasked and prevented from obscuring reality. In short, overcoming of teChnical domination depends upon practical action and critique of ideology. Complementarity of Technical and Practical Action Habermas has been criticized for concentrating upon the Opposing nature of the two concepts, technical action and practical action, which are intimately related, but as polar points on a continuum. Certainly one cannot be reduced to the other but there is a continuity between them. The identification of work as the activity associated with technical rationality does not mean a complete lack of meaning content. In the extreme, work is visible, obvious, easily measurable, and product-oriented. At the other extreme, interaction is complex with subtle meaning content and may incorporate several levels of meaning which have to be uncovered, layer by layer, to be understood. Interaction is also situational and particularistic. Questions of rationality which correspond with the extremes of the con- tinuum are, at the technical/strategic extreme, those of efficiency, expedience, economy, maximization; and, at the practical extreme, those of normative and moral principle related to the socio-cultural life-world of norms, sanctions, myth and religion. 37 The previous discussion is not directed toward dis- crediting the technical bases of rationality per se but is an attempt to restore the balance of complementarity between technical and practical action, and to emphasize the impor- tance of using appropriate criteria to judge rationality. Nor does the writer mean to imply mutual exclusiveness. The interrelation can be illustrated by the inseparability of observation (technical) and interpretation (practical judgment). Observation is value-laden in the choice of framework used and the information recorded. The comple- mentarity of theory and practice can be misunderstood also. The distortion of the relationship between theory and practice so that one assumes greater importance than the other, or that they appear to be separate entities, is mis- leading. To divorce theory and practice is to deny the dialectical, reciprocal relationship. Theory derives from practice and practice guides and eXpandS theory. Habermas rejected the illusion of a world conceived as a universe of facts independent of the knower (McCarthy, 1978, p. 59). He also criticized the ahistorical nature of attempts to explain social action, arguing that these attempts neglect the socio- cultural matrices in which individuals are located. Actions of individuals cannot be understood unless viewed in the context in which they occur. 38 Technical Ideology An ideology is a set of beliefs which, if inappropriate, can lead to distortion of reality and false consciousness. Technical ideology obscures the real nature of problems so that all problems, whether technical or practical, are dealt with as if they are technical. Habermas Claimed that the domination of cultural institutions by means-ends rationality, that is technical rationality, has widened to include ”even the family" (1968/1970, p. 98). If the family is a microcosm of society it will reproduce its social roles and perpetuate a specific society because "household activities cannot be analyzed as separate from the socioeconomic relations of the society in which they are embedded" (Rapp, et al., 1979). Relationship of Habermas' Theory to Family Activities Habermas acknowledged the importance of kinship struc- tures in conjunction with socially organized labor as the specific way through which social roles are reproduced. "The kinship structure which controls both the integration of the external and internal nature [that is, self-formation] is basic” (1975). The fruitfulness of his model which has been outlined so far in general terms depends upon its translation into specifics. Translation into a specific framework is contributed to by the following related pieces of work--a view of ration- ality drawing on the work of Diesing (1975) in relation to decision making, Honsinger's use of that interpretation as 39 a tool of analysis (1980), and Piotrkowski's conceptualiza- tion of the interface between household work and the family's emotional sub-system (1979). A discussion of the above con- tributing ideas follows. Perspectives on Rationality In 1979 the writer developed a view of rationality as having both technical and normative dimensions. The model was an alternative but related framework to the Habermas model and it was derived in part from Diesing's discussion (1975). He identified five types of decision making--social, economic, technical, political, and legal. Only the first three are dealt with here because the last two can be sub- sumed, in this writer's opinion, within the first three depending on the Specific content of the decision situation. A further collapsing of Diesing's economic and technical categories can be justified. By social decision making, Diesing meant the integrating, goal-setting process related to personalities and social relations. This process is characterized by the absence of giygn ends, lack of definite means, or way of evaluating (Diesing, 1958). Social decision making requires that the participants address relatively unique situations and explore the possibilities inherent in each with views to uncovering conflict as well as conflict-maintaining factors, looking for strain-reducing support in the future, and preparing for future stresses. The focus is on the participants and their interactions. 40 In contrast, economic decision making with its goal of maximization, and technical decision making with its goal of efficiency, are strictly means-ends actions (and in this reSpect, indistinguishable). This undifferentiated economic- technical concept corresponds closely with Habermas' "pur- posive-rational" action, while social decision making pro- vides the counter notion akin to Habermas' "interaction." Habermas went further in relating the types of action to an ultimate basis of rationality. He proposed that the final arbiter of rationality for technical action was "science and technology" while the "socio-cultural life-world of myth, custom and tradition" was the source of rationality for practical action. Practical rationality lies in inter- subjectivity of understanding achieved without force, or the domain of consensual action with undistorted communi- cation (Habermas, 1976/1979, p. 120). The two bases of rationality, "science and technology" and "the socio-cultural life-world," prOposed by Habermas can be subsumed in the ancient philosoPhical expression for the ultimate, intrinsically valued goal of humans--the summum bonum, literally the highest good to which humans can aspire. The role of the summum bonum is as motivation of, or rationale for, action a priori, and as justification of action a posteriori. In this way it is both self-shaping and self-reinforcing. Habermas is saying that science and technology have become the summum bonum in western, industrialized 41 society, replacing the socio-cultural life-world which was previously the ultimate source of rationality for human action. Humans have had a variety of perceptions Of the summum bonum. Aristotle's humanistic view held that the highest good for humans was happiness (in Johnson, 1978, p. 65). The Stoics' notion of the highest human good was independence and self-control, because insofar as a person is dependent upon another, he or she is enslaved by that other (Epictetus in Johnson, 1978, p. 105). In contrast, the early Hedon— ists held to a maximizing dictum. Their ultimate goal was pleasure and the absence of pain (Epicurus in Johnson, 1978, p. 97). Hedonism gave rise to utilitarianism in the late eighteenth century. Utilitarianism is a doctrine based upon the belief that the rightness or wrongness of actions is determined by the goodness or badness of their conse- quences. Jeremy Bentham, the nineteenth century British philosopher, claimed that acts must justify themselves through their utility--that is, through their contribution to "the greatest happiness of the greatest number" (Johnson, 1978, p. 250). He also believed that all pleasures are qual- itatively the same, the only difference between them being those of quantity. Bentham developed a hedonistic calculus: a device for assessing what action one should take in the attempt to achieve and aggregate pleasure (in Johnson, 1978, p. 259). John Dewey's ideal was growth—-to him the only moral end (1939, p. 40). More recently John Rawls 42 has proposed an ideal of distributive justice for the ultimate goal of humans (1971). Yet another example of the summum bonum in our society is Christian perfection. Utilitarianism is of particular importance to the present study because in its demand for accountability, emphasis on measurement, and reduction of quality to quantity, it represents Habermas' idea of technical ration- ality. It ignores the normative dimensions implicit in practical rationality, of goodness and badness, rightness and wrongness being associated with principles of justice, fairness, human dignity, self-formation and autonomy. A model drawing on Diesing's explanation and incorpor- ating the concept of the summum bonum was devised by this writer (1979). See Figure 6. Honsinger used the model as a tool for categorizing goal statements in relation to pro- grams for gifted children in Michigan, 1971-1979 (1980). Honsinger argued that a basic lack of normative goal agreement among edu- cators causes what appear to be failures in economic and technical decisions. [The latter], if made without concern for normative and ultimate goals, appear more likely to fail or be short-lived. What Honsinger is saying, when translated into Habermas' terms, is that technical action needs to be preceded by practical action; that is, that the ultimate criterion of rationality should be principles relating to the socio- cultural life-world rather than short-term technological maximization. Only 11% of the school districts in Honsinger's study articulated an ultimate goal. Thus the 43 @5me .8363. Ecom can 3:223: .o 052“. 