Critical sw study notes


Published on

the start of my critical sw study notes though it isnt finished

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Critical sw study notes

  1. 1. CONSTRUCTION OF SOCIAL WORK THEORY (Payne, 2005:3 –23)  SW practice is a process of deciding action from variety of alternative positions  SW’s need to have ideas that try to explain why and how practice decisions are made  disagreement about what social work is, and different groups argue for and against different views Description of critical thinking (Kirst-Ashman, 1997)  scrutiny of what is stated as true, and conclusion  formulation of opinion/conclusion; focuses on the  “process of reasoning”  how people think about the truth, analyse and formulate conclusions  question what others take for granted  “triple A approach”: Ask; Assess; Assert  apply to any belief, statement, assumption, reasoning, experience claimed as true  enhances self-awareness; detection distorted thinking  help identify propaganda; distinguish intentionally deceptive claims; choose words carefully Critical consciousness  deepening critical consciousness skills toward socially just society  understanding of critical consciousness - work of Paulo Freire  experiencing, analyzing, reflecting on life, history, environment  “becoming subject rather than object of own history  object to subject, victim to social agent: “conscientisation”  routes to critical consciousness depending on histories,  how raised, ‘insider’/‘outsider’ characteristics  use knowledge from one category to understand another  social group membership affects access to societal resources + mobility in society
  2. 2. WHAT IS CRITICAL THEORY? Early critical theory is broadly Marxist. It is the account of the social forces of domination that takes its theoretical activity to be practically connected to the object of its study… Critical theory is not merely descriptive, it is a way to instigate social change by providing knowledge of the forces of social inequality that can, in turn, inform political action aimed at emancipation (or at least diminishing domination and inequality). (Rush, 2004:10) Rush, F. (Ed). (2004). The cambridge companion to critical theory. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Principles of critical thinking • most are advantaged and disadvantaged by some group identities, but issues differ outsider/insider categories • gaining knowledge about discrimination and oppression + guarding against bias ongoing + lifelong • learn about culturally shaped assumptions - not impose unknowingly, • core values and standards • recognize how bias is structured into policies, practices and norms about social interactions – institutionalized racism – than we do to perceive individual prejudice • question the knowledge base and theories that underlie our practice • acknowledge and manage feelings connected with incomplete understandings , identity negotiations, interactions to develop our critical consciousness • recognize non-conscious learnings shaped by oppressive societal dynamics • be yourself and be genuine while working on critical consciousness • reduce communication problems + destructive power related dynamics, use knowledge about how characteristics affect others similar + different • incorporate knowledge of contexts of different identity categories • understanding + competence about dimensions of concern, moves in cyclical patterns Four presuppositions of the critical social science paradigm: • Macro-social structures shape social relations at every level of life
  3. 3. • The world is divided between haves and have nots and that the interests of these groups are opposed and irreconcilable • The oppressed are complicit in their oppression • Its emphasis is on empowering oppressed people to act, collectively, to achieve social change Critical theory: “Truth as unmasking” Higgs and Smith (2002) 1970’s, 80’s - critical theory ‘driving force’ behind new forms of marxism, feminism and black consciousness Argues that Critical theory believes that it can offer us a comprehensive account of society and the production of knowledge. Claims there is no such thing as objective truth – all truth is created by human beings All we have is opposing claims by different groups of people who are seeing various forms of power All human societies are structured around certain power relationships All ideas come from human beings and all human beings are influenced by the world they live in – creates a vicious circle and we are therefore influenced by society and context - far more than we realise Critical theory differs from PM in that critical theory claims that society is structured and that our understanding of that structure will help to partically amend social evil. Society and education are governed by certain fixed laws and rules. PM on the other hand claims that society is not structured – society is no more than a series of unique, irrepeatable and chance encounters between human beings. Both CT and PM agree there is no objective truth CT argues that structure of thinking processes is a result of social forces and that problems can be solved through transformation through praxis - critically reflecting on society, uncover hidden assumptions that maintain existing power relationships Through praxis people can discover what enslaves people and begin to alter social reality through participating in society differently CT argues that we will be liberated from oppression once conscious of how oppression operates (critical consciousness) Critical theory and practice developed by Freire (1921-94) - teaching and schools do not educate, make learners accept power structures Ferguson (2008) “Reclaiming social work”
