7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
1/72
Modernity,
Pluralismnd
he
Crisis fMeaning
The
Orientation
f ModernMan
Peter
L. Berger
ThomasLuckmann
Bertelsmann
oundation
ublishers
Gtersloh 995
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
2/72
cIP-Fiihcns!!liJD!
Nlodcrnn), lnLLsn lhoaissolneanLng rl,r
onenrarion r nulco tr, PqerL Bor-lcr
(i
d.d.h :
Bqldrmrn( l.Nn(d'on
01995 sedelsmrtrdridanon .itersloh
Edio. Dr ndtrr
Ktrhlmrnn
cory cdtor: ltisltr
N!uPdh
Prodcriotrdnor sabr. Kltt'nr
cover design IT(i
!r(b.agqtrur, Rielereld
corerphoro Itobcd J)!Lru'11.K'ero.n.i.
I'r{l
Ns
Yo'k. soloDu, R
(lu$erh.hMdsn'
Latour andqpessr
s
dgtotrcn'bll, B,elercld
Print Fuldrervun.g$Nax, !ulda
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
3/72
Contents
lletner lYeidenleld
Preface
Peter
L. Betger,Tbomas
uchmann
Modernity,
pluralism nd he
crisisof
meaning
what
basic uman
needs f
oricntation
m u s te a t i s f i e d l
. . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1. The foundations f the meaningfulness
o f h n m a ni f e
. . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2. Themeaningfuhre*
l
.ocialrelrt ion
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
4/72
Preface
Questions
f cultural
orientatiooare among he most urgenr ssues
of modern
society. ndividualism
and pluralism
ead
o the conse-
quence hat individuals
more anclmore
face he difficulty to define
standards nd valuesguiding their own lives. ndividuaLsequire
these alues
o be able o find orientation
n a situation
vhich
s de-
finedby
optionsand he necessity
o takedecisions.
Three ccntral
groups of questions
lelineate rucial problems,
which
the Bertelsmann
oumlation
ntends o tackleby creatinga
new
,rngc
[ pro:c,
s
on cuhural
rrcntation:
-
l low
can ndividuals
ealizemeaningfulivesby chosing
rom
thc pluralisticnultiplicityof optionsl
-
How do
humanbeings oorclinate
he numerous olesandsocial
networks
n which they interactl
n other words:how do they
stabilizc
hcir own identity)
V/hat value
systems
uide thcir ideasof good and cvil? In as
much
:s individuals
harcconrnron alue
patterns
we
have o
raisc
a consccutive
uestion:'hich
communities o
such
ndividu-
als onn who sharcsimilar pattcrns f mearingand udge heir
lives
by the samevalue systcrns?
nd finally:
what
do these
comnrunities
ontributc
o thc integrationof the society
as a
whole
or to what
extcntdo thcy endangeruch ntegration?
How
canmodernsocieties
rovidedrerequiredigaturesl
Individuals
who havc
acquircd table
orienrations
ossess
n cffcc-
tive
panacea gainst
xistentialhrcats o
their
self-perception.hey
regard hemsclvesspeoplewith an undoubteddentity.And they
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
5/72
avail
henxelvesf ethical tandards
hich enablehem
o
judge
their
actionswith regard o their
effecton society s
a whole
On all drree
evelsndividuals ave
ceasedo act according
o what
hes raditionally
been egarrled sself-evident
nd akcn
or grantcd.
Thereforc he ossof the taken-for-grantedas ed to the possibility
and cven
necessityo decide
hat is meaningful, ood and
sociaily
acceptablc.
his
decision
s an individual
one and t is debatrble
f
thc
cohesion f society uffcrs
sa consequencefthese
decisions.
n
addrtion
he pluraiistic bundance
f suchdecisions
llowscommun-
it ies o emerge
hich
enjoy he
oyalties f rheir
members ut do
not
nccessarilyake nto eccounthe
welfare f socictyas
a whole.
'fhe
range f projects n
"culnrral
orientation" tartedts series f
publications
with a first
volumeon
"'lhc
loss
of orientation
the
cohesion risis
n modern
society"
in
German
anguage nly).
In a
next phaseof the field of projects
wc commissioned
number of
expcrtises.
s a first result,
Peter llerger
(Boston)and
'lhomas
Lucknrann
(Konstanz)
present
heir analysisof
the mechanisms
which ead o a crisis f meaning
n nodern society.
his study
emergedrom a contextof projectswhich aredealing
with
orienta
tion in the
mmediate
ocial
eighborhood
ndwith the orientation
by communication
n
a
workplacc environment
and in company
hierarchies.
ther
sub-projects
ocuson the
legitimacyof political
iction and
he limits to statecontrol of
socialprocessesr on
new
challenges
ue o the ever ncreasint
omplexityof knowledge
nd
the
flow of informationwhich modern
ndividualsace.
Peter
Bergerand ThomasLucknrann ount
among he ceuses
or
the modern
risis
f
meaning rocesscsf
modernization,Lural ism
and particularly
with regard o Buropean ocieties
seculariza-
tion. fhjs
leads
o the conscqucnce
hat the
validity
of shared
mean-
ing is difficult
o mailtain for largergroupsof
individualsn society.
Patternsof meaningare being shared
and maintainedby smaller
communities.t is therefore rucial
o distinguishn
which way in
dividuals
nite to form these ommunities.
n addition,all of them
relate o the functionalmacrosysternsn society ike polit ics,eco-
6
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
6/72
nomy andscience.nteraction
etween
heseevels ndcommunities
is being egulated
y intermediary
nstitutions,mediacommunica-
tion
andmoralizing tatements
n everydayife. It will need
urther
enquiry o establish
efinitcknowledge
n
which nstitutions
reef-
fectiven this respect ndhow they perform heir task.The resultof
such a study can
be evidence
on the possibility o counteracr
centripetalendenciesn
society.
Prof.Dr. Verner \eidenfeld
Member
of the Boardof the
Bertelsmann
oundation
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
7/72
Modernity, pluralismand
he crisis
of meaning
whatbasic
uman
needs
f orientation
must be satisfied?
Peter [.. etger
Tbomas uchmann
1. The oundations
fthe
meaningfulnessfhuman ife
It is not apparent hether
alk about he crisisof
meaningn today's
world
really correspondso a new form
of disorientation
n the life
of modernpcopLe. ould t bethat wc aremerelyhearing he Latest
repetitionof
an old
lament?s ir
the complaint
'hich cxpresseshe
feeLing
f distress hich hasagainand againafflictedhumanity
n
the
face
of a worid become nstcady?s this thc old
lament, hat
hurnan ife s
a ife to*'ardsdcath?s this the
voice
of doubt, hat
this
life
could ind its meaningn a transcendentistory of salvationlOr
is this despcration bout he lack
of sucha
meaningl Vc aredistant
in t ime from
thc book of
the Ecclcsiastes'everythings noughtl
everythings n vainl")
ut
not
distantrom hespiri t
of thc
Chroni
cle of Bishop
C)tto
von Frcisingwritten
more than
850 ycarsago:
"ln
alL,
wc
areso depressedy thc mcmory of thingspast, he pres'
surcof thc present nd he fearof futurevicissitudeshat we accept
the sentence
f death hat is in rrsand rnay become ired of
lifc it-
self." t is even
urther and all thc sanle ot so
ar
betwecn he
con-
ceptions f human ate in history
rom
Thucydideso Alben
Camus.
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
8/72
On
t,hat
basis remodern
and
post-modern)riticsof present ay
societyand culture
convinced hat the crisisof our tirnes
s funda-
mentally different rom
aLlpast
mkeries?These
observers
ardly
start rom the assumption
hat thcre
hasbeen
a
radical
hange
n the
humancondition, he conditiohumana.Rather hey seem o suspect
a new socialconstitutior
of the
meaning
of
human ife in moder-
nity, which has hrown meaning, ndwith it human ife, into a his'
torically uniquecrisis.
SuchspecLations
re powerfully suggestive
andmay appear onvincing,
hat
doesnot mean,however, hat they
will actually stand
up to cmpiricaL
nvestigation.
Contemporary
sociological nalysisends ar too easily o assumehe existence f
somethingike meaningand meaningfulnesss fiotive of human
actionandasa backdrop gainst hich he moderncrisisof meaning
is
apparcnt.
t is,
therefore, ecessaryo beginwith sonreanthropo-
logical
preliminaries. hey shallseek o
identify
the general ondi-
tions and basicstructures f mexningfulhuman ife. Only in this
way is
it possibleo improveour understandingf chengesn par-
ticular
tructuresf
meaning.
