Berger & Luckman's take on roles

The reality of everyday life develops face to face in the presence of each other. The other one manifests himself entirely in front of me. The closer we get, the more signs we get from the other one. In interaction, the other one changes in front of my eyes. The face-to-face situation is the prototype of social interaction. The result is a continuous exchange between my expressiveness and yours. In the face-to-face situation the subjectivity of the other is accessible to me, the other becomes completely real. Hypocrisy, misinterpretation are more difficult to sustain on a face-to-face basis. Human expressiveness is able to be objective, i.e. manifested in products of human activity. The r of the vc is full of objections and, moreover, possible by them. A special case of targeting is the human production of signs, that is, the meaning. Language is another computer of everyday life, such as time and space. It's the goalkeeper for excellence, it allows us to object to reality, to mean, to typify, like tb away in time and space. It allows us to express our subjectivity, accumulate experience, knowledge. Language forces me to adapt to its patterns, I can't use German syntactic rules when I speak English, it has a coercive effect. It is capable of presenting a variety of objects that are absent, at any time the world can be updated through language.

"Roles" can be re-established just like the institutions. " I have no choice in this matter, I have to act this way ("as husband, father"). Identity itself can be redeemed. There is therefore a complete identification of the individual with his or her socially attributed characteristics.

How the social order is built: It is a human product, it is a constant production, carried out by man in the course of his continuous outsourcing. Outsourcing is an anthropological necessity, man is not conceived within a closed sphere of static interior, continuously needs to be outsourced in activity.

Origins of institutionalization:

Any act that is repeated frequently creates a pattern that can then be reproduced with effort saving, releasing energy that remains available for other activities. We standardize our conduct (Sherif). Eject: learn how to drive. These room processes predate any institutionalization. As institutions emerge: It appears each time a mutual typification of actions is given by types of actors. The institutions involve history and control. Institutions always have a history, of which they are products. The very fact that they exist controls human behavior by setting guidelines (social control). It's duty. I do what's right because I have certain characteristics. I don't do what I'm told anymore. Social determinism (e.g. female drivers) is established in the transition from one generation to another. We can't understand an institution unless we understand its history. The institutions are the duty to be, this duty to be learned from the go. Mead doesn't have as much institution as it does. Those who do not respond to this are heretical groups, institutions punish them (minority).

The human product (externalization) is then objective, and later it will be internalized

Internalization: Internalization of that world, those truths that surround us. It is the process by which the objective social world is projected back into consciousness during socialization", internalization is defined as immediate apprehension or interpretation of an objective event as it expresses meaning, as it is a manifestation of the subjective processes of others that therefore become subjectively meaningful to me

Objective: process by which outsourced products of human activity achieve objectivity. The relationship between the producing man and his product remains dialectical, the man and his social world interact, the product acts on the producer again. Outsourcing and targeting are the moments of a continuous dialectical process, the third moment of that process, is internalization. The objective is universalization (see Durkheim and Mead, the symbolic, the universal language).  

It has been divided onto 4 different levels:

• Pretoetic level: It's the total sum of what "everyone knows" about their social world, it's primary knowledge. Legitimations must be valid ("because I told you so"). Because that's what it's all about. The first level is that of incipient legitimacy "that is how things are done". All the simple traditional statements "that's how things are done", which are the first and generally the most effective responses to Why? The child is not questioned
• Theoretical level: Legitimacy theorists tend to support logical aspirations Simple applications, phrases (Why do I have to get up early? "because God helps him early in the morning." The second level contains theoretical propositions in a rudimentary way, are explanatory schemes which relate to groups of objective meanings: proverbs, moral maxims and sentences.
• Explanatory theories: traditions (?)The third level contains explicit theories by which an institutional sector is legitimized in terms of a differentiated body of knowledge
• Level of symbolic universes: any human experience must enter the symbolic universe.  They can't live with different symbolic universes. One always flirts with the other, kills him. Symbolic universes constitute the fourth level, are bodies of theoretical tradition that comprise areas of different significance and cover institutional order in a symbolic whole, are processes of legitimacy that relate to realities other than those of everyday life. Symbolic processes are meaningful processes that relate to realities that are not of everyday experience. This level of legitimacy is distinguished, in addition to the precedent, by the scope of its significant integration.