  4. 4. Definitions of critical social work Healy’s definition the key elements are that it examines and challenges power relations and as such offers the ability to challenge and change oppression. Similarly in the definition offered by Fook critical social work is conceptualised as a method by which hegemonic ideas can be challenged. Fook argues that it is because of postmodernisms recognition of various truths that dominant structures can be challenged to become more inclusive. Ferguson suggests that these definitions offer postmodernism as a “basis for an emancipatory practice” However Ferguson argues that the nature of postmodernism means that it cannot provide this basis as it lacks ability to challenge structural constraints. He points out that postmodernism opposes the use of “metanarratives” that act as grand theories in their attempts to make sense of the world as a whole. In this argument as no one truth has having priority over another. Objective reality does not exist within the postmodern perspective and this means that radical perspectivism is adopted. This key element of postmodernist theory, Ferguson argues, leads to three key tenets which it is argued undermine critical social works emancipatory objectives. These are, according to Ferguson its “individualism; its rejection of structural explanations of poverty and inequality; and its moral relativism”. Ferguson argues that postmodernism denies the existence of collective identity and rather sees everyone in individualist terms. This he argues is in contrast with Marxist approaches and has more in common with neo-liberal approaches. This individualism results in theories of “power as omnipresent” and therefore makes the struggle against oppressive forces local and individualised rather than structural and collective. The second argument made by Ferguson is that this failure to make links between the micro and macro results in the inability of the framework to offer guidance for change. This emphasis on the local means that oppression such as poverty cannot be explained structurally and rather becomes a localised or individualised experience. The final point Ferguson raises in objection to postmodernism as a basis for critical social work is that it has moral relativism as a key outcome of its prioritisation of different truths. This means that no situation or actions are better than others.
  5. 5. Challenges to CT (Healy & Mullaly) (don’t think criticisms are essential learning but handy to know) Healy argues that critical social work includes the following key premises:  A recognition that large scale social processes, particularly those associated with class, race and gender contribute fundamentally to the personal and social issues social workers encounter in their practice.  The adoption of a self-reflexive and critical stance to the often contradictory effects of social work practice and social policies  A commitment to co-participatory rather than authoritarian practice relations  Working with and for oppressed populations to achieve social transformation Critical social work emerged out of a different form of capitalism and society, currently these ideas are being challenged by practice and postmodern analysis. Healy argues that there is not a link between practice contexts and critical social work making it difficult for social workers to translate these radical ideas into practice. She criticizes critical social work theorists for failing to deal with the epistemological and ethical challenges to social work and for instead simply criticizing social workers for not implementing the ideas in their practice. She argues that at a epistemological level there is a concern expressed about the assumption that structural analyses can be imported into local contexts of social work practice and policy making process. Healy cites the example of how social workers in fields where the use of statutory power is integral to their role practice, she states that critical social work has failed to help these social workers practice critically. At a ethical level critical social work claims that through rational thought and action people can change the way that they live. Healy argues that such an assumption is naïve to the inconstantancies of human action. Oppression can often be the result of utopian and rational ideas. Healy sums up by arguing that the onus is on critical social workers to recognize the differences in the contexts from which their ideas are drawn and the environs in which social workers typically practice. The advent of PM theory has also shaken the foundations on which critical social work is built. PM. Healy argues, challenges practice theories that seek to unify social work around common causes and practices, rather PM asks social workers to recognize that social work like other entities is produced by discourse and so will vary from context to context.