Meaning s constitutedn humanconsciousness:n the conscious
nessof the individual,who
is individuated
n
a body and
who has
been
socialized sa person.Consciousness,ndividuation,he speci-
ficity
of the body, societyand the historico'social onstitutionof
pcrsonal dentity are charactristicsf our species,he phylo- and
ontogenesis f which need not
be considered-
lowever,we will
provicle shortsketch
of the generaL
erformances
f consciousness
from which the multi-layered
meaningfulnessf experience nd ac-
tion in human ife is built up.
Conscior.rsncssaken n itself s nothing; t is always onsciousness
ofsomething. t exists nly in
so ar
as t directs ts
attntion
owerds
an object, owerds
a goal.This intentionalobject s constituted y
the various
syntheticachievementsf consciousnessnd appearsn
its gcner;l
structure.
herher
t bc perception. emoryor imagi
nation:
around he core, he theme' of the intentional bject,
extends thematic ield that is delimitedby an openhorizon.This
10
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
9/72
horizon in
which
consciousness f ones own
body
is always given
can lso be themxtizcd.
The
sequence f
interconnected
hemes
-
lct us call them apprehensions'
is in itself stili
without meaning.
It is however the foundation, on
which rncaning can come
into ex-
istence. For, apprehensionswhich do not occur simply and inde-
pendentLybut
which the ego turns its attention lowards
acquire
a
higher degrecof thcmatic definition;
thcy becomeclearly
contoured
"expcrienccs".
Expericnces aken nrdividr.rallywouLd stili bc
without
mcaning
Ilowever, as a core of expcricncc cletaches
tself from the
back'
ground of apprehensions, onsciousness rasps
he rclatioD
of this
core to other expcnences.The srmplcst orm of such relationships
are
"equal ' , 's imi1ar" ,
d i f fcrcnt" , "equal ly
good' ,
"d i f ferent
and
worse" etc.
Thus is
constituted
thc most elementary
evel of mean-
ing. Me:rning s nothing but a complex
form of consciousness:
t does
nor exist ndependently.k always has a point of
reference.
Meaning
is
consciousness
f the fact th:t a relationship
exists between
experiences.
he inverse s a lso rue: the meaning
f experiences
and, as wiLl be shon'n, of actjons has to be constructed hrough'
re lat ional" erformancesf consciousness.he
experienceurrent
ar
a particular monent can be rclated to one
in the immediate
or
distant past. GeneralLy,each expcrience s related
not to one
other,
but to a type of experience, schenre f experience,
a maxim,
moral
legitimation ctc.
won fron many experiencesand cither
stored in
subjectiveknowiedge or tkcn fronl a socialstore
of knowledge.
As convoluted as this phcnomcnology of
multi-layered perform-
ancesof consciousness xy scenr, ts resultsare
the simple
elemeots
of
meaning n our daily livcs. -or cxample, n the
apprehension
of a
flower a typical gestalt s tied in with a typical
color connected
o a
typical quality of snell,
touch, and use. In directed
consciousness
this apprehensionbecomesexperience, his experience
s grasped
n
relation to other experiences
"so
nrany flowcrs')
or related o a
clas'
sification
taken from a social stock of knowledge
("an Alpine
flower') and may finally be intcgrated nto a plan
of action ("pick it
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
10/72
and ake t to my lovcd
one!"). n this processmultiple ypes "A1-
pine lower",
loved
one')are ntegrateclnto a
processualcheme
('pick
n and
ake t to') and usednto a more
complex, ut sti l l
everyday
nit of meening. f finrlly
this project
s not
simply put
into action becauset confiicts with a morally founded maxim
("don't
pick itl rare
flowerl"), then a decision s arrived
at and a
higher
evelmeanings
constitutedhrough he scquential vaiuation
of
values
nd ntcrcsts.
'l
his example lready
ndicateshe doublemeaning
f
'acting"
and
"action".
Th meaning
f the currentact s constituted
rospective-
ly. A completcd
ction s meaningfuln retrospect. ction
is guided
by aview o a prcconceivedim.Thisdesignsa utopian which he
actor anticipates
future stete,assesscsts desirability
and urgency
and
considershe
steps
which will
bring it about
-
insofaras
he
processs not fanri l iar
hroughearl ier imilaractions ndhasnot
bccome habit. ' Ihe
neaningfthc acions,
in
the acr", s
consti-
tutedby their clation
o thegoal.The completedcion,wherher
successful
r not
-
but also
he actionprojected scomplete can
be
comparedo other
actions, an be undersrood s he fulfillment
of maxims,
an be
explained nd
ustified
es he execution
f
laws,
can
bcexcusedsdefying
norm, anbedeniedo others nd n
the
limit
also o oneself.he
doublemeaningnd hecomplex
tructure
of meaning re
characteristicf all actionbut in
day-to-dayoutine
!he chxracteristicsay
appear lurred.
Social
action,of course,
hareshis structureof meaning
but ac-
quiresadditional
haracteristicimensions:t
can be indirect or di-
rect, t canbe mutualor unilateral.Socialactioncanbe directed o-
wards
otherpcople
present r absent, ead
or unborn. t canseek o
addresshem n
their individuality,
or associal ypesof differentde-
grees f anonynrity,
r nrerclyas
social ategories.t can be directed
towardsobtaining
a responser nor
-
theremay,
or may not be,an
answer.t can
bc
intended
sunique
or may aim to achieve egular
repetition
or
to be prolonged
hrough ime. The complexmeaning
l2
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
11/72
of
social action and social relations is constructed
n
these
different
dimensionsof nreaning.
In
speaking
of the constitution of nreaning
n thc consciousness
f
the individual
it rvas
already
clear that this could
not neen the
iso
lated subject, hc s'indowless monad. Daily life is full of manyfold
successionsf
soci ir l
ct ion
and he
personal
denti tyof
the individ-
ual s formedonly in this action.
Purclysubjectivepprchensions
re
the
foundation of the constitution of
meaning: simplc
layers of
mcaning can bc created n thc
s.rbjcctive expericnce of
a
Peison.
Higher laycrs of meaning and
a more complex strucnrrc
of meaning
dependon thc objectification
of subjectivemeaning
n
social
action.
The individuaLs only able o makecomplicated ogical onnections
and
init iateand
control
dif ferentiatedequences
f action
f he or
she s ablc to draw on the
vealth of experience
avaiiable n a social
contexr.
In fact,
elemcntsof
meaningsirapedby
older streamsof so-
cial action
"tradit ions'),
low even
n
the
lowest
evcls
of
meaning
of
nrdividLralxperience.
Iypif ication,
classif ication,
atterns
f ex-
pcrience
nd schcnles { ection are elcnrents
f subjectivc tores
of
knowledge that are largely takcn over
ftom thc social stock
of
knowledge.
Certainly,
subjcctive constitution of
meaning is the origin
of all
social
stocks of knowiedge, historicai
rcservoirs of meaning,
on
which peoplc born into a particular society
in a particular
epoch
may dral. ' lhe neaning
of an cxperience l
action was born
''somewherc
,
once upon a timc
in the conscious, problenl
soLving"
action
of
an individuai relative to
his or her natural
and
socialenvironnrcnt. Howeverl si ce most problenrswith which the
nrdividual is confronted also arise n thc
lives of other pcople,
the
solutions to these problems
arc not
just
subjcctively but
also
intcrsubjectivelyclcvant. i ther he problcIrrs
hemselvesrise
rom
interactive social action, so that
the
solutions
must also be
found in
common. Ihcsc solutions can also be objectified
n one of a
number
of possible
ways, through signs, tools, buildings,
but above
all
l l
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
12/72
through thc cormnunicative
ornx of a language
n
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
13/72
'lhe
subjective
solutions'
for
problenrs
f experience
nd action,
thc
"primary"
objcctifications f
rreening vhich became
ntersuLr-
jcctivcly
retrievablehrough conrrnunication
ith othcrsaresocial_
ly processed n different
"paths"
\ir'hich
have
varied enormously
across istory. In institutionaLly ontrollerl
"secondary'
processes
much
s gnored
s oo nsignificant;
ther hings rediscarded
s n
appropriate r even dangerous.
part of the objectifications
f
nrcanig drawnon for processing
re nerely stored way,
dlose
*'hich
are
udged
o be adequate r
right aregivena form of ordcr,
vhi lc
certain lementsc
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
14/72
diffusccxpcrtknowledge
n populariz,cdorm
and peopleappropri-
arcpicccs
f this nformation nd ntegrate
t
with
thcir stock
of
The arcas
f rneaning re
stratificd.The
"lowest',
simplest
ypifi
cations, elating o factsof namreand he socialworld, are hc foun-
dations
of different
parternsof cxperience nd action.