33:68me 15:21.15. 32.2:on was; 222.... «“522 $3 «on a >p_._uco_o.=w 5.33:..qu 63.05:. .202 BEEOEEQE: 35:32.5 35352:: — 13.2.18: 0.20203 .263 20.283 to 9:: w O u A A223 EOE: m w._923 .o c2585 IA. .I as. 2.26 3525.2 6.5.0 2.33“— nucotu 2:250 $29225 / / season 2.3:. 32:3...” 3300 «outcom tonnes... 23.... 106 association is indicated by the type of line connecting either the family member, or the family as a whole, with the particular institution. The quality of the relationship has been nominated by the researcher on the basis of her observations as "strong," "tenuous," or "stressful." The direction indicated by the arrow is the direction of energy flow. For example, the link between the Evans family and their wider kin is strong and the energy flow is in both directions; the link with the religious system is tenous; the link with the near neighbors is stressful. The nature of the link between the 12 and eight-year-old girls (Tess and Elaine) and the Sport and Recreation category is their participation in a marching team, one of the examples of interactions included in the diagram to clarify the writer's intent. The diagram reinforces that the family is primarily a reacting system. Systems of Action in the Evans Family Language as the expression of conditions of social life is central to the following analysis because understanding of the conditions of social life is related to understanding self-formation within the family. The set of language cues identified as the key to mode of rationality constitutes the tentative framework derived from Habermas' theory (refer p. 50 above). The framework was used to eXplore the themes which emerged from the data. 107 Initially the themes identified in the data were: "beating the system," "belief in the supernatural," "making a fortune," "sense of freedom," "role of money." The state- ments made by the family members were coded and sorted according to the categories. As the sorting proceeded, it was found necessary to create a sixth category, "kinship and community." The next step was to summarize the contents of the categories. Further examination of these categories revealed that there was duplication within and between them. It appeared that it might be useful to collapse a number of the categories, for example, "belief in the supernatural" and "sense of freedom," and to reorganize the content into the following four categories: 1. Belief in the supernatural, the occult, astrology, chance, luck, fate. Gambling as a way of "making it." Fantasy of "moving to a farm," winning Tattslotto, illusion of freedom (avoidance of being tied-down and subject to routine) when in fact there was heavy dependence upon social institutions. Absence of effective action (capacity to complain, refusal to vote, to boycott electric trains of little consequence). 2. Alienation from society. Lack of loyalty to legiti- mate power illustrated by refusal to vote (later tempered by voting merely to avoid the $100 fine) or by pragmatic "vote for the person who will do the most for me"; depoliticization, illustrated by un- declared income and avoidance of tax; atomized family unit, dependence on a limited number of kin for community--minimal service of social interests, separation from neighbors; view of world as basi- cally non-problematic, maintenance of uncritical attitude; maintenance of holding pattern, c0ping framework. 108 3. Technical domination by society. Universalistic, impersonal nature of medical, educational, housing, social security (both invalid and unemployment authorities) institutions. Inflexible, rule- oriented, procedural, functional roles. For example, no Specific doctor, undifferentiated "they" when Speaking of medical care; schools in general have failed their children; housing authority Spoken of as "the commission" or "it." 4. Technical domination within the family. Repeated interactions observed within the family in which money played a part. A problem which emerged from this arrangement was the absence of parallelism between the categories producing a disjuncture when considering them as a whole. Further reflection on Habermas' writing prompted a decision to categorize the beliefs as they related to: "cultural beliefs," feconomic life," "political system," "social relations with wider community," and "family relations." The rearrangement produced the following division of the data: 1. Cultural beliefs: Belief in the supernatural, the occult, astrology, chance, luck, fate. Gambling as a way of "making it." Fantasy of "moving to a farm," winning Tattslotto, illusion of freedom (avoidance of being tied-down and subject to routine) when in fact heavy dependence upon social institu- tions. 2. Political system: Absence of effective action (capacity to complain, refusal to vote, to boycott electric trains of little consequence). Alienation from society--lack of loyalty to legitimate power illustrated by refusal to vote (later tempered to voting merely to avoid the $100 fine) or by pragmatic "vote for the person who will do most for me": depoliticization illustrated by undeclared income and avoidance of tax. View of world as basically non-problematic, maintenance of uncritical attitude. 109 3. Economic life: Source of income invalid pension, unemployment benefit, family allowance placing the family at the margin of the capitalist productive system--labor not required for productive process but being supported by the State. Gambling winnings. Challenging the system. 4. Social relations with wider community: Atomized family unit, dependence on a limited number of kin for community--minimal service of social interests, separation from neighbors. Technical domination by society illustrated by universalistic, impersonal nature of medical, educational, housing, social security institutions. For example, no specific doctor, undifferentiated "they" when speaking of medical care; schools in general have failed their children; housing authority Spoken of as "the com- mission" or "it." Universalistic food preparation. 5. Family relations: Technical domination within the family--repeated interactions observed within the family in which money played a part as instrumental currency; effect of money as cultural currency in terms of group ties; normative transactions. A discussion of this typology derived from the inter- action of Habermas' theory and the case-study data follows. Cultural Beliefs In his analysis of society Habermas identifies a tendency toward cultural crisis, one manifestation of which is a belief in the occult (Keane, 1975). In the case-study data there were several examples of belief in the super- natural, astrology, luck, chance, and fate. Denise described herself as a "typical Virgo12 --terrib1y critical" after she had complained of the unreliability of an associate in greyhound racing. On a later occasion She announced that September 24 and 25 were proving to be "as unfortunate as 12Sign of the Zodiac. 110 [her] horosc0pe predicted" which supports the thesis that she believed that the stars were playing a part in what befell her. Another time Denise reported being impressed greatly by a clairvoyant she consulted who was able to describe facets of (Denise's) life which the clairvoyant could not have known about, including that Denise cares for two children who are "not [her] own." The clairvoyant further predicted that Denise would eventually have the care of another child which was "not [her] own." Denise expressed a belief that She has experienced rattling of doors and the Shaking of the house without reasonable physical explanations. Fiona too, reported that she had had a frightening experience during the "calling up" for a seance. In addition, Denise was inclined to think that there was some supernatural cause for a series of "strange phone calls [which] were getting her down." A telephone call in which a person had told her that "the devil" was trying to act through her disturbed her greatly. She reacted strongly when one of the children brought in a mirror with, "Don't break it--seven years bad luck--I'm terribly superstitious." A belief in "luck" was evident in the claim by Denise that She was "lucky at Bingo," having won the jackpot twice, and having won well on a recent horse-race. She claimed to be lucky also "at the dogs." However: she did not have enough faith in her luck to bet any money on their dog Sandy in a particular race because "that would be a sure 111 way of making him lose." The excitement of playing games of chance was mentioned several times by Denise, as was the extra zest provided by it mattering "if She lost or won," because She believed that she could 293 afford to lose the money invested. Gambling success is extremely unlikely given that very few peOple manage to achieve it, bearing in mind the principles on which gambling is based. However a number of references were made to this hOpe, for example, the possibility of winning "Tattslotto" as a means of obtaining a car for Fiona when she is eligible to drive. An ambition of the family iS to live on a farm. Denise was ready to acknowledge that $48,000 was out of their reach for the purchase of a prOperty she had been told about. Apparently she had received information that the purchase price was $24,000 and she had actually called to inquire about the prOperty only to find that the price was double what she expected. Given that on another occasion She had said that it was not possible to "make up a one hundred dollars but [possible to] make up a five dollars" to pay off installments on household