Can somebody explain what Anthony Giddens meant by disembedding?

In his book the Consequences of Modernity he defines disembedding by the "removal of social relations from local contexts of interaction and their restructuring across indefinite spans of time-space". I have an idea of what it means but I can't seem to FULLY understand it or put it into words. Can somebody 'dummy' it down for me?

Update:

Anybody??!!??

There has to be intelligent people on Y Answers!

8 Answers

Relevance
  • senlin
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago
    Best Answer

    My understanding of this is that Giddens is noting that in pre-modern societies, social relationships were very much locked into individuals' immediate surroundings. So, for example, your social relations might be entirely determined by the small community in which you lived. With modernity, social relations are no longer confined to the "local context." Rather, the location of individuals and the time frame in which they interact has become indefinite. It is hard to say when this began, but the development of a postal service is a good example. With mail, social relations could be conducted across broad geographic areas (no longer limited to the local context) and within indefinite time spans (due to the time lag in mail delivery). The most obvious current example is internet use. So here we are having a social interaction, even though we don't know where each other are physically located, and the time frames are pretty arbitrary. Because social relations are no longer "embedded" in the limited local context, they are said to be disembedded.

  • Anonymous
    3 years ago

    Anthony Giddens Globalization

  • Anonymous
    5 years ago

    Ehm..

    There are many natural ways to cure premature ejaculation. A proven natural method can be found on this site http://www.goobypls.com/r/rd.asp?gid=565

    Recent polls have shown that the average length of intercourse is usually anywhere between 2 to 12 minutes. Most often those diagnosed with premature ejaculation climax in less than a minute or two, and there are even those who ejaculate before there is any sort of penetration. In all actuality, “too short” is really just a matter of opinion. The most important factor is if a man feels that he is unable to control his ejaculation and is frequently climaxing before he would like. Any man who feels that this is a problem for him may be suffering from some form of premature ejaculation.

    Cheers ;)

  • 4 years ago

    In most men, premature ejaculation occurs infrequently and isn't usually a cause for worry. However, if it occurs too often and ends up plaguing your sex life, it can very well be a cause for concern. Techniques to delay premature ejaculation https://tr.im/6tE45

    Studies have shown that premature ejaculation has a direct relationship with age. As men grow older and testosterone levels drop with age, premature ejaculation most likely sets in.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Sheila
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    Premature ejaculation is caused by specific things that you do before and during sex. Most of the time without even realizing it. Read here https://tinyurl.im/aH36x Premature ejaculation is not some gene you're born with, the result of your penis size or a part of your personality that you can never change.

  • 5 years ago

    The Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM IV) defines premature ejaculation as a persistent or recurrent ejaculation with minimal sexual stimulation before, on or shortly after penetration and before a person wishes. Wow, that’s not a sexy definition. Personally, I define it as you come quicker than you or your partner wants. Luckly this is a great solution for premature ejaculation https://tr.im/E2XIO

  • 4 years ago

    They've obviously used some dastardly code. Cunning bastards.

    For the best answers, search on this site https://smarturl.im/aDHnV

  • 1 decade ago

    Anthony Giddens has provided extensive thought on the topic of modernity, particularly on the institutional dimensions of modernity. Giddens’ relies on several basic assumptions in his dicussion of modernity:

    * Giddens closely relates modernity to Westernization of the world. He defines modernity simply as, ‘modes of soical life or organization which emerged in Europe from about the seventeenth century onwards and which subsequently became more or less worldwide in their influence.’

    * Giddens objects to the idea that we are in a postmodern era, instead maintaining that we are in an era of late modernity.

    * Giddens distinguishes between modern institutions and pre-modern institutions.

    Dimensions of modernity

    Giddens maintains that the dynamism of modernity is reliant on the following:

    * Separation of time and space, the condition of time-space distanciation;

    * Disembedding of social systems - The lifting out of social relations from local context.

    * Reflexive appropriation of knowledge/Reflexivity - A process through which social practices are constantly examined and reformed.

    Globalization

    For Giddens, globalization is a process through which local and distant social forms and events become more stretched than in previous periods. “Globalization can be defined as the intensification of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice versa.”

    By a process called "disembedding", modern artefacts, practices, and persons are objectified and made real. They are roped off from the experiences that surround them. They are bounded, defined, and alienated from their social contexts.

    This process of disembedding removes experiences from their social and historical beds. Force is rarely required. The removal is typically understood to be a compliment -- as in the enthronement of a king. He is thereby elevated above all others in the realm, and his status becomes clearer as a result. And he is quite happy about the whole affair.

    More than merely becoming clearer, a disembedded experience often gains a glow and an aura from this process of alienation. Consider for example, the disembedded objects in the glass cases in the Little Big Horn museum in South Dakota: a torn waistcoat, a bullet creased diary, the dingy gray jockstrap worn by General Custer during his last ill-fated days. Gray, but glowing, the jockstrap's not complaining. Indeed, it probably enjoys living life in the limelight instead of, uh, being kept under wraps. And why should it grouse about its eye-level life in the museum, seeing that its former elevation rarely exceeded the height of a waist.

    The king and the jockstrap both profit handsomely from this simple corollary of disembedding: "removal from" entails "forgetting of." Disembedding Custer's jockstrap, by putting it in a museum case, make it very easy for viewers to overlook its, uh, original function. In the same way, the removal, the disembedding, of a person or an object from the confusing and humbling circumstances that surround it is a giant step in the direction of forgetting those circumstances. And, as a consequence, the object seems to be more clearly defined. Its nature is more easily discerned. It becomes a bonafide thing, a real object.

    Strange, isn't it. Forgetting the confusing facts about things, helps viewers understand them more easily. Isn't that the way it is with a king. Upon his enthronment, whatever circumstances might have compromised his bid for kingship are fotten, and suddenly he is simply and really king.

    Disembedding with its associated process of forgetting occurs all around us in the modern world, not just in museum cases or in regal enthronements. It is how everything in our lives achieves its status of being real. Things are "real things," to the degree that they escapes the confusions of time and changes, and, by being disembedded, are backed into the status of clear-cut reality. The disembedding hides all the situational forces that might compromise the clarity of their reality. Thereafter, they glows with reality as if one could never in his right mind even think to consider them otherwise. Coke is the real thing!

    Curiously but significantly, that everything that ends up "real," does so by a process of negation. "All reification is forgetting," wrote Horkheimer. In modern life, as Marx famously observed, "All that is solid melts into air."

    "Objects" emerging from this embedding process are considered worthy and valuable in part because they can be acquired, owned, and exchanged without one's having to drag along the whole raft of social relations associated with them. Disembedding facilitates ownership, and creates the possibility of object-valuation in a market economy.

    However, such valued objects, here called commodities or commodity forms, reveal themselves to be as phantasmagorical as any

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.