Stacked n
thcsc ypifications
are schenesof
action orientatcdby maxirns
of
action owardshigher values.
Supcrordinate
conligurations
of
va-
luc"
hrvc bcen
developedince he
old high culturcs y rcligious
nd
later phiJosophical
xperrsnto value
systenN. hese lainr
o nrean,
ingfully
cxplain
and
regulatc
hc conduct
of
life
of thc inclividuain
relation o thc community n both routines f daily ife and n over-
coming criscswith
referenceowardsrealities
ransccnding very
day
ifc (thcodicy).
The
claiurof superordinatc
onligurations
f
values
nd
value
sys,
rems
"
f i l l
rhe n r i r " ry f l i f ewr rh
n re rn ing. n ros rpp . rygn l
n I
schenre rat
brings ogethermodels
or action n the most
diverse
areas nd its
them nto a projection
of meaninghat
srrerchesrom
birth to death.
This scheme f mcaning
elateshe totality
of a life to
a time that transcendsre ife of the individuale.g. 'erernity").
Biographical
atcgories f ncaning,
as
wc
call thcm, endow
the
mcxning of
short-range ctiols
with long,tern significancc.
he
meaning
of
cvcryday outinesdoes
not disappear ntirely
but it is
subordinate
o the
"meanjng
of l i fc". (c wil l narne
cre,amongst
the many
historical
onstructions
f biographical chcnrcs,
nly rhe
small enrc
f the
exemplaryifc' and
he
arger
enrc f theholy
l i fe", rhc ancienthcroic cpic, and thc modern heroic egend
(e.g. Prince
Eugene,
Georgc Vashington,Baron von
Richrhofen,
Antoine
dc St.Exupry,Rosa
,uxemburg,
takhanov).
All institrrtions
mbody
an
'original'
action-nealing
which has
proved tself
n the definitivc cgLrlation
f socialaction n a parricu-
lar functional
area.
Of
particular
rlportance
are those nstiturions
whose
ask ncludes
he sociaL rocessing
f meaning-Most
import,
ant of all are hose nstitutionswhosemainfunctions onsistn the
l 6
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
15/72
coDtrolof the production
of mcaning nd
he transmission
f
mean_
ing.Such nstitutions
ave xistedn almost
l l socicties
ther hn
thc archaic.
n dre
old
high culturcs, n the
societiesf
the early
mo'
dcrn period
and latcr (e.g. in todays
ran) rcLigious
moral
instittr
tions havebcencloscLyied to thc apparatus f domination They
coLrld im
relativelysuccessfullyt both
the production
and distri'
butionof a
relativcly onsistentierarchy
f meaning.
f however
theconditions
oth
of
productionnddistribution
f social
meaning
approximatco
an
opcn
market, his has
considcrableonsequcnces
for the
'nreaning
budget'.
n that case
nunrbcr f suPPliers
f
mcaningcompctc or the
favor c,f a public that
is confronted
with
the clifficultyof choosinghe nrostsuitablemeaningrom the wcalth
of me:ningsvailable.
cshall enrrn o this
ater.
Insti tutions
ave
he ask
of storing nd
making "ai lable
eaning
for
the
actions f the ndividual
both in particular ituations
nd
or
en e[tire conductof lifc.
This functionof
institutionss
however s
scntially elated o tire rolc of
dre ndividualas
a consumer ut
also
f i on l *e ' o . , r r r .
:
p rodu ,
ro f
rcan in6 .
This
relationship
an
be comparatively
implc
n
both
archaic
o-
cietics nd
n most raditional
high
cultures.
n suchcivilizations
he
mcaning f indivrrhraLsphcres
f actionss
ntegratcdithout
major
ruptures
ith
thc o"erall
meaning f life conduct
and his
s tself c
fcrred o a rclativelycoherent
alue
systcm.
he conrmunication
f
rneanings
oincd
o thc control
of the production
of mcanirg.
ldu
cation
or
direct incloctrination
ccks o ensure
hat the lndividual
only thinks and does
what conforns to the
basicnorms of
thc so-
cicty. And thc corrtrolandcensorshipf everythinghat is pubLicly
said, aughtor
preachcd ims o prevent he
diffusionof
dissidcnt
opinion.
nternal ndexternalompetit ion
s auoided r
el iminated
(not always ucccssfullyl).
he re:rning { actions
nd ife conduct
s
irlposedasa unquestioncd
ule brndingon all.
For examPle,
he rc-
lationship
of
marricd couplesand the
relationshipof
parents o
childrcn
s defincd nambiguously.
arents ndchildren
enerally
conform;devianccs clearlydefincd sdcviancerom thc norn.
17
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
16/72
In modernsocieties
onditions
are different.Of
course, here are
still institutionswhich
conmunicatc
he meaning
f actionsor their
particular
areaof action;
here arestill
value
systcmswhich
are ad-
ministercd
y
some
nstitutions
as
nrcaningful
ategories
f life con,
duct. Ho*'cver, as will be sho*'n, there are, by comparisonwith
premodern
ocieties,ifferences
n the consisrency
f
value
systems
as n the
internaland external
onpetition
over the production
of
meaning,
hc communication
f rneaning, nd ts
mposition.To re-
turn once
morc to the example:
n modernsocieties
t
would
be dif-
ficult
to find
parcntsand
children
for
whom the relationship
s
equally
bindingon both
partiesand s de{ined nquestioningly
y a
firm valuc
system.
2.
Thc meaningfulness
f social elationships,
the concurrence
f meaning
and he general
conditions
or crises
f meaning
Socially bjcctified
ndprocesscd
tocks f meaning
re
"preserved"
in
historical eservoirs
f mcaning
and
"administered"
by institu-
tions.The
actions f the
ndividualareshaped
y objectivemeaning
suppliedrom
social tocks
f knorvledge nd
communicated y
the
pressureor compliance
which
emanatesrom institutions.
n this
process,bjectificdmeanings constantlyn interactionwith subjec-
tively
constitutcdmeaning
nd ndividual
projects or
acion. IIow-
ever,nreaning
an
alsobe ascribed
one might even
say,aboveall
-
to the intcr'subjcctive
tructureof social elations
n which
thc
individual
ac* and ives.
From
the
very
beginning
a
child
is incorporated
nto
sociaLela-
tionships:with
its parents
ndwith other
significant ersons.
hese
relationshipseveiopn regular, ircct andreciprocal ctions. trict-
l 8
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
17/72
ly, an
infant is
not capable
of action in the full
meening of
the word.
As an individuated organism
i! has, however, the
bodily and con-
scious
apacit icsnherent o thc
human
species
hich i t employs
n
its
behavior owards
others. ' Ihc actionsof
others
elative o the
child are thcmseives argely dctennined by schemesof experience
and action that are drawn frotr
s
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
18/72
with
biographical
categoriesand schemes
of action and
rhar rhe
others who
enter inro
sociai rclations with
the child do not nrirror
its behavior
even
approximatcly. The typical
consequencesor
the
development
o{ thc
child arc
predictable!
Pcrfect
concordancc,
as
projccted bove, s neverachieved, ut rrchaicsocietics nd he tra
ditional high
cuitures were
not far removed from
it. The
opposite
casehas hovever
no
correspondingeaLiry:
socierywithout
any
kind of value
ystem
nd
sithout
stocks f mcaning
adapted
o
it is
hard to imagine
as a
"society
. As a child one is
born into commun-
, t r c .
u f l i f e
l
e b e n r te mc in rh a l r c n th r , h
r re
-
t o
\ ry i n g
e x i . n r s
also conmunities
of meaning.
lhat
means
hat even without a
univcrsally shared
stock
of meaning adapted o a single,closedvaluc
systen conrmonalties
of meaning can be developcd
n communities
or drawn from
the historical
rescrvoir o{ meaning.
These comrlon
meaningscan
then, of course,
be contnrunicated o
children relative-
Iy
consistently.
Communities
oflife
arecharactcrized y regularly
repeated, ircctly
reciprocal
action in
durablc
social
clat ionships.
hosc involved
place an institutionaily
or
other\r,isesecured rust in
thc durability
of the cormnunity. Beyond
thesebasiccommonalties
here are wide
differenccs
between
societies n
the differcnt forms of
conrmunities
which
are nstitutionalized
n them. The
universalbasic orm
are ife
communities
into which
ole is born. However,
there are
also lifc
communities
into which
one
is adoptcd and those which
one
joins,
such as
partners in
marriagc. Some
cornmunities
of
life
form
thcftselves
hrough adapting
oncs life to the
continuation
of sociaL
relationsthat were originally not intended to be prolonged, others
rcquire init iat ion.