goods, the farm was even more of an illusion. When the possibility of moving to another country prOperty came up, the expectations were raised to the extent that Reg reported that the family would be moving in four weeks, and discussions were taking place on arrangements for schooling. The "promise" associated with the property which was for lease was over-rated, and the venture was impractical to consider. There were great expectations of the male 112 greyhound's racing potential. Richard described the dog as "the great white hOpe." It was Similarly idealistic for Stan to believe that he could find another job readily when he "walked out" of the one he had at the time. The current level of unemployment in Australia and the over-representation of Stan's age group and education level put him at serious disadvantage in the job market. He was waiting for the Employment Service "to let [him] know of an Opening" in gardening. There was a fatalistic acceptance in the observation by Richard that the education system had failed as far as his family is concerned. "School doesn't work for our kids." Even Fiona,.who was reportedly "doing well" at school and has ambitions of going on to finish secondary school and then into higher education, had been suSpended for a misdemeanor Shortly before the researcher met the family. On another occasion, though, Denise accepted responsibility for one set of adverse circumstances when She said, "We've had some hard times-~but it was our own stupidity." This acceptance is exactly counterposed to the belief in magic as the power in her life, to which Denise referred frequently. To take full responsibility for the "hard times" they had experienced is as distorted as taking no responsi- bility at all. Blaming their own stupidity carries the implication that if they had not been stupid they would have escaped the hard times. Such a direct relationship does not exist. In suggesting that it does exist, Denise is claiming 113 for themselves power and capacities no member of a social group gag possess. The sense of freedom expressed by Denise in the family's good relations with Social Security and the Housing Com- mission has elements of illusion in it because both authori- ties impose strict constraints on their clients. Social Security places a very low ceiling on what an individual may earn without prejudicing the invalid pension or unemployment benefits, beside other requirements. The Housing Commission precludes such things as "wall—papering" and "keeping grey- hounds," two things Specifically mentioned by Denise. Having to accept the Housing Commission representative's pejorative remark about the house being "knocked about" and the Evans' having a "mob of kids" belied a sense of freedom and autonomy in one's own home. Stan's expectation that his efforts in the garden might have been noticed by the inspector indicated a consciousness of inferior status. The disposal of their money is controlled by earlier decisions the family made to become involved in installment purchasing. A condition of the co-Operative to which they belong is that the administrator has to "approve purchases." Attempts on the part of Denise and Richard to exercise freedom and autonomy are very limited in sc0pe. Denise claims to rebel at being "told what to do." For example, She claimed that She would "rather be fined than vote,"12 12Voting in Australia is compulsory at the State and National levels, and sometimes at the local level. 114 although when the election day came, the threat of a $100 fine was effective and she did "as She was told" and voted. The boycott of electric train travel because "they knockled] smokes off in the train" (that is, banned smoking) meant little because of her infrequent use of the train anyway. Richard's assertion that he was "never one to be tied up" is belied by his 19 years of marriage and his Six children plus the acceptance of reSponsibility for his wife's two nephews. Denise's rejection of "routine" is similarly sub- jective. Her life is routinized but in a different way from the stereotype she is rejecting. In relation to cultural beliefs the data support that there are distortions of reality which are obscuring the practical problems facing this family. In general these beliefs are related to the perceptions of power in their lives. Political System The pragmatic attitude of Richard toward involvement in the political process was expressed in his intention to "vote for the man who [would] do the most for [him]." His criter- ion of "doing the most" was technical (instrumental) and atomistic. The "most" was the promise of increased Family Allowance. Acceptance of the promise as genuine, and dis- regard of any other government policies and practices were expressions of alienation from the political process and absence of loyalty to the legitimate power--factors of crisis identified by Habermas. Denise's lack of effective 115 action was expressed by her hostility to participating in the electoral process,13 illustrating her alienation from the political system. Richard's involvement in work which is undeclared, and his avoidance of taxation contributions as a consequence, alienate him from society and the political process. To some extent they reflect the deficiencies of a system which is so inflexible as to deny financial support except when an individual is totally dependent. In the Opinion of Professor Else Oyen, the Australian welfare system is "in- complete and based on grudging handouts" (Mills, 1980), in Spite of amounting to 28% of the annual national budget. Australia had an innovative welfare system as early aS 1910 but the early promise has not been fulfilled. Professor Oyen attributes some of the problems to Australia's politi- cal institutions which have created "obstacles for the develOpment of welfare," citing Federalism's role in the delay of "delivery of welfare services" (ibid). One of the effects of such policies and practices is to depoliticize individuals as is the case with the Evans family. This issue does not appear to be perceived as a problem by the Evans' but this is consistent with Habermas' position that 13The overlap in content which occurs from time to time in this discussion is because many of the factors considered, for example gambling, voting, the police force, have dimen- Sions relevant to more than one category. 116 in a world dominated by technology, people are unaware of problems in which they are caught. Again the data support that the practical problems of this family are obscured--in this case in relation to the political system--by their lack of understanding of the dynamics of political power. Economic Life As consumers of goods and services the case-study family is involved in economic life in the traditional sense. But their income comes mainly from grants from the public purse through various distributive agencies. Even the winnings from gambling successes are not returns for pro- ductive 1abor--a basic tenet of the capitalist system to which the family belongs. Ironically the family's investment in gambling in the hOpe Of winning large returns is consistent with the capita- list's investment with his hOpeS of profitable returns, but it is an illusory investment and without productive effort. The system does not appear to need the productive labor of any of the family members except for Fiona whose part-time employment in a local supermarket fits the capitalist model. The preparedness Of the State to support these non-producers (in market terms), albeit grudgingly, while contrary to the capitalist notion is instrumentally motivated. In Habermas' terms this is part of the State's intervention to counteract the instability of the capitalist system with its fluctuating 117 demands for productive labor. While the provision of financial support ensures that the minimal needs Of the family are met, their location on the margin of the system reinforces their alienation. The economic system stands as a challenge to Richard. He said that he had always been one to "try to beat the system." His undeclared work is a success in this context. Other instances of family members gaining satisfaction from "beating the system" were Stan and Fiona's success in gaining entry to a hotel disco (minimum age 18 years) even though Stan was only 17 and Fiona 15 years Old. Both Stan and Fiona were amused at their success in forging their mother's name in matters related to school. Reg thought it was very funny when after he had hit a boy who had "hit [his] girl- friend" the wrong person was identified as the culprit and was punished instead. The data support that the family's concept of their involvement in the economic system is distorted and illusory. Social Relations With the Wider Community The case-study family is predominantly an atomized unit. Birthday celebrations, for example, consist of "parties between themselves." A limited number of Denise's kin provide community, as borne out by the number of times the Evans family has lived with relatives, and by the extent to which they have relatives stay with them from time to time. Denise regards children as company for herself. She 118 said that she "really wouldn't mind having another child to keep [herself] from being bored in the daytime." She is eagerly anticipating grandparenthood with "children and grandchildren coming home for Sunday dinners." Denise had been able to overcome a problem because her husband and family "had stood by her." The family does not appear to be integrated with the immediate neighborhood. Both Richard and Denise described the area as "bad." Examples of disjuncture were the tele- phone calls to police because of the Evans' parties. The Evans family was defensive because they were 395 having a party on each occasion, but the issue appeared to be not so much that the description of what was going on was in- accurate, but that relations with the neighbors precluded direct negotiation. A neighbor allegedly threatened Tess with a knife when She was on her way to school one day. A positive transaction with a neighbor was the gift of snack foods for the children. Denise and Richard's explanation for "not getting on with the neighbors" is that "they (the Evans) will not drink with them." There appears to be very little interaction with other community groups apart from Tess and Elaine's membership of a girls' marching team. There are no church affiliations, for example. Richard makes contacts through his coaching Of a football team and the use of resources (physical plant and organizational structure) for greyhound racing, but these do not appear to demand very much personal or family commitment. 