The Social Construction of Reality and Christian Thought

Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann’s work, The Social Construction of Reality, grapples with the idea that our world consists of all that it does because men and women have collectively created the languages and institutions that make our society a concrete object. The authors also trace the idea of knowledge and how it is contextual. These ideas will prove useful in applying the social theory of Berger and Luckmann in an effort to trouble, but ultimately reconcile the notion of a socially constructed reality with Christianity.

In an effort to trace the argument of Berger and Luckmann one must first realize that reality is an entity that stands apart from an individual’s own wishes or consciousness. While this thought seems absurdly basic, it is a necessary one as we strive to separate ourselves from the world that we are so sunken into, even to the point that we are convinced that our reality is somehow absolute. This is not to say that our reality is a complete counterfeit, but to maintain that it is only genuine because humanity has created it and it is therefore real. However, it is arbitrary because the human race lacks the authority to make a reality that is absolute.
The concept of a socially constructed reality has its roots in the theory of Karl Marx and Wilhelm Dilthey (among others). Marx claimed that the world is divided into human activity and the world produced by human activity. Marx built on this with his skeptical “Ideology,” which claims that human activity is controlled by those in power to keep the disenfranchised out of power. This was accomplished with the power of knowledge. Dilthey contributed to the sociology of knowledge through the notion of “historicism,” which states that human thought always occurs for a specific purpose at a certain point in history.

The simplistic nature of these ideas causes one to wonder why the thoughts above are not more self-evident. Perhaps this is due to humanity’s constant need to focus their thoughts on the practical tasks of everyday life. This pragmatic consumption of human thoughts is referred to as “recipe knowledge” by Berger and Luckmann, who go on to theorize that this is needed because humans are “instinctually under equipped.” Furthermore, they add that, “Man occupies a peculiar position in the animal kingdom. Unlike the other higher mammals, he has no species-specific environment, no environment firmly structured by his own instinctual organization” (pg. 47). Therefore, in an effort to compensate, humans construct their own reality and become socialized in order to receive knowledge.

In essence, central to the concept of a constructed reality is the communication of that reality through language, which is arbitrary. For example, the word “chair” is not inherently connected to the object that society agrees to call “chair.” Instead, the word “chair” is merely a signifier for a given object. In this way, words serve as widely held symbols to conjure up a common object. These symbols only work so well because they are held in common by a community. Consequently, language is a social construction that serves to reinforce every other part of this socially constructed reality.

As humans go about their everyday lives they use language to speak society into existence. The result is the externalization of this society. Men and women collectively use their words to build the structures in our society. However, once these structures are put into place, they are not easily changed. For example, the founding fathers of the United States used language to create a constitution. Once their words were put onto paper, they were used to construct our government, which has become a superstructure so massive that it seems to be unchangeable to any one individual Thus, in this way, language is used to externalize the institutions of our society.

Therefore, once society is externalized, it turns on the same men and women who spoke it into existence as it begins to shape the way they think and act. This is the internalization that Berger and Luckmann describe as the reconciling of society to one’s own conscience. In other words, the structures of society persuade those within it to follow their rules and conform to their codes. For example, the powers in society have convinced the average individual who drives while intoxicated is committing a terrible crime that endangers society. This has been accomplished through laws and through the media running stories of tragic drunk driving accidents and this serves as an example of a structure that has influenced our conscience. Breaking the speed limit by exceeding it by five miles per hour, on the other hand, is widely held as a crime that is far from despicable. This is due to the fact that the superstructures of society have not succeeded in convincing it’s citizens that that going five over is wrong. However, the fact that drunk driving is widely held as a civil evil is the result of internalization.

The acceptance of an institution from a society’s citizens is referred to as legitimation, or as Berger and Luckmann state, “legitimation is the process of ‘explaining’ or justifying” (pg. 93). It is through this process that a socially constructed reality is recognized for its value and the codes of that society are realized as valid. For example, the education structure and its red tape are recognized as valuable for the credentials that it bestows on an individual and the knowledge it gives its participants. It is worth noting that there is also an element of knowledge to legitimation, which is portrayed in the example of education through the picture of its participants who are knowledgeable of the value of the institution.

In an effort to apply the previously stated ideas to everyday life, it is beneficial to consider how the beliefs of Christianity and the sociology of knowledge conflict and compliment each other. The most blatant example of conflict between these two ideas can be portrayed by looking at knowledge from a modern perspective, which many Christians have used and continue to use regarding their faith. The stereotypical modernist perceives truth as transcendent and an absolute that one can know. This is convenient for the modern Christian as he or she wrestles with the idea of a transcendent God because the searching Christian can adopt this definition of knowledge to their world and make it black and white. The result of living according to this knowledge is portrayed by the legalistic Christian, who lives according to a strict set of dos and don’ts because they claim to know what is absolutely right and wrong through their transcendent knowledge. In this way, the following words of Berger and Luckmann apply: “as long as the routines of everyday life continue without interruption they are apprehended and unproblematic” (pg. 24).

However, if one troubles the notion of transcendent knowledge with the previously mentioned idea of historicism, then one’s everyday life ceases to be solved by transcendent knowledge. Instead, Christians must wrestle with the notion of Marx’s “Ideology,” which states that ideas are used to justify an end in service of an interest. When this is applied to the issue of Christianity and a socially constructed reality, it demands that Christians recognize that their claim to know absolute truth was at least convenient, if not motivated by, their desire for a simplistic faith. It is much more convenient for the lazy Christian to go through their everyday life with certain “recipe knowledge” that claims to absolutely know right from wrong. This certainly allowed the modern Christian to flee the academic scene in the late twentieth century.
In light of the need to form a worldview that meshes with our perceived reality, therefore, the Christian must admit that at least most of human knowledge is constructed by reality because the evidence from history and anthropology is far too massive to ignore. For example, dating practices differ drastically from time to time and place to place. Consequently, the modern Christian must edge closer to the post-modern sector, which is feared by the Christian due to the slippery slope of relativism.

Berger and Luckmann are not promoting the deconstruction of all thought until all of our ideas are simply placed into a metanarrative. They only maintain that humanity is limited to the knowledge found in our reality, which is truer than the modern Christian realizes. However, one can easily maintain the existence of transcendent truth outside of a socially constructed reality. In this synthesis a Christian can maintain that their knowledge of reality is indeed subject to the very society that humanity has constructed. However, with a limited knowledge of God’s absolutes, the informed Christian can better identify and expose the lies of the enemy.
Followers of Christ can only do this by maintaining that there are absolutes that are built into creation by God. However, it is impossible for men and women to know absolute truth absolutely, but one can know it substantively. Indeed, it is only through a limited knowledge of absolutes that Christ followers can strive to give a different legitimation to their own society. “Legitimation”, as the process of giving value to an institution of society, can only be achieved if one is aware of value at all. In this way a Christian can give value to a structure of society with an authoritative knowledge of right and wrong. Furthermore, followers of Christ can externalize and internalize a constructed society according to the absolute norms, which transcend time and space.

The thrust of Berger and Luckmann’s argument does not only explain how reality is constructed, but also communicates how we can better participate in its construction. As Christians, God has charged us with building his kingdom and to use all knowledge for the glory of God. Therefore, let all Christians go forward in humility as the admit that all truth belongs to God and only he knows it absolutely. However, let us thank him for allowing us to know it substantively and let us be ever mindful that many components of the world we live in is a product of a broken human race.