Thc
examplcs nclude holy
orders which
also
consti tute
hemselves
s conrmunit ies
f
rneaning,
eper
colonies,
retlrctuent homes!
and
Prisons.
Comnunities
of
life
presupposc
a
minimum
of cornmon
meaning.
'fhis
measurc
can in
some societies
and for some forms
of conrmu-
nity be very
minimal: it
may concern
only the coincidcnce
of the
objcctive ncaning of the schemcs f day to day socialaction, asper-
2A
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
19/72
haps in ancient
slave households
or in nrodern
prisons.
Commu'
nities of life
may also aspire o complcte
unison
in all layers
of mean-
lng including the
categories f thc entire
conduct
o[ life as
n some
monastic orders or in the
ideal of certain
tyPes of
marriage.
How
ever,most comntunities of life acrossdiffcrent sociticsand ePoches
aspire to a dcgree of shared
nrcaning somevhere
in between
this
nl inimum andmaxinrum.
l x p c . r : r o n . l o
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
20/72
nity
of
meaning
hen
their disagreemenrould
be painful or
both
partncrs
nd he crisis
of meaningwould
escalatento a life
crisis.
Let
us renrain or an instant vith
our
example. et trsassume
he
wife
encountcrs
ther
agingnrarriedwomenwho
havearrived
at a
similar erspcctiven theircommon ging, perspectivehichdoes
not
agrec ith
the dominantviews
shared
y their hLrsbancls.n
ex-
changing
hcir expericnces
conmunity
of meaning might
be
formed.
n thc first variant
of
our
example
his community
of mean-
ing remains
spartial
asdoes hc rlisagreement
ith the husband
nd
there{ore
ervcs scompensation
ather
han replaccment.n
the se-
cond variant
any partiaL
isagreements
interpretcdas
"total"
and
the new foundcommunity f meaningould ake heplace f the
broken narriage.
Vhere ; r
i f * .ommun i r i c \
l r \ lp re \ume n r in imr rn
. rmmun i ry
of meanrng,
he inverse
s not
true. Communitics
of
meaning
may
under
certaincircumstances
ecome ommunities
f lifc, they may
however
bc built
up and naintained
exclusively
hrough nrediared,
reciprocal
action-These
conrnrunities
ay be founded
on different
not directly
practical
evels
of nreanrng nd may
concerndifferent
realmsof meaning, .g.
philosophical, uch
as he humanist ircles
of the
early modern
period, scientific,
uch es the nlany
cliques
of today, or the
"meeting
of
souls"of which farnous
or-
respondenccs
ell, such
as har between 6loise
andAb6lard.
\Vehave
cenhat
undercertain
ircunrstances
roblenrsmayoccur
in
the inter
subjective
onstruction
f the personal
dentity f the
child to which
the
term subjective
risisof meaning
nray be appli-
cable. f the behaviorof the child is constantly onfronred n the
action
of significanr
dultswith
incongruent eacrions
he child will
be able
o discern
hc objecrive
ocialmeaning
of its actions
only
with
difficLrlty
r not at all.
If the child does
nor receive easonably
concordant
nswerso
the question
who
am ?
posedhroughout
its
behavior,
hen ir nrust
encounrer
reatdifficulties
n taking
on
responsibility
or
itself.Even
f under rore
favorablc
ircumstances
the identityof a pcrsonhasbeenunproblemaricallyonstructed,ts
22
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
21/72
strength
can be endangcred
ater Lrypersistent,
systematlc
Lrlconsrs-
tency
in the rcflection of
its actions n the actions
of others
F u r l . . r n r r r . ,
w e
h a ' e
e c n
h
r r r r r d c r
e r t a i r c u n . r , r n ,
. i n t e r _
subjecrive r iscs
of meaning
may
occur.
For
different
forms of
community of life different typicaLmcasures f coherenceare to be
expected
and thesediffcr
from society to society
and
from period
to period.
1hc
condition
for a crisis of
meaning
s that the mcnbers
of a particular life-community
acceptunqestioningly
thc degree
of
coincidencc f neaning
expectetl f them,
but areunable
o match
i t . s
was
already tatcd,
his discrcpancyetween
is'
and
'should"
appears art icularly ften
f the dcal s -rf
l i fe community
nsist hat
r r < h o u 1 d'e r u n ' p l e r . o n r m u n r r vl n r c ; n i n g .
l i
'ubjc.t i '
< and
nter- 'ubje.,vccrr 'c .ol
meaning
icrrren nra-e
n
a society so th:rt thcy develop
into a gcneral
social
problem, then
one
wil l hauc o seek he
cause ot in the subject
tsel f
nor in the
given
inter-subjectivity of
human existence.
t is rather
to be ex-
pected
hat the causes rc !o
be found in thc
socil structure
itself
Let us, herefore, nquire
which part lcular
tructures
f a historical
society counteract he dcvelopmentof crisesof nre:rningand which
encouragcsuch a development.
More precisely:
what are the struc-
tural conditions for a sufficient
dcgree of coincidcnce
n inter-sub-
jective
reflections
such
that rhe
foundation for the
formation of
per'
sonal idcntity
*ith
constant
merlrng s givenl
\(hen
do thesepro-
cesses reate subjective
criscs ol
mcaningl And
which structural
condit ions romote
and
which hindcr the sufFicient
oincidcnce
f
' o c r a l e l . r r ' r n r t h r r. h e o u n d . r t ' " nf
l r f F o m m u n i l i e (
e ' r \ t ; n r
u
crisis?
\(e will attempt to answer
hescquestions
n concrete
crms in the
light of thc historical developmcnt
of nodcrn
society.
Flowever,
we
wish to prcccdc this at tempt
with a fcw abstract,
gencral considerx
tions.
For it is possible despite
he prxctically
endlcss
multiPlicit/
and
importance of differcnces
between societies
to
identify
-
with respect o our qr.lestion bout the
structural
conditions
for the
23
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
22/72
cnrergcncef crisis
of meaning
trvo basic ypes
of social tructure
across ll
cpoches-
'l
he first
type not
particularly usceptible
o crises
f merningare
socicties hich
have
a single ndgenerally
indingvalue
ysternnto
which thedifferent ayers ndrcalms f rncaning rewell intcgrxrcd:
from
cveryclay
chemes
f expericnce nd
action o the
superordi-
nate categories
f lifc
conduct and crisis
managerncnt
irected
tovards extraordinary
ealiries.
he totaL
tockof meaning
s stored
andmanaged
n socialnstrtutions.
Because
he schemes
f
actionobjcctified nd
mademandatory n
social nstitutions
are
directed owards
a common value
system
superordinateo the specific reaningt is assuredn this type of so-
cicty that the institutions
ustainhc order
of
mcaning
n
basic on-
cordance ith
practical
ife. lhcy
do this directly
and,so to speak,
in dctail,by imprinting
henlsclves r1 hc
meaning
f
many
day to
day actions;hcy
do this,
so o spcak,n the arge
by identifying
bio-
graphical
ategories
f meaningwith
communities
f life, n particu-
lar hose 4rich
re
entrustedirh forrning
he personal
dentity f
.
L r l d rcn
Bro ru rng
nro
ren rbc r .
f . oc i c r y .
Differcnt
societies
orrespond
o this basic
ype o different
extents.
Archaicsocieties
orrespond
rost truely
to this type.
The complcx,
ancicnthigh
cultures
areslightly ess
losc,but essential
haraceris-
tics of this
type are
o be found cven n
the premodern
ocieriesf
modern
times. Like
all
other societieshese
societies ave nrany
organizational
roblems
nd heir members
aveevery
ife problem
inraginable:
n
dealingwith
nature,work,
domination,
ife and
death.Natural ly herearealsoqucslons f meaningor
the
ndi-
vidual.
But these
omparatively
table, ften
evenstatic
ocicries
communicate
n
order
of meaningwhich is
consistent
o a large
extent hrough
congruent
processcs
f sociaiization
nd
thc
irxti-
tutionalization
of action.
Thcse
proccssesre located
n meaning-
fully rclated ife
communities
ncldiffcrcntsocial
spaces.his
basic
type may be
simplified
as an ideal
ype, however
societicswhose
structureevenapproximateso this type provideno ground or the
24
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
23/72
growth and extensionof
subjective nd inter+ubjective
rises
of
meaning.