119 The family's relationships with services appear to be universalistic and impersonal in nature. When Speaking of medical care Denise gave great credit to the hospital. "They are brilliant in there-—I've got a lot of faith in them--they saved my life." The education system was spoken of as an undifferentiated institution--Richard's statement that "school doesn't work for [their] kids" is an illustra- tion. The generic term "teachers" appeared to include all teachers, and the expectation was expressed that teachers should be able to "control children." This expectation makes no allowance for particularistic skills and needs of either individual teachers or children. A teacher who could not "control" Reg was not dOing her job, in Denise's Opinion. The Housing Commission was Spoken of as an undifferentiated entity too. For instance, Denise did not want "the Com- mission" to paint the house because "they use such drab colors.“ The technical, instrumental penetration of the family's life is further illustrated by the frequent use of take-away foods. The technical aspect dominates the symbolic meaning of food served to a family when it is de-personalized to that extent. The data support the claim that Habermas' theory can be used to characterize the technical domination by a society of a family's relations with its wider community. 120 Family Relations The reduction of qualitative exchanges to quantitative measures, a characteristic Of technical domination of social relations, is illustrated by emphasis on money and money transactions in familial groups. In the case-study family, it appeared that money played a part as cultural currency in terms Of group ties. The penetration Of ties of affection by the language of money is an indication of the substitu- tion of the technical for the practical. According to Habermas, money is an inapprOpriate medium for the expression Of group solidarity and for the index of membership Of the group. The group consists of those to whom the family "pool" Of money is available. Denise described their method of money management as a "pool" from which the family drew. She appeared to hold the purse. The "drawing" was therefore as she saw fit, rein- forcing her position of power as the central figure in the family. Having enough money to keep the family together was clearly an important issue. Denise described as "worse off than us," families which could not be kept together. She resented people who "cry poor-mouth." She wishes that She were as "poor aS them." The family's limited money income contributed to the excitement Of her gambling. The knowledge that She "couldn't afford to lose," heightened the thrill. This belief is also not borne out because losing money did not prevent her from gambling, nor did it appear to threaten their family's being "kept together." 121 One of Denise's understandings Of money was expressed by the statement "Everything's money now," in connection with anything they wanted to do as a family, for example, taking the children to the drive-in.14 In the exchanges among family members, money featured frequently. Tess wanted her mother to give money to Noel for his helping with the dishes and as compensation for not going with Richard to buy the take-away food that evening. This occasion was one in which Denise intervened by disagreeing with Tess. She did not want Noel to think that he Should get money for everything he did. Discussion occurred on several occasions about what Christmas presents the children would get even though Christmas was still four months away. Steve was threatened that "Santa Claus [wouldn't] come if [he weren't] a good boy." Reg was rewarded for going to the snack-ShOp to buy Denise's cigarettes, and compensated for not going to the Show15 by being allowed to buy snacks for himself and the two other children who stayed home. Two instances Of children wanting to convert goods to money were observed. Elaine announced that she would sell 16 a biscuit for five cents and Ted offered to sell his 14Drive-in theatre. 15Royal Melbourne Agricultural Show (correct name). 16Cookie. 122 stereo for $5. On another occasion Reg said that they had thought of selling Tina (the dog) for $100 but rejected the idea because, "She [had] been such a good dog." There were instances of family members borrowing from each other. Tess seemed in constant fear that it happened without her know- ledge. Apart from Tess, peOple did not seem to be very particular about repayments. Elaine's notion Of what was Tess' share of the 15 cents that Denise gave her to Share with Tess was five cents for Tess and 10 cents for herself. Another aspect Of the technical was the apparent reifi- cation Of money. Money was spoken of as if it had a life of its own and was something that came and went at will. Denise and Richard's honeymoon lasted "until the money ran out." When they had money, food appeared to take top priority, for example, filling the freezer with meat and buying $200 worth of groceries from Half-Case Bulk-store)"7 at a time. On the other hand, when they did not have cash it was possible to buy on credit at the snack-shOp. The parents were in agreement that Ted "should learn the value of money," but it seemed that money was wearing many guises in their family life, as the language of inter- personal relations, that were ideological and were obscuring the real issues of power and authority. A discussion of practiCal actions in the family follows. 17Store which sells in bulk. 123 Within the atomized family unit of the case-study family, the concept of Sharing was promoted by Denise in particular. It appeared that She had a commitment to equality. For example, she was impatient with her childless Sister and brother-in-law for the fuss they made of Tess which She thinks has made Tess selfish. The uncle and aunt had reclaimed the gift of a bicycle to Tess because the other children were using it. Denise said that Tess "was very bad about sharing." Denise's expectations about Sharing were the subject of a teasing verbal exchange with Ted and with Steve on separate occasions. When Steve told her that he had made pancakes at school, she said, "Where are mine? You little garbage-—you ate them all." When Ted said that he 18 She said, "Where had got "eight out of ten for [his] pizza" is it? You didn't share with me." Sharing Of time is impor- tant too. Denise said, "It's very hard to give each child some time on its own." To some extent She seemed to have overcome the problem by allowing her children to stay home from school. On four of the six observations that cut across school hours one of the school-aged children was home, a different one each time. There was an easy attitude toward clothes. When Denise 19 could not find her thongs She said "Fiona must have worn 18Ted had made his pizza in a foods class and "eight out of ten” was his teacher's assessment Of his work. 1 9Footwear o 124 them to work." When Elaine's dresses were too small to wear to the Show, it was regretted that She was too small for Tess'. Ted borrowed Stan's pants to wear to the Show although Stan had to be persuaded by his mother to lend them. Reg had worn Tess' shoes and Fiona's belt. The sharing extended beyond the immediate household of the Evans family to Denise's Sister and brother, who, with their respective Spouses and children, had stayed with the Evans from time to time. Had Stan's girlfriend been pregnant, Denise said that she and the baby would have been welcome to come and live with them. Previous to the Evans' moving into their present house they had lived with various relatives. The emphasis on Sharing within a very tight network reinforced the boundaries between the family and the com- munity and threw into Sharp focus the difference between relating to family members and to outsiders. There was a cynical attitude toward outsiders whom it was assumed "just want to take your money" according to Denise. She was very sceptical about the "non-profit" organization an agent claimed to represent. Denise's reactions to various of the remarks made by the children conveyed beliefs in fairness and justice. When TeSS advised Reg to match the insults he had received, "DO it to them," Denise remonstrated, "That's as bad as they are." Tess complained that Stan pulled her hair, and Denise responded by asking her what She had been doing. She told Reg that it "wasn't very nice to hit another child" and 125 Steve that it was "cruel and nasty" to pull Off a butter- fly's wing. Denise acknowledged the legitimacy of a teacher's complaint when "Tess took after her with a stick." She expects that teachers will "control" children, and she endorsed that Reg Should have been punished for his mis- demeanours. But she was concerned and felt that She had grounds for complaint about the lump on Steve's head which he said was the result of a teacher's hitting him with a ruler. Denise set an example in co-Operation for her family in that She and Fiona shared the meal preparation, "You do the potatoes and I'll do the pumpkin" and when Fiona couldn't find her clothes to wear to the Show she said, "If you'd left me a note I'd have had it ready for you." When Ted was resisting his father's request to walk the dog, Denise offered a compromise solution: "Give 'im a little run across the park." The following exchanges illustrate lack of consistency in practical reasoning. Denise's words did not always match her actions. The words conveyed an ideal, but the reality was Often differ- ent. A number of injustices among the children were either ignored or not noticed. When she was appealed to as arbiter (a frequent occurrence) because Ted had promised Tess a "ride on the bike" in return for "a bite of her sandwich" She was more concerned with whether or not Tess would want to eat her evening meal. On the occasion that She was adamant that the two younger girls would not be allowed to go to the 126 Show because of their quarrelling and refusal to do as they had been asked, she overlooked her earlier decree when the time came for them to get ready to leave. Denise's belief in freedom is eXpressed in her state— ment that she does dishes herself "if She is in the mood." At the same time she appears to regard things done by family members for the benefit of all as being done "for [her]." She expects children to keep rooms tidy because She "getISI annoyed when [she] has to walk over things." This attitude is ideological and it distorts the real nature and purpose of technical tasks. The tasks expected of children appear to be gender-linked. Girls will work in the kitchen when Denise is not "in the mood" and boys will work in the yard. A very technical justification for boys learning the rudi- ments of housekeeping was, "It's good for a boy to learn so that when the wife's in hospital they can manage for them- selves." Denise accepts meal-producing reSponsibility which ranges from planning the "freezer-full" of meat to endorsing whichever take-away food source is to be patronized. Having planned her meat and grocery supply, the actual meals to be served seemed to be last-minute, impulsive choices. Denise Spoke of her mother as having been a very "fussy housekeeper." She also referred to an earlier time in her own married life when She had kept her floors shiny and her housework "done." Now she "letlsl it all go," which suggests that she has some sense of "how it ought to be." 127 In treating the system as a challenge and something to be beaten, or got around, unconsciously Richard is pre- senting an alienated view of society as part of his con- tribution to the self-formation of his children. In this chapter the dialectic between Habermas' theory and the case-study data has been presented. Conclusions Of the study, implications for home economics in Australia, and recommendations for further research will be discussed in the next chapter. CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH The first objective of the study was to evaluate Habermas' theory related to systems of action as a basis for reflecting upon family activities, using theoretical materials and empirical data from a case-study, dialecti- cally, with the ultimate aim of understanding self-formation in the family. The second Objective was to identify the implications Of such an evaluatirwxfor one profession, Home Economics, in Australia. Conclusions The systems of action identified by Habermas were paralleled in the family. Both practical and technical actions were Observed. Many of the technical actions were in relation to issues of a practical nature illustrating the domination by technical rationality, in the family, that Habermas describes in society. Examples of practical actions were the mother's attempts to give each child some time on its own, her normative judgments on several behaviors that they were not "right," 128 129 including that She did not believe in forcing a marriage. She also resisted giving payment to a child for participating in a household task on one observed occasion, thereby indi- cating that She believed that a different system of action was apprOpriate in the family group. The acceptance into their home of the two nephews, both with learning problems, illustrates normative behavior. In one reSpect this action follows a tradition of the previous generation. Two nieces had been incorporated into the mother's family. (There were other instances of close identification with problems of particular kin.) Many instances of the substitutions of technical action for practical action emerged. Some examples follow. The use of money transactions as the medium for ex— pressing interpersonal relations within the family is an example Of technical domination. The way in which money is talked about—~the bases of exchange, reasons for giving and withholding rewards, and the individual with ultimate con- trol--defines the power relations in the family. The reported appeal to the policewomen to counsel the teenage girl is a substitution of technical action because it is an example of applying instrumental means to solve a problem of normative behavior, a practical issue. In the same way, the transfer of the child to a Special school because he was uncontrollable in a regular school is a technical action in'a practical problem. To use marriage as the technical solution to the problem of a chance 130 pregnancy is an example of substituting a technical action when a practical action would be more apprOpriate. As part Of the cultural mores of the society, marriage is a practical issue. Relationships with children are practical issues, so to perceive having children as a way of providing company for a mother is reducing humans to objects and dealing with the issue as though it were technical. The family's dependence on government allowances for their income reflects depoliticization. They are prevented from participating in the social structure associated with the production system. Some participation in the form of undeclared work occurred, but inability to declare it was alienating in that it denied the person's existence in a political sense. The apparent lack Of need for the parti- cipation Of any family members in the production system is depoliticizing in itself. The family's behavior toward the political-economic system as something to be outwitted rather than as an expression of their humanness and something in which to participate with fellow citizens also reflects their depoliti- cization and is related to the state and national practice of compulsory voting. Australia's system of compulsory voting is technical penetration of the practical domains of human life. To have people vote only because otherwise they would be fined obscures the real meaning of political participation. This technical attitude toward politics reflects the perception 131 of the political system as a technical administration of affairs of state and is contrary to the ideals of democracy claimed by Australia. The underlying ideologies which led to the domination by technical action include beliefs about technocracy, metaphysical forces, power and freedom. An ideology is a framework, consisting of values which act as a guiding principle for peOples' decision making. To hold values is part of being human. According to Habermas, traditional ideologies have been made anachronis- tic in a capitalist society dominated by technical reasoning. The denial of human capacity to make practical decisions-- a tenet of technocracy-~excludes the possibility of generating a rational consensus of values to answer the question of how peOple Should live together in a cohesive whole. The tech- nocratic view, claiming to be value free, intervenes as the way for people to deal with practical issues. In this way, technology assumes the role of an ideology. Although there are many examples of the case-study family's choosing technical action to deal with practical issues, their ideology is not exclusively technocratic. There were vestiges of a metaphysical ideology in the state- ment that believing in God was important, and in the beliefs in the occult,1 the stars and luck, but these beliefs were 1Habermas identified belief in the occult as a symptom of cultural crisis. It is not clear what the origin of the belief was for this family but in either case, it interfered with their view of reality. 132 mixed with technical ideology. There was no coherent ideology tied into a systematic world-view. The technocratic ideOlOgy is reflective of Australian society. The attitudes to the political system are typical of the western capitalist system's crisis Of legitimation as described by Habermas. The heavy dependence of this family on welfare support and their increasing needs con- tribute to the State's fiscal problems. The parents' belief that schools are to control children is technocratic ideology. Education is part of the socio- cultural life-world, and to reduce its role to a technical function is inapprOpriate. The mother's attitude that participation of other family members in household tasks was for her benefit rather then for the corporate benefit reflects her fragmented view of the family. There is an ideology associated with the real under- standing Of power. The family is dependent on (1) the public housing authority which imposes restraints on their freedom to act, (2) the Social Security administration with its conditions to be met, (3) the demands of the education system in which five Of their members are involved, and (4) health services which impose qualifications. It is false con- sciousness to believe that they are free, autonomous individuals not tied down or subjected to routine. The anonymity of the institutions with which the family deals masks the real power and produces depoliticization. 