'l'hings
arediffcrent n societics
n which shared nd
bindingvalucs
arc
no longer given for everyoncand structuraLly
ecured nd
in
which hese alLrcso not pcrmeate l l spheresf l i fe equally nd
bring
hem nto concordancc.
hrs Ls he basic oncli t ion
or the
spread f
both
subjective
nd
nter-subjectiverises f
rneaning.
n
formulating
his
basic
ype of socicty
liable
to crises"
wc will again
neglect
many dctails o identify n sinplification
ts structural
har-
In suchsocietieshcre
may be a
ualue
ystcn
nheritedby tradition
as a stock ol nreaningrom bygoneperiods.This
value
system
s
objectified
n the socieral tock
of knowledge nd
s hereend here
still administered y
specialized
rcligious)nstitutions.
Ihere
may
evenbc
more
han one set
of valucs
imported"
fronr the stocks
f
the musc magin:rire f
meanings. ot wanting
to dexl with
the
question f
so
crlled pluralisn
at this point
we set o one side
he
posibility that a multiplicityof
value
systems
ay
coexistA society
mayeven e l iableo crisis"
f i t containsnlyone
single
aluc ys-
tem, n the
firll
sense f the
word, a single ystem onsisting f ele
mentsof mcaning
frorn
schemes f
experience
nd action all
the
way
to
gener:rl ategoriesf life conduct)
ncorPorating
ll spheres
of life arranged teprviseo{'ards
superordinate
alucs.
Even
n such
societyavalue
ystcm
ouldbeboth
resent
nd
not
presen!.
n such
a society
he big instirutions
of
the economy,
politics,and
religion)
have
separatedhemselves
rom the superordi-
natevalucsysten anddeterminehe actionof the individual n the
functionalarca hat they administcr.
conomic
andpolitical nstitu-
tions
makeobligatorydre instmncntal ational,
objcctive
meaning
of
schemesf:ctjon in those
reasor which hey
are esponsible.
'On
the sidc so to spcak,
el igiousnstitutions
offer"
value-
rationaL
wcrtrational) ategoriesor life conduct.
S(euse hc
term
'
offer'
even n
thc
case, ssumedcre, hat society
ontains nly
one
ordcr of meaning rientatedowards upcrordintcalucs, ot muf
25
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
24/72
tiple,
courpcting ystems.
ecauseven n
this case eligiorrsnstitu-
tions
ransmithehigher
rdcrcategories
apablef givingmeaning
to
the entircconduct
f Life, ut evenwithout
competit ionrom
othcrvaluc
ystenshese
:tetoriesmay not
be madcbinding
nd
may not be inposedon the conductof people.Overall, he nstitu-
tions
of tilis type
of societyno longercarry
a well-ordered
rockof
meaning
and value consistendy
nd bindingly
nto thc practice
of
life.
A
socicty s rnthinkable
entirely without
common values
and
sharednterpretations
f reali ty.
Vhat is the nature
of
values
n
such
a type of society,
bvrously ending
owards he modern,
and
wherc
are hey to be found)
It is certain hat the scheDresf action
institutionalized
n
the different unctional
spheres avea
binding
anclobjcctivemeaning
or
thoseacting n
them. n the organization
of actionwithin
a single
sphere here s definitely
a community
of
meaning. 'har
however s
not much by way
of commonalties. he
objectivemeaning
of institutionalized
chemes
f :rction s instru-
mentally
orientated
owards
he functionof this
area.Apart from its
generalizable
spect
s nstrumentally
ariofial his institutionalized
schemeof action cannot be transferredbetweensphercsand it
certainly
cannot
be integrated nto
superordinate
chenres f
meaning.
he objective
meaning
of acrioncannor n
itself be inte-
grated
nto ctegories
efrring o rhe
subjectand
simultaneously
directcd
owardsa superordinate
alue
system.Only rcligious
and
'quasi '
rel igiousnstitutions
ommunicateategories
f meaning
with
sucha claim
o generality.
his claim s however
efutedby the
objcctive eaning f theschemesf action f theother big"insti-
tutions.
lhese
meanings
irecr [e adion
of the individual n most
arcas
of daily lifc,
whether
rhey conform
ro the
superordinate
meanings
f schemes
f life
cornnrunicared,or
cxample y religious
institutions,
or not.
The clai
to integrateones
own life into
a
superordinatc
alue
systemcan be realized
essentially
nly in a
sphere ot
touched
y the othcr
'big' insti tutions,
in a sphere o-
cial iy efined s he private phere'.
26
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
25/72
A minimum
of
shared
eaningsn a society
s containedn
the
teneral
grccmentiven o
the
"firnctic,ning
of functions',
e. the
agreement
hat in eachareaof action
condud
shouldbe directed
towards
nstrumcntally ational requircments.
ncl this minimal
consensuss sccured y the generl ccePtancehat in the Private
reserves f
individual existencc nd comnlunities
of life separate
meanings f
Lifemay be pursucd, istinct
rom
thoseof other
ndi
vidualsand groups.This minimum
may be cxceedcd
ven
n this
typc of
societics. irst, it is
remarkablehat the
"big"
institutions
bind
their spccific meanings
beyond the
rationality
of the
organization
f action
within thenr to general
alucs, uchas
or
example
drc
generalnterest".-xceedinghemininlLrmn thisway
may fulfill
abo"e all legitimatelypurposes
while the schemes
l
action
henxclvcsmay remain
untouched.
urthermore,
econdly,
individr.rals
nd
comrnunities
f
meaningmay attenPt
o difcct
heir
action evcn
within
a
sphereadnrinistcred
y a
'big'
institution
towards
supcrordinate
values'
going beyond
its
instrumentally
rationalobjectivc
meaning.lowevcr,
this canoccur
only in conflict
with thespecificnstrumental
ationality.
'fhe
attenrpts y institutions
o conncto suPerordinatc
alues
or
lcgitimatorypurposes
may prodrrcc nly
vapid onnLriac
nd
value-
orientated
onductof
life may bc limited to
the
reserve f the pri-
vate.This
would
add o
the conditions or
the spread f
subjective
anrl nter-subjectivcrises
f nrcaning.
owever,
his alsocreates,
simultaneously,
he precondrtions
or something
lse,
nanely the
coexistence
f different
alue ystems nclfragments
f
value ystems
in the sanre ocietyand hus he parallelexistencef quitedifferent
communities
f meaning.
The statewhich
results ronr thse
pre-
conditions
an be calledpluralism.
f it itself
becomes suPerordi
nate
value or a
socicty
we mayspeak f
modernplLrralism
27
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
26/72
3. Modernity
and he
crisisof meaning
If pluralism rvere
defined
as a state n which
people who lead
their
lives in vcry different ways are to bc found in thc samesociety,one
would
not be dealing
with a
spccificallymodern phenomenon.
One
could find
one or other
variant o{ pluralism
in almost all societies
other
than the archaic.
Ancient lndia as well
as the India o{ today
was charactcrized
by
a pluralism of casts,
medieval Europe
by a
pluralism
of estates- ut
in thcse examplcs
he dif ferent forms
of life
would
still be related
o a common value
systen and
thc
interaction
bctween the communities of life would remain limited and strictly
regulrtcd.
Even if
one defincd
pluralisrn as a state n
which dif{erent
forrns
of
lifc
were to
be found in a society
without these
different
forms
of
life
being referrcd
to a common value
systemone would
be
ablc
to
find
examples,
or instance
the Roman Empire which
in
economic and
poLitical erms was
a single sociery.
But even here
the
interaction
between thc
different groups
and peoples
-
insofar
as
they werc
not regionally
separatcd was
reglllatedsuch that the dif -
fercnt
supcrordinate
stocks
of nreaningwere
uncoupled rom the in-
stitutionalized
schcmes
of action
of the functional
spheres.The dif-
ferent
groups could,
therefore, interacr
in the instrumentally
ra-
tional spheres
[ action while
at thc same
ime remaining attached
o
their orvn value
systems-For
example, he relations
ofJews to non,
Jews
vere
egulated
y the
so-cal led
fence
ofthe
law".
1f
hesc egulations
reno
longer, r canno longer,
be nraintained,
then a ncw situation is created, widr
serious mplications
for
the
takcn-for
granted
starusof value
systemsand
overarching views
of
the world. Thc
ethnic, religious
and orher
groups
and coDrmunities
of lifc,
divided by
different
stocksof meaning,
are no longcr spatially
.cp.]rrr.d
r.
for
o,ample n
rrgrorr ut r rorierl
or
' r rrc
or
in
quar.
ters or
thetrocs
of a city),
nor do they interact
only
through the
neutral
tcrrain
of strictly
separated equences
f action
in institution-
al ized functional spheres.Encountersor, under certain circum-
2 8
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
27/72
stances, lashes
etwcendiflerent
vlue
systens
nd
views of the
world becomc
nevitablc.
'l'hcre
ha'e bcen
approximationso this state
f affairs efore,
. g.
in thc Ilellenic
uorlcl.
This
form
of pltralisrn
is
not necessarily
l inkcd o thespread f crises f meaning,hough articulariyn the
Hellcnic world there
wcre
also
signs f this.
This form of plLrralism
hasbecomeully flcdged nly
in modcrnsocietics. ere,
he ccntral
structuralaspects f this pluralisnrhavcbeen
aiseclo the
sttus f
an cnlightencd
aluc
bove
hediffcrent oexisting
ndcontpeting
value
systcnx.
So, for examplc, c'lerance
s rcckoned
he
"en-
lightencd'virtuepar cxcellence,ince nLy
hrough olerance
an n-
dividuaLs nd conrmunities ivesideby sicle nd with one anodler,
whilst
directing
eir
existence
owards different
values. This
modcrn orm of pl ural isn s,
ho*cvcr,
also
hc Lrasicondition
or
tire
spread
f
mbjcctive nd inter ubjective
rises f
meaning.
\Vhethcrmodernpluralismneccssarilycads
o suchcrises
s en
open
question. owevcr,one can say
with certainty hat
in highly
devcloperl ndusrrial countries,
i-c. where mc,dernization
has
progrcsseclurthcst and thc
nlern form of pLuralism
s fully
developcd, aluesystems nd stocksof
meaningare
no longcr the
comnronpropertyof ail members 'f society.
l
he individual
grows
up in a norld in
which
herearc neither
onrmon
alues hich
deternrinection
n
different phcres f
l i fe, nor a single
cali ty
identical or all. The 'ndividual s incorporated
nto a suPcrordinate
system f meaning y thc cornmunity
of life in which
it growsup.
Howcvcr, his canrot be assuned
o
bc
the nrcaring ystem
f odler
pcopleMitmcnschen).hcse thersmayha"cbeen hapedy quhe
differentsysrens
of nrcaning n the communities f
life in
which
they
grew
up.
In Europc, sharedand overarching ystems
f in-
terprctationwerc alreadyshakcn n the
early phaseof
modcrni-
zation. The history of totalitarian
deologiesn the
last hundred
ycarshasshorvn
h:rt
nothing,
not
cven
radical egrcssion,
an re
store such nterpretativc chemes cnnanently
or
make thcnr the
structLrralharactcristic f a modernsociety.t is, by the way, also
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
28/72
questionable
hcther undamentalist
ttemptsn rhecountries
fthe
socalledThird
Vorld will
be
more successlul
egardlessf the in-
tensiry rvuh *'hrch
overarching
nd universallybinding
stocks
of
meaning
redefendedoday.
It hasbeennotcd hat suchconditions ronrote he spread f sub-
jective
and ntcr-subjective
rises f meaning. ut while
some ondi-
tions
accelerate
uchcriseshereareotherswhich hinder
hem.The
palcsuperordinatealues
f modernplural ism o not
have his
power.They
nrayhaveother
useful
effects
n that they promote he
peaceful
oexistencef diffcrent forms
of life and value systems.
lhey are,
howevcr,not suitable
o dircctly counteracthe
spread f
crises f meaning.They
tell the inclividual ow to behave owards
other people
and groupswho differ in
their
view
of life. They do
not, however,
ell one how
one should ead
onc's
ife when
the un-
questioned
alidity of
the traditionalorder is shaken. hat
may be
achieved y diffcrentmeans.
As the degreeo which
socially
valid
conditioning
of shared nterpretations l reality
decreasesifferent
communities
f life can
developncreasinglynto quasi-autononrous
comnunities
of meaning.nsofar
as hese ommunities
rove hem-
selveselatively tablehey may preserveheir nrembersrom crises
of
meaning.
tability s
particularly mportant
or the
role
playedby
such ife communities
n the coherent ormation
of personaldentity
of children grorving
up in them, who may
thereby be protected
from subjective
rises f meaning.
oncrete ommunities
f l i fe as
qasr'autonomous
onmunities
of
nreaning,
ndnrorestable,
pure"
conrmurnitics
f like minded
peoplc
(Gesinnungsgemeinschaften)
counteracthe pa demicspread f crises f meaning. owever, hey
cannot ranscend
he preconditionshich
prornotehe
spread F
cnscsof meaning
anchored
structurally n modern society. iur-
themore,
to rcpeat
his point, communities
f ljfe
nr which
the dis,
crepncy
etween he expectcd
nd actualcommunity
of
mcaning
is too great
can themselves
ecome he trigger for inter-subjective
crisesfmeaning.
This dialecticalelationship ctween he lossof meaning nd the
30
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
29/72
nev creat ion f
nreaning
r between
heerosion f
nrcaningnd
ts
rebuilding
anmost
clcarly
be observedn the case
f religion.
lhis
is, n any
case,hr: most mportant orm of a comprehensive
attern
of experienccnd
values,
ystematicallytructurcd
nd
rich in mean_
ing. For the argest artof humanhistory a societywasunthinkable
without a singlercligion encompassingverything
and everyone
'lhc
gods
of nry ancestors
erc
nanrrallyalso
nry own gods;
my
gods
werenaturallyaLsohe godsof all the members
f my tribe
or
ry town.
Most archaic
ocieties
cre ike this.
Across ong periods
of time
high culnrreswith rnany differentiated
ocial nstitutions
wcre ike hisas
wcll.
Then hisunitybetween
he ndividual,
isor
hersociety nd hegods, mbodyinghc
highest uthority
n theor-
dcr of vaiue,
vas
hakenn diffcrcntpiaces
ndat diflerent ypes
by
religious chisms. his happened
ong
before
he beginning
f mo-
dernity,
as or exarnplen the exodus f lsrael
rom the unified
sym
bolic order of the Middle
East,or evenmore radically
n the separa-
tion of Christianity
rom
the
symbolicorder of
classical ntiquity.
After
such
schisnrsherewere rcpeated ttempts
o restorea super
ordinatesysrem f oreaning
n a new basis, erhaps
f a smaller
scope"subculture'nstead f culturc) as n the unity of the tribe
of Isracl
with its
God or
in the constant earch
or thc unity of the
Christian hurch.
Vith the concept f Christendom
n
the
European
middleages n
anempt
wasmade
o irring
ogetherall the people
n a certrin space
of power under a single,
common and superordinate
ystemol
meaning, nd to h,-,ld hcm
there. Vc know that this attemPt
was
neverentircly successful.ithin Christendom rinorities reserved
their special
ymbolic
ysterls
Jews,
heretics, ults
deriving rom
a
pagan art.
At ti'res
thc symbolic
unity of Christendom
wasbroke
up from
without lslam)
r
fromwithin GreekOrthodoxy,
lbin-
gensians).
t wasmost
severely
hakcn y the Rcformation-
he con-
sequences
f thn quakewerenot intended,or the
reformers
wanted
to
restoreand prcscrve uni{iedChristendom n
r ncw basis. he
schismof thc church foiled this attempt at thc European evel.
l 1
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
30/72
Alongside
hc Orthodox
church wo new
"Christcndoms"
emerged
-
onc C:rtholic, he
othcr Protcstant. he formula rvirh which
the
religiouswars
n central
Europcwereended
cuius
cgio,
eius eli-
gio
-
wis
thc foundation or
an attcnrpt o restorc
ymbolicunity at
least i thinsmall pacesf rule.Llowcver,ue o theonset f mod
ernizationcven this
territorial solution was
only short ived. In-
dustrialization,
rtranization,
rigrationand masscommunications
could not
be clcanlydivided
nto CatholicandProtestant
hannels.
In nodcrn
centralEuropc
Catholicsand Protestantsand ncreas-
ingly membcrs
f many aiths,
not to speak
f
incrcasing umbers
f
people i thoLu
eligion)
ncounter ach
therandaremixed
up,
e.g. hrough rarriage.
The conccpt
fregio n thc formula
of the Peace
f
Vestphalia
hus
loses
ts spatialmening.
tcgio becomes
he sphcre of
cotrmu
nication
for a
community
of
meaning
and conviction rsually
not
limited
to a
particulararea.
One
is
Catholic by
belonging o a
Catholic rcligious
community
and taking part in
other Catholic
insti tutions
vcn f one's
neighborsreprotestants.
lhese
subcuf
tures,
generallyvoluntary
conrntunities
f convrction,no longer
offer the securityof earliercomnrunities f life and nreaningwhich
were
embcddedn
societai
ordcrs of
value
and meaning.