133 It is also ideological that the family has power but misunderstands its own limitations. This misunderstanding is illustrated by dependence upon magical influences or, alternatively, claiming superhuman powers for themselves. The family has the capacity to act as an effective group in that they maintain their group cohesion, solidarity and unity as a system. This same ability could be effective in other areas if, for example, they could participate in the same way at a community level. The metaphysical ideology obscured reality for the family in several instances. While cosmic forces such as the sun and moon are highly influential on peOpleS' lives, the amount of gravitation effect between a star and an indi— vidual is less than between two individuals (Shapiro, 1981). A belief in the stars affecting the family's fortunes is ideological. It obscures the individual's responsibility for his or her actions. Other beliefs in the supernatural were in relation to the occult (for instance, the bad luck associated with breaking a mirror and the influence of luck in success at a game of chance). The conclusions of this study illustrate that a family's understanding of the real location of power can be obscured and their ability to act effectively, stifled. Inability to perceive their own political natures inhibits them from questioning what appear to be the Obvious and "given" in society. Self-consciousness and self-understanding are fundamental to achieving the capacities to act autonomously. 134 Fromm recognized the need to unmask false consciousness when he said If a person . . . is not able to see the social reality and instead fills his mind with fictions, his capacity to see the individual reality . . is also limited (1962, pp. 130-131). Many peOple are left out of the Australian democratic process either out of apathy or pragmatic self-interest. Individualism and privatism encapsulate peOple and they lose their capacity for community--the ability to be part of each other's lives. Misunderstandings of power locations have arisen from the replacement of the socio-cultural life-world of consensual norms, with the "value-free" technology. This misunderstanding occurs in the case—study family. What are the implications for the self-formation of family members? The family's belief system appears incon- sistent and confused and technical rationality dominates family activities. In such a cOntext reflection on, and realistic assessment of, their own capacities by family members is limited and it is unlikely that full human potential will be realized. In this study the researcher used the critical theory of Jurgen Habermas as a basis for reflecting on the nature of the family activities of an Australian working-class family, focusing on self-formation in the family. Aspects of the theory which influenced the study were Habermas' critique of positivism; his theory of knowledge; his systems of action; his emphasis on self-formation; his 135 critique of ideology; and his beliefs in the complementarity Of theory and practice, and the need for an historical approach to the understanding of phenomena. The study has demonstrated that Habermas' way of looking at society is useful for understanding the nature of a family's activities. The theory generated the framework alternative to positivism which made it possible to employ an interpretive approach focusing on practical action and ideology critique. In treating practical action in terms of communication, the theory identified language analysis as an important part of understanding the social reality of individuals. Habermas helps us to see that unless we understand the problems of family in a socio-historical perspective pro- fessional practice with families is abstract and it fails to address the real issues of families and their everyday lives. This insight has implications for home economics, a field that defines itself in terms of the family. Implications for Home Economics According to Brown and Paolucci's mission statement for home economics, home economists are facilitators for families. Their role is to enable families to develOp systems of action which will lead to "maturing in individual self-formation and participation in the critique and formu- lation of social goals and means for accomplishing them" (Brown & Paolucci, 1978, p. 23). ‘136 This type of partnership between home economists and families demands that the professional understands a family's view of reality. In particular, the professional needs to understand the family's perceptions of the location of problems. It would be beneficial to home economists to understand societal processes and that the processes within a family are reflective of the larger society. Further, the family processes perpetuate the existing societal processes in the self-formation of members. The positivist domination of home economics knowledge reflects the utilitarian perspective on science which influenced the way home economics was initially conceptual- ized. Of importance to home economists is the understanding that the type of knowledge which has dominated the pro- fessional practice--the empirical-analytic knowledge--needs to be complemented by other forms of knowledge: interpre- tive, and critical theory. To grasp reality demands this broader perspective. Finally, the study's implications for home economics can be summarized in two main points, namely that 1. Everyday life for a family can be highly complex and understanding of such complexity requires different kinds of knowledge (interpretive know- ledge and critical theory in addition to empirical- analytic knowledge), and 137 2. The integration of such new knowledge, by home economists, with their theory and practice, depends upon an historical understanding of the evolution Of the field and its knowledge base. Future Research The implications of this study for further research are two-fold: methodological and substantive. On the one hand Habermas' theory has yielded insights on the meanings of family activities in a working-class family. The theory should now be extended into use with other family types, or be used in seeking answers to additional questions to expand understanding of working-class family. The types of questions which might be addressed are: 1. How can we understand a family's relationships with other societal institutions? 2. How can we characterize the kind of community a family provides for its members? The substantive knowledge derived from the study broadens the knowledge base of home economics and generates further questions to be answered using empirical-analytical methods to complement the type of knowledge derived from this study. Appropriate questions to be answered using empirical methods include: To what extent is satisfaction with outcome of an action related to using the appropriate kind of action (that 15, practical or technical action)? 138 Finally, for home economists the study poses the question: In what ways will home economists have to change to incorporate the kind of knowledge generated by studies such as this one? APPENDIX APPENDIX #5 - 527 Dandenong Road Armadale Victoria 3143 Australia May 26, 1980 Dr. Henry E. Bredeck Office for Research Development 238 Administration Building Michigan State University Dear Dr. Bredeck: Enclosed are seven COpies of prOposed research for review by UCRIHS. The proposal has been approved by my Ph.D. guidance committee, chaired by Dr. B. Paolucci, Department of Family Ecology. If you have any questions or require further information, I may be contacted through Dr. B. Paolucci, Department of Family Ecology, College of Human Ecology, Michigan State University. Sincerely, Margaret E. Watters 139 TO: 140 The University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects FROM: Margaret Watters, Ph.D. student, Family Ecology RE: The Ph.D. Research Project, tentatively titled: "The Meaning of Household Activities to Family Members: Application of Habermas' Theory" PrOposal has been reviewed and approved by Dr. B. Paolucci, Dr. M. Bubolz, Dr. L. Nelson, Dr. J. Schlater (all of College of Human Ecology). and Dr. R. Peterson (PhilOSOphy Department). following information is provided to facilitate review of the prOposed research by UCRIHS. and economic influences in Australia during the twentieth century will be identified and their interaction described Of study, and family as the focus of that field of study I. ABSTRACT SUMMARIZING THE RESEARCH The main emphasis of the project prOposed is philOSOphical and theoretical. The project will encompass: a. a critique of the Home Economics field of study in Australia b. a theoretical analysis of the concept "family" in the Australian setting c. an examination of Habermas' theory Of knowledge and human interests as a source of conceptual tools for characterizing the qualitative dimensions of family household activities d. an evaluation Of the model generated in c. (above) by using it to analyze data collected through a limited case-study of one family The procedure to be undertaken includes: a. examination of the relevant literature to describe the context of the study. (The major social, political, to provide a setting for both Home Economics as a field in Australia.) b. examination of the literature relating to Home Economics in Australia 141 c. examination of the literature pertaining to Australian working class families to identify and describe the functioning of these families in an urban setting d. examination of Habermas' theory of knowledge and human interests to identify concepts relevant to the self- formation Of individuals through work (the theoretical model to be constructed constitutes the major emphasis of the research) d. evaluation of the theoretical model, c. (above), through its use in analyzing data collected by researcher as participant-Observer of one family in its home setting. The nature of the study is exploratory. The major focus is the building of a model and the collection of empirical data is incidental to the main thrust of the research. Linguis- tic symbols are important in Habermas' theory so the empiri- cal data will consist Of actual words spoken by family members during observation periods. It is anticipated that the researcher will engage in approximately 30 hours of participant-observation over a period of three to six weeks. Direct questions will be confined to questions of clarifi- cation or confirmation of meaning implicit in actions. There is no systematic schedule of questions but observations will be focused on activities undertaken by household members singly or in groups, activities which popularly may be described as "work." II. REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SUBJECT POPULATION The subject pOpulation will consist of one working class family which has volunteered to be studied. The family will comprise two parents and at least one child, aged between six and 15 years, who live together in one household 142 in Melbourne (capital city of Victoria), Australia. The inclusion of at least one child is crucial to the study as the manner of reproduction of social roles through work, a major function of the family, is of central importance. The family will be involved in procedures relating to informed consent prior to the data collection. III. ANALYSIS OF THE RISK-BENEFIT RATIO A. The Potential Risks: The potential risks to the subjects are minimal but could include the possibilities of invasion of privacy and incon- venience caused by the presence of the researcher as parti- cipant-observer. B. Procedures for Minimizing Risks: a. i. The family's full knowledge of the purpose of the study ii. the voluntariness of the family's involvement (all members having participated in the decision to be studied) iii. the family's right to withdraw from the study at any time b. arrangement of observations by appointment with the family so that they control the presence or absence of the researcher c. the use of linguistic symbols as data giving the family members control of the information conveyed to the researcher d. guaranteed anonymity of the subjects (Melbourne's pOpu- lation exceeds two million) e. the involvement of only one researcher who undertakes to reSpect the subjects' rights as fellow-humans 143 C. Potential Benefits: The subjects are likely to gain from: a. an Opportunity to reflect upon their family life b. knowing that they are contributing to the generation of knowledge c. their learning about the research process d. the possibility of their participation being of benefit to other families Work and family are heavily interdependent in society. A means of characterizing the qualitative dimensions of the inter-relationship may provide a mechanism for better under- standing of family dynamics. IV. CONSENT PROCEDURES After the preliminary contact, the researcher will make an appointment to visit the family at home. A full explanation of the project, and details of what participation in the research by the family will involve, for each of the family members, will be given. If the family is still willing to participate, each member will be asked to read a consent form, and if satisfied, to sign the form. Verbal assent will be sought from children unable to read, providing that the parents agree to their participation in which case legal reSponsibility for that assent will be assumed by the parents. V. CONSENT FORM (please see attached sample) All family members involved in the study will be present at the signing. 144 VI. INFORMATION-GATHERING INSTRUMENTS In this project the process is the product, i.e., the gen- eration of, and the evaluation of, a model is the goal of the research. The observations will be related to work and how that work is perceived by family members. The means of recording observations, whether by tape-recording or writing (in the presence of family members or not) will be negotiated with the subjects. VII. STATEMENT BY DR. B. PAOLUCCI (majoryprofessor) I have received the project prOposed by Margaret Watters, and have approved it. Signature Date 145 Michigan State University East Lansing College of Human Ecology Michigan June, 1980 CONSENT FORM We, the undersigned, freely consent to participate in a scientific study being conducted by Margaret Watters under the supervision of Dr. B. Paolucci, Professor, Department of Family Ecology, College of Human Ecology, Michigan State University. ' The purposes of the project have been explained to us and we understand the explanation that has been given as well as what our participation will involve. We understand that we are free to discontinue participation in the study at any time without penalty, or that we may withdraw the participation of our child(ren). We understand that the results of the study will be treated in strict confidence and that we will remain anonymous. Final results of the study will be made available to us at our request. We understand that our participation in the study does not guarantee any beneficial results to us. We are willing to participate in this research. We, as legal parents/guardians of the child(ren) whose signature(s) appear below give our permission for the child(ren) to participate in the study to the extent the child(ren) wish(es). Signed: Adult Female Signature Date Adult MaIeISignature Date Child's Signature Date Child's Signature Date Address Telephone 146 July 1, 1980 Ms. Margaret E. Watters #5 - 527 Dandenong Road Armadale Victoria 3143 Australia Dear Ms. Watters: Subject: PrOposal Entitled "The Meaning of Household Activities to Family Members: Application of Habermas' Theory" The above referenced project was recently submitted for review to the UCRIHS. We are pleased to advise that the rights and welfare of the human subjects appear to be adequately protected and the Committee, therefore, approved this project at its meeting on June 30, 1980. Projects involving the use of human subjects must be reviewed at least annually. If you plan to continue this project beyond one year, please make provisions for Obtaining appro- priate UCRIHS approval prior to the anniversary date noted above. Thank you for bringing this project to our attention. If we can be of any future help, please do not hesitate to let us know. Sincerely, Henry E. Bredeck Chairman, UCRIHS HEB/jms cc: Dr. Beatrice Paolucci BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY A.H.E.A. Home economics: New directions. A statement of philosophyyand objectives. Washington, D.C.: AOHOEOAO' 1959. Agar, M. H. The professional stranger: An informal intro- duction to ethnography. New York: Academic Press, 1980. Allen, C. M. Defining the family for post-industrial public policy. In D. P. Snyder (Ed.), The family in post- industrial America: Some fundamentalyperceptions for public policyydevelopment. A.A.A.S. Selected Symposia Series, 1979, 21-36. Archibald, J. F. The most important of our products. In I. Turner (Ed.), The Australian dream. Melbourne: Sun Books, 1968, pp. 267-272. (Originally published in The Lone Hand, 1907.) Australian Bureau of Statistics. Melbourne, Victoria. Telephone call November, 1980. Balbus, I. Politics as sports: The political ascendancy of the sports metaphor. Monthly Review, 1975, 26(10). 26-29. Bean, C. E. W. In your hands Australians. In I. Turner (Ed.), The Australian dream. Melbourne: Sun Books, 1968, pp. 281-284. (Originally published 1918). Bernstein, R. J. The restructuring of social and political theory. Penn.: U. of Penn. Press, 1978. Beutler, I. F., & Owen, A. J. A home production activity model. Home Economics Research Journal, 1980, 2(3), 16-26. Bivens, G., Finch, M., Newkirk, G., Paolucci, B., Riggs, B., St. Marie, 8., & Vaughn, G. Home Economics: New Directions II. Journal of Home Economics, 1975, 61, 26-27. 147 148 Blainey, G. Faces of the eighties. Television interview by R. Moore. Australian Broadcasting Commission, January 16, 1980. Bleicher, J. Contemporary_hermeneutics as method, philos- ophy and critiqpe. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1980. Bolton, G. C. 1939-1951. In F. K. Crowley (Ed.), A new history of Australia. Australia: William Heinemann, 1974, pp. 458-503. Brown, M., & Paolucci, B. Home economics: A definition. Washington, D.C.: A.H.E.A., 1978. Bryson, L., & Thompson, F. An Australian newtown: Life and leadership in a working-class suburb. Melbourne: Penguin, 1972. Burns, A., & Goodnow, J. Children and families in Australia. Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 1979. - C. W. The distribution of population. In M. Clark (Ed.), Sources of Australian history. Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1957, pp. 587-594. (Originally pub- lished in Sydney Morning Herald, June, 1907.) Cass, B. The family. In A. F. Davies, S. Encel, & M. J. Berry (Eds.), Australian society--a sociological intro- duction. (3rd ed.) Melbourne: Longman-Cheshire, 1977, pp. 85-126. ‘ Clark, M. Sources of Australian histopy. Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1957. Connell, R. W. Class. In A. F. Davies, S. Encel, & M. J. Berry (Eds.), Australian society--a sociological intro- duction. (3rd ed.) Melbourne: Longman-Cheshire, 1977, pp. 2-17. Conway, R. The great Australian stupor: An interpretation of the Australian way of life. Melbourne: Sun Books, 1971. Conway, R. Land of the long weekend. Melbourne: Sun Books, 1978. Crowley, F. K. (Ed.). A new history of Australia. Australia: William Heinemann, 1974. 