Never,
rheless,
hrough various ornrs
of comnrunication
nd social ela-
tions they
can save he individual
from unmasterablc
risesof
meaning.
f they
do not turn radically
gainst ocictyand
areat ieast
toierated
y it, they
act,so o
spcak, n aggregateo
stenr he spread
of crises
f mcaningn
society.inlightened
ulerswcre wise
enough
to recognizc his and left their subjectso seekhappiness here
they find it".
It turned
out that the hope
tirat Catholics ould
be
loyal
supporters
f the Prussian
rorvnwaswell founded.
Vhat has
been aidabout eligion
holds,mutatis
mutandis,or other
conprehcnsive
orders
of meaning.Moderniz-ation
as made
the
assertion
l thc monopoly
of localized ysrems
f nreaning ndvalue
across
ntire
socictiesmore
tlifficult if not
entirely mpossible. r
the safle time it hascreatcde posibility for the formationof
32
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
31/72
communitics
f conviction ranscendingpacc
e.
g.
through com-
prchcnsive
deologies)
nd
rom
drcse tocksof
meaning he shared
nreanings
f smaller oolmunitiesmxy be derived.
Despite his pos
sibility
the overalldeuelopmcnt ngenders,bove
all, a greatdegree
of insecurity; oth in the orientationof individualactionsand the
entire irection f ;fe.
Nevertheless,t
'ould
bemislcadingo draw heconclusion,
rom
this alone, hat nrodern ocietiesuffer rom comprehensive
rises f
rneaning. herearestill peoplewho cvenunder hese onditions
re
able o establish meaningful elationship
etween
he experiences
of
thcir own
livesand he various nterpretive
ossibilities
ffcred o
them and who are thereforeable o conduct heir lives
relatively
meaningfully. urthertrore, here
are he
institntions, ub-cultures
andcommunities
f convictiol
wirich
transport
ranscendent
alues
and
stocksof
mcaning nto
concretesocial
elationships nd life
conrmunities
ndsupport henr here.The succcss
f modernsocicty
beyond hcse
islands
of meaning"s
duc
to a legalizationf the
rules of social ife and its
"old
fashioned rorality",
lurthermore
through he formal moralization f certainmore or less rofession-
alizcdsphercs f action-Legalizationmeans hat the functionaL ys-
tem is rcgulatcd
y abstract
onns,
ixed n
writing and bindingon
ali members
f a society.
Moralization
s an attempt
o solvecon-
crcte
cthical qucstionshat appear n individualspheres
f action.
|or example, n the USA academic
isciplines
uch as
"mcdical
etirics' or
"business
ethics' havecmerged. egalization
gnores he
different
value
systenrs f thosc affected. he nroralization
f pro-
fessional pheres oeswithout a conrprehensiverder of meaning.
Iloth creatc hc
conditions
n which
people
manageheir daily ives
without
a
comprehensive
nd haredroralrty.
Sucha society anbe comparcd
vith
a system f traffic
rules.One
stopson red anddriveson grcenand he maintenance
f these rrles
is in the ntcrest
of
all participants.
ne can herefore
ormally ely
on
people
abidingby the ruleswithout
the
rules hemselveseing
legitinratedn deepmoral tcnns. f the rulesare nlringed,one can
33
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
32/72
bring thosewho have nfringcd hc
'traffic
rules" o reason, y laws
or by non state ules, laintainedby tradeassociationsr medical s-
sociations.
Char:rcteristically,roups
with
rival interest n demo-
crticsocieties ttcmpt o havc he
"traffic
rules' which aremost m-
portant for them legalizcd y thc state.Obviously, he analogy s
only partial:
'traffic
rul""s" an rcfcr only to the practical ssues f
individual
spheres f social ifc. Lven there a moralizing,value-
orientaredhetoricmust
bc enrployed.
Particularly f groupswith an intcrest n a particular
set of
rules
wish
to use he denrocratic
roccsso
legalize
hese
ules,
hen they
mustseeko legitimize
heseulcs y referenceo vxlueselevanto
all of society however aguely
hesc
may
be
ormulated.
Beyondhe nfluencef the awand he ethics'ofparticularphere
individuals
are lcft to
their own
devices.
ystems f ethics let
alone he lawswhich rcgulate
onduct
n
professional
ife
or in the
public phere arc
of
l inle
rsen overcomingrisesf meaningnd
confl ictsn person:li fc. lowcvcr, ven f we ignore
he
fact
hat
the analogywnh
traffic rulcs s incomplete,t is in any case alid
only for thc
'normal
case Vhat docs hatmean? meanshat he
analogy ssumcs societywhich hasachievcd high degree f eco-
nomic
prospcrity, xperienceso inrDlcdiatchreat rom outside nd
hasnetotiated
elations etwccndiffcrentgroup nterestselatively
peacefully.
is one of thc saddcning xperiencesf
this century hat
such
normality'
is
alwaysragile.f conditionsre
abnormal"
and
particularly f it is
dcmanded f individuals hat they should
place
their interests
chind hoseof socictyasa whole, hen
"traffic
ru1es"
areno longcrcnough. n sucha situation, n overarchingmorality,
regardless
f
how
it is founded, ccorncs societalmperative.
\{rhat we
have
ust
claimed
draws
on a
tradition of sociological
theory which
canbe tracedbackabovcall to Emile Durkheim
and
the French
school oundedby hin. Flowever,t rejects
neof their
basicassumptions.
urkheim bclicved hat no society
can survive
without
an overarching
morality; ire named that overarching
morat-symbolic,rder
religion".
\e diverge rorn Durkheim n that
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
33/72
wc
clonot accept
his
necessityor thc
"norrnal
case". he dialogue
with Durkheirn
cquires s to specify his
"normal
case"more pre
cisely.Durkheim devotedmuch effort to the study of the
phenom-
enonof sacrifice ecausee considercdhat the willingness
o sacri'
ficc oncsown interests nd n extrcnris nes ife for thc socialwhole
was a decisive
haracteristic
or
thc ability of a
society o survivc.
Durkhcinr's ssumptionolds or a
society
vhichs exposcdo an
cxistcntialreat.But t rspreciselyh threat
which s missingn
thc normal ase The trafficpartlcrpantseed o fol low he
ruies
in thcir
orr,n
nterest; o wil l ingncssor
sacrif ice
s presumed.
Modcrnization
makes he occurrcrrce f such
"normal
cases"
ruch
morc
1ikely han t was n carlicrpcriocls:nodernizarion
ringswith
it cconomic rowth which is typically
associared
ith rclativepoliti-
cal stability.The
citizenry
s much
css cnrpted
o question he
le-
gitinracy
of an order
lvhcn
its survival is sccured
by matcrirl
prosperiy. However, t shouldbc cmphasizedhat
it would be a
gravc
crror to assumehat this statccould be regarded ssecure
nd
irreversible.
' l
hc
rveakening
ndeven hecollapse
f
an overarchingrderof
nrcaning ith theonset f modernitys hardlya novel heme. he
cnlishtcnmcnt nd ts
successors
,clconrcd
his
process s hc over-
turc for thc crcation
of
a new onler
bascd n
freedomand
rcason.
'l
hc postrevohLtionaryrench raclitioralists ndother conservative
thinkershavebewailed he sameprocss sdecadencend
declinc.
Vhcthcr modcrnity
and
ts
conset1ucncerc
welcomed r rcjected
thcrc ;s widespread
onscnsusn tbe factsof the
matter. e feel het
thisconscnsushoughnot complctcly nfoundedoes ndulysinr
pl i fy a
conrplcx i tuation.
lhcrc
is widespread
onsensus
ot only
anrong*
experts ut also
n
conrnxrn ense nderstanding
bout he
cause, erhaps ven he main crusc
of
this breakingapart of
the
conrprehensiverder of meaning.
l
his is to be found n the
retreat
of religion.
Religion here is not understood n the
wider sense
enployed
by DLrrkheim,.e.asanycomprehensiverderof
meaning
and world order, but rather in the narrower more corventionl
t5
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
34/72
mcaning
religion,asbelief n god, n anotherworld, salvation nd
the bcyond.$(ith referenceo thc n)odern Vest his mplies hat the
declinc
f Christianityhascauscdhc moderncrisisof meenint.
This nor very
original
nterpretation as
accepted s
act
and
wel-
comedby progrcssivehilosophers nrl ntellectuals nd mourned
by almostall conservativedeologicalhinkers.Put simply he main
thesis
f this argument,well establishedn the socioiogy f religion
as he
"secularizetion
thesis' s that modernhy eads nescapablyo
sccularization secularizationn the sense f a lossof influence f
religious
nstitutionson socictyas well as he iossof credibility
of
religious nterpretations
n peoplc's onsciousness.hus comes nto
being
a
historically
new species:
the
nrodernperson"who believes
that onecancopeboth in onesown life and n social xistence ith-
out rel igion.