149 Crowley, F. K. 1901-1914. In F. K. Crowley (Ed.), A new history of Australia. Australia: William Heinemann, 1974a, pp. 261-311. de Garis, B. K. 1890-1900. In F. K. Crowley (Ed.), A new histopy of Australia. Australia: William Heinemann, 1974, pp. 216-259. "Demos," The people's cry. In I. Turner (Ed.), The Aus- tralian dream. Melbourne: Sun Books, 1968, pp. 158- 159. (Originally published in The Boomerang, 1888.) Dewey, J. Theory of valuation. International EncyclOpedia of Unified Science, 1939, ll(4). Diesing, P. Socioeconomic decisions. Ethics, October 1958, LXIX(l), l-18. Diesing, P. Reason in society. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1975. Dubnoff, S. Gender, the family, and the problem of work motivation in a transition to industrial capitalism. Journal of Family History, Summer 1979, pp. 121-136. Dukes, W. F. N=l. In R. F. Kirk (Ed.), Statistical issues: A reader for the behavioral sciences. California: Wadsworth Pub. Co., pp. 217-223. Dwyer, P. How lucky are we? Australia in the seventies. Carlton, Victoria: Pitman, 1977. Fraser, J. F. Australia: The making of a nation. Melbourne: Cassell & Co., 1910. Fromm, E. Beyond the chains of illusion. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1962. Game, A., & Pringle, R. The making of the Australian family. Intervention, April 1979(12), pp. 63-83. Gollan, R. A. The historical perspective. In P. W. D. Matthews & G. W. Ford (Eds.), Australian trade unionism. Melbourne: Sun Books, 1968, pp. 14-40. Gregory, D. Ideology, science, and human geograph . London: Hutchinson, 1978. Habermas, J. [Theory and practice.] (J. Viertel Ed. and trans.) Boston: Beacon Press, 1973. (Originally published 1963.) 150 Habermas, J. [Toward a rational society.] (J. J. Shapiro, trans.) Boston: Beacon Press, 1970. (Originally published 1968.) Habermas, J. [The hermeneutic claim to universality.] In J. Bleicher (Ed.), Contemporary hermeneutics as method, philosophy and critique. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1980, pp. 181-211. (Originally published 1970.) Habermas, J. [Problems of legitimation in late capitalism.] (Excerpt from J. H., Was heisst heute Krise? Merkur, April/May, 1973, 415, 664-647. Trans. by Thomas Hall.) In Paul Connerton (Ed.), Critical sociology. United Kingdom: Penguin, 1978, pp. 363-387. Habermas, J. [Legitimation crisis.] (T. McCarthy, Ed. and trans.) Boston: Beacon Books, 1975. (Originally published 1973.) Habermas, J. Toward a reconstruction of historical materi- alism. Theory and Society, 1975, 2, 287-300. Habermas, J. [Communication and the evaluation of society.] (T. McCarthy, Ed. and trans.) Boston: Beacon Press, 1979. (Originally published 1976.) Hartman, A. Diagrammatic assessment of family relation- ships. Social Casework, October, 1978, pp. 465-476. Hegel, G. W. H. Dialectic and human experience: The phenomenology of spirit. (Excerpt) In F. G. Weiss (Ed.), Hegel: The essential writingg. New York: Harper & Row, 1974, pp. 70-79. Hess, R. D., & Handel, G. Family worlds: A psychosocial approach to family life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1959. Hickman, D. C., Religion. In A. F. Davies, S. Encel, & M. J. Berry (Eds.), Australian society--a sociological intro- duction. (3rd ed.) Melbourne: Longman-Cheshire, 1977, PP. 234-267. Hogan, J. F. The coming Australian. In I. Turner (Ed.), The Australian dream. Melbourne: Sun Books, 1968, pp. 134-139. (Originally published 1880.) Honsinger, M. K. Description of the curriculum goals in educationalgprograms forggifted children in Michigan: 1971-1979. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1980. 151 Hopper, J. Home economics--its place in education: A com- parative review. Journal of Home Economics of Aus- tralia, August 1972, 4, 4-17. Horin, A. The working women's revolution. National Times, August 26, 1979. Housing Commission Victoria. Annual general report: 1977- 1978. Melbourne: F. D. Atkinson, Government Printer. Hudson, W. J. 1951-1972. In F. K. Crowley (Ed.), A new history of Australia. Australia: William Heinemann, 1974, pp. 504-551. Hunt, F. J. Education. In A. F. Davies, S. Encel, & M. J. Berry (Eds.), Australian society--a sociological intro- duction. (3rd ed.) Melbourne: Longman-Cheshire, 1977, pp. 210-233. Johnson, 0. (Ed.). Ethics: Selections from classical and contemporary writers. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston, 1978. Keane, J. On tools and language: Habermas on work and interaction. New German Critique, Fall 1975 (6), pp. 80-100. Keat, R., & Urry, J. Social theory as research. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1975. Kilmartin, L., & Thorns, D. C. Cities unlimited. Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 1978. Kingston, B. My wifequy daughter, and poor Mary Ann: Women and work in Australia. Australia: Nelson, 1977. Krupinski, J., & Stoller, A. (Eds.). The family in Australia: Social, dempgraphic and psychological aspects. Sydney: Pergamon, 1974. Laing, R. D. Thegpolitics of the family. Canada: CBC Publications, 1969. Lake Placid conference on home economics: Proceedings of annual conferences, 1889-1908 Lake Placid, New York. n.p. 1901-1908. Lasch, C. Haven in a heartless world. New York: Basic Books, 1977. 152 Leichter, H. J. Some perspectives on the family as educator. In H. J. Leichter (Ed.), The family as educator. New York: Columbia Teachers College Press, 1977, pp. 1-43. Lowenstein, W. Weevils in the flour. Melbourne: Hyland House, 1979. McCarthy, T. The critical theory of Jurgen Habermas. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press, 1978. McCarthy, T. Translator's introduction. In J. Habermas, [Communication and the Evolution of Society.] 1976/1979. Op. cit. pp. vii-xxiv. McQueen, H. A new Britannia: An argument concerning the social origins of Australian radicalism and national- ism. (Rev. ed.) Melbourne: Penguin, 1976. McQueen, H. Social sketches of Australia, 1888-1975. Melbourne: Penguin, 1978. Marx, K. [Capital] (Vol. 1). (S. Moore & E. Aveling, trans.). New York: International Publishers, 1967. (Originally published 1867.) Middleton, H. A Marxist at Wattie Creek: Fieldwork among Australian aborigines. In C. Bell & S. Encel (Eds.), Inside the whale. Australia: Pergamon Press, pp. 238-269. Mills, S. Our Welfare: Cause for lots of concern. The Age, June 20, 1980, p. 11. Paolucci, B. Le développement des resources humaines dans leS familles americaines. In A. Michel (Ed.), Les femmes dans la société marchande. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1978, pp. 4-11. Pearson, C. H. The tendency of the age is to be hopeful. In I. Turner (Ed.), The Australian dream. Melbourne: Sun Books, 1968, pp. 164-170. (Originally published in National Life and Character, 1891.) Penton, B. Advance Australia--where? In I. Turner (Ed.), The Australian dream. Melbourne: Sun Books, 1968, pp. 313-316. (Originally published 1943.) Peterson, R. T. Critical discussion of "Home Economics: A definition." In Home Economics: A definition. Washington, D.C.: A.H.E.A., 1978. 153 Pinar, W. F. Notes on the curriculum field 1978. Educa- tional Researcher, September 1978, 1(8), 5-12. Piotrkowski, C. S. Work and the family system. New York: The Free Press, 1979. Poster, M. A critical theory of the family. New York: Seabury, 1978. Radi, H. 1920-1929. In F. K. Crowley (Ed.), A new history of Australia. Australia: William Heinemann, 1974, pp. 357-414. Rapp, R., Ross, B., & Bridenthal, R. Examining family history. Feminist Studies, Spring 1979, pp. 174-200. Rawls, J. Theory of justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1971. Reid, M. G. Economics of household production. New York: Wiley and Sons, 1934. Robertson, J. 1930-1938. In F. K. Crowley (Ed.), A new history of Australia. Australia: William Heinemann, 1974, pp. 415-457. Rose, 8. The collapse of work. Speech on Science Show. Australian Broadcasting Commission Radio, December 18, 1979. Rusden State College. Statement on home economics. July 1980. Sandercock, L. Cities for sale: Property_politics and urban planning in Australia. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1975. Sawer, G. Australian government today. (11th ed.) Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1973. Shapiro, L. T. Pseudo-scientific claims. Speech broadcast on WKAR radio, Michigan State University, January 14, 1981. Smart, M. S., & Smart, R. C. Children's development and relationships. (2nd ed.) New York: Macmillan, 1972. Starting the machine. In I. Turner (Ed.), The Australian dream. Melbourne: Sun Books, 1968, p. 256. (Origi- nally published in The Bulletin, 1901.) 154 Stephenson, P. R. The genius of place. In I. Turner (Ed.), The Australian dream. Melbourne: Sun Books, 1968, pp. 295-298. (Originally published in The Australian Mercury, 1935.) Stretton, H. Housing policy. In P. Scott (Ed.), Australian cities and public policy. Melbourne: Georgian House, 978, pp. 107-122. Summers, A. Damned whores and God's police: The coloniza- tion of women in Australia. Melbourne: Penguin, 1975. Theodorson, G. A., & Theodorson, A. G. A modern dictionary of sociology. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1969. Turner, I. The Australian dream. Melbourne: Sun Books, 1968. Turner, I. 1914-1919. In F. K. Crowley (Ed.), A new history of Australia. Australia: William Heinemann, 1974, pp. 312-356. V.U.S.E.B. (Victorian University and Schools Examination Board). Planning Committee Reports, 1972 and 1975. Walsh, M. Poor little rich country: The path to the eighties. Melbourne: Penguin, 1979. Ward, R. Australia: A short history. (Rev. ed.) Sydney: Ure Smith, 1979. Watters, M. E. Rationaliry and social decision making. Unpublished paper. Michigan State University, 1979. Weiss, F. G. (Ed.). Hegel: The essential writings. New York: Harper & Row, 1974. Wild, R. The background to Bradstow: Reflections and reactions. In C. Bell & S. Encel (Eds.), Inside the whale. Australia: Pergamon, 1978, pp. 182-215. Zaretsky, E. Capitalism, the family, and personal life. New York: Harper & Row, 1973. HICHI IlliilllllillI?“