The
confrontation
ith
this
'nrodern
person" esbecome n m-
portant opic or
whole
gcnerations
f
Christianheologiansnda
central oint n the
progranrmef theChristianhurchesn
western
countries.;or
this hesis,s
well,
a nLrmberf argrrmen*anbede-
ployed.l istorical
videnceuggcstshatat Leastincehe 18th
en-
tury thesocialnfluencef thc church asdeclined,t easrn wes-
tern
Europe,
nd hat mportantnsti tutions
e.
g. he
enrire duca-
tional
systcm) ave iberated hcmselvcsrom their earlier eligious
ties. n
addition, he term
'modern
person" s not entirely
divorccd
from
reality. t is likcly
that there are a considerablc umber of
peoplcwho
copewith thcir liveswithout religiousaith (in
the sense
defined
carlier)or religious
practice.
Vhether this
type of secular
exjstences an absolute ovelty s questionable.t is ikely that there
have alwaysbeen
pcople
who
have ound thcir happinessn this
v'orld
without
churches before and after they came nto ex-
istence. ut even
disregardinghis, dre equationof modernity
and
secularization
ust be reated
keptically.
{ the
secularizationhesis
appliesanywhcre,
hen in westcrn -urope. (Even
there
it would
have to be questioned r'hethcr
hc institutional retreat
of the
churchesanbe equatcdwith the rctreatof rcligiousnterpretations
36
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
35/72
in consciousness.)bservers f the Europeaneligious
cene
incLLrd-
ing
one of the two authorsof this study)
have for a
long time
pointed
out
that declericalizationhouLdot be confused
with the
lossof
religion. n any case he convcntional
ecularizalion
lesis
rapidly oses redibilityassoo asoue eaves
Western
Europc.
A particular rritant for
this
theory is
the
stateof religion
n
the
United
States.
American societycrn hardly be described
s un-
modern. Io*'ever, eligion s forccfullyaliveandpresent
herc.And
this s ruebothat he nsti tutionaleuel s
q'el l
as n theconscious-
ness nrl
ife conductof
millionsof
peoplc.
Thereare
cw signs hat
this situation s changingn thc dircctionsuggcsted
y the scculariza-
tion thesis.Outside :,uropeand North
America t is
in
any case
nonscnse.he socalled 'hird Vorlcl is n fact shaken
y thc onrush
of religious novements. he Islauric ereissxnceasattracted
most
attentionbut it is far from bcing he only case.
Vorldwideone can
tracc hc successtory of evangelicalrotestantism,
he moststriking
chapter
f
which is Evangelism. his newProtestantism
preadsike
a prairie ire
-
in s-idestretches f Eastand Southeastern
sia, n
Africasouthof the Saharand mostsurprisingly
in al l coun-
trics of Latin America.Often it is preciselyhose ayersof society
most ouchedby modernizationwhich are most susceptible
o reli
giouscndrusiasm. he troops of todays eligious
massmovcnrents
arc to bc found n the new citicsof the Third
Vorld, not in thc tra-
ditionalvillages. eople raincd at tbe nrodern
universitics reolten
the cadingadresfthismovemcnt.
ln short: he Europeanmodel of secularized
odernity hasonly
l imitedexport alLre.he most nrportantactor n the creation f
crises f meaning
n
socicty s
n
dre i lc of the
ndividual
s
prob-
ably
not
the supposedly
odcrrr
ecularityut
modern lural isnr.
Modcrnity means quantitative s
vellas
qualitative
ncreasen plu
raliz:uion.
fhe
structural ausesf this factare
well known: popula-
tion growth
and
migrationand, associatedith this, urbanization;
pluralization n the physical,dcrrogr:rphic ense;
he market eco-
nomy and inclustriaLizationhich throw togetherpeople of the
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
36/72
most
differenthindsand orce hem to dealwith
eachother reason-
ably peacefully;
he rule of law anddenrocracy
hich
provide nsti-
tutional guarantcesor
this peaceful oexhtence. he mediaof mass
communication
onstantly
nd empharicaLlyarade plural iryof
waysof life and thinking: both prlntedmaterial iding on mass i,
teracy
spread crosshe
entirepopulationby compulsory chooling
and
he nes-est lectronic
media.
f
the
interactions
nabled y this
pluralizationare not restricted
y
'fenccs'
of one kind or another,
rhis plurlism akes ull
effect,bringing
with
it one of its conse-
quencesrhe
"structural'
crisisof meaning.
'lhe
"fence
of the aw" was
alrcadymentioned. abbinical
udaism
erectedhis fence o
distinguish racticing
ews
rom their profane
surroundings.
t was his
'fence"
which made
possiblehe survivalof
the
Jewish
community
over
many centuries n
a mainly hostile
Christian
or
Islamic
society-One nlight alsosey: he
"fence
of the
law"
protected hosepeople ivnrg within it from
pluralism.This
protectioncollapsed ith
the emancipation f the
Jews
n wesrern
societies nd
the people affcctedwere consequently
articularly
liable o
crises f meaning.t is not merehappenstance
hat modern
Jewishhinkers ndwritershav con ern d hemselvesarticularlyn-
tensivelywith
suchcrises
f
meaning.
Conversely ne cansay hat
any group that wishes
o protect itself from the consequences
f
pluralismmust erect ts
own
'fence
of the law'. As wasmentioned,
there have
been nstances
f pluralisur
hroughout
history, for in,
stxnce n the large
owns of late antiquity and
probably at times
along he traderoutes
and the urban cenrers f Asia. The
modern
processesf pluralizationdistinguish hemselvesrom their pred-
ccessorsot
only by their immense xtent
much
wider
circlesare
affected y them),
hey are alsodistinguishedy
their acceleration:
whiLst
heir effects
rogressivelyxtend o
"new"
countries,hey do
not remain
static, n alreadyhighly modernized
ocietieshey
are
accelerating.
Modern
pluralism eads
o a thorough elativization
f systems f
valuesandschemes f intcrpretation.Put differently: he old value
38
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
37/72
systems ndschemesf
interpretation rc decenonized
.
The result-
ing disorientation f the individual and of
whole groups
has for
years
bccn he
main themeof socixland cultural
criticism.Catego-
ries such
as
'alienation"
and
"anorrie'
arc proposed
o charctcrize
thc difficulty experienccdy people rying to find their way in the
modcrnworld. fhe weaknessf suchcommon
place oncePtions
s
not that they exaggeratehe crisisof meaning.
Their
weaknesss
their
bl indncss
owardshe capacityf individuals
s
well asdiffer
ent conrmunities f life and meaning o
preserve
heir own
values
and intcrpretations.Existentialphilosophy
from Kicrkegaard
o
Sartrchas
developed
he most mprcssive onception
f the
alienatcd
human being.Other versions rc to be
found throughot
ecent
\festcrn literanrre oneneedmentiononly
Kafka).However,
t can-
not
bc doubted
hat this imagcof humanityapplies
o only
a small
portion of the population
n rnodern
societies
though his portion
may be in certin especrsn importantone).
Most people
n these
societies o not
vander
around
ikc
characters
n a
Kafha novel.
They arenot plagued y
fear
and
arenot tempted o
makedesperate
lcapsof faith
,
nor do they co sider hemselves
condemned
to
frcedonr'-One x-ayor anothcr,with or without religion, hey cope
with
their ives. t
is important o understand ow they
mnagchis.
But
before
we
attempt o pursue
his
question
we wish to return
oncc more
to
or.rrclain that pluralism s the
cause f the
crisisof
mcaning r modernity.We must cxaminemore
closely he
signifi'
cance or
the stock
of meaningend the process
hrough
which
meaning s lost,
of
the socialpsychological tatus
of meaningand
knowlcdge s aken'forgranted.
J9
7/24/2019 BERGER, Peter L. & LUCKMANN, Thomas. Modernity, Pluralism and the Crisis of Meaning
38/72
4. The loss
of the taken-for-granted
lf
communities
of
life
and mc:ning rcally overlap to the extent
that
is demandedby socialcxpectariols, rhen social ife and the existence
of thc indiv idual
proccedhabi tu: l ly alnrost
by
themselves". h is
doesnot necessarilymply
drat drc individuals have no life
problems
or
that they are happy
with thcir fate. However,
rhey a! least
"kno\ir"
about
the
world,
how tr-,bchave n it, what is reasonable
o
cxpect and, iast
but not least, ndiviclLrals now who
they are. For
exrmple, the role
of a slavc was presurnably never
a pleasantone.
Nevertheless,
however unpleasant t may have
been the individuals
who occupied
this role livcd in
Top Related