  6. 6. PM authors like Foucault challenge CT negative views of power in arguing that power is everywhere and can be negative and productive. This analysis of power assists social workers in seeing that their power can at times be necessary and productive. Mullaly has a similar argument. He argues that over the last two decades developments in capitalism (transformation from a rigid and centralized post war form to a flexible and global form) have challenged the progressive social work project. The effects of neo-liberalism with the pulling back of state intervention have left a greater gap between the rich and poor, trade unions are in disarray and social work is being deskilled. These have all contributed to a radically different climate in which social workers work in and progressive social work no longer seems able to meet these challenges. PM argues that the world is characterized by diversity and that no one should try to define reality, needs or interests of another group. This emphasis on relativism challenges solidarity around needs and objective evils. Authors argue that PM is stimulating at an intellectual level but irrelevant to activism and practice. Mullaly tries to make progressive social work relevant and link with PM through three premises around which he hopes to rebuild progressive social work: 1) universal celebration and promotion of difference and diversity 2) development of a set of universial but transcultural human needs – need for physical health and need for personal autonomy 3) Recognition of oppression as the major source of social problems which in turn leads to anti-oppressive social work as a framework Post colonial theorist - Fanon • Fanon (1967) raises the issue of the relationship between colonialised people and language in Chapter one of his book “Black Skin, White Masks”. Here he argues that “every dialect is a way of thinking” and as such assuming the colonial powers language means assuming an alternative culture (Fanon, 1967, p.25). In this way colonialised people are taught that to raise white above black, in language and in culture. However Fanon (1967) also speaks to the double bind that colonised people find themselves in through their alienation from themselves and from others – both black and white. • Fanon (1967) argues that the black man can never be anything other than what he is - black, to try to be white means to be lost. He argues that to deal with the consequences of colonialism two wars need to be fought. As Fanon (1967) simultaneously attends to agency and structure in his discussion he argues that the black man must liberate himself
  7. 7. and at the same time deal with structures that enable his oppression. Fanon (1967, p.11) argues that “man is what brings society into being...” and therefore man can change society. This links with his discussion of the inferiority and dependency complex of black men, seen in the fourth chapter of his book, which Fanon (1967) argues is a result of the demolition of cultural practices of colonialised people. • Fanon (1967) uses Mannoni (1964) work contained in his book “Prospero and Caliban: Psychology of Colonization” as a foundation off which to bounce his arguments. Fanon (1967, p.85) argues that Mannoni`s (10964) central theme is that “the confrontation of ‘civilized’ and ‘primitive’ men creates a special situation – the colonial situation – and brings about the emergence of a mass of illusions and misunderstandings..” Fanon (1967) argues that colonialisation is definitely a situation that brings about unique consequences for the colonized. Fanon (1967) however disagrees with the point that Mannoni (1964) continues to argue that this dependency complex (that colonisation brings about) is actually an inherent complex that would have emerged even had colonial encounter not taken place. Fanon (1967) argues that this is to ignore structures and the environment that the colonialized live in and locate the problem intra-psychically only. Rather he uses SA to show that racist structures cause racism, which locates the object of the racism as inferior. • Fanon (1967) argues that Mannoni is incorrect in stating that the inferiority complex of colonialised people develops from being in the minority (Fanon, 1967). Fanon (1967) states that this complex develops out of extra-psychic dynamics. He states that the inferiority complex develops from being put in an inferior position by someone who puts themselves in a superior position (Fanon, 1967). Fanon (1967, p.93) states clearly that “It is the racist who creates his inferior”. Not as Mannoni (1964) would have the colonialised who so want to be white that they independently of their environment feel inferior. However Fanon (1967) argues that following Mannoni`s argument leads us into a difficult place where colonialised people only have a choice between a dependency complex or an inferiority complex with no hope of “salvation”. However Fanon (1967) argument can be taken to its logical end: to understand colonialisations effects can mean liberation. • Linking with his earlier discussions on language, Fanon (1967) again brings up the way in which the Malagasy are alienated from themselves through the process of colonialisation which seems them as less than human. Fanon (1967) argues that though colonialisation
  8. 8. the Malagasy have lost themselves and are no longer “men”. This is seem clearly in Fanon (1967, p.97) argument that “The arrival of the white man in Madagascar shattered not only its horizons but its psychological mechanisms”. Again this links with earlier discussions on options for intervention arguing that liberation is internal. However Fanon (1967) also discusses the fact that every citizen of a nation is responsible for the actions of their nation. This indicates that he believes that the colonialised need to deal with their dependency/inferiority complex while the colonisers need to deal with their racism and superior attitude (Fanon, 1967). Neither group can deal with the others issues. • Interesting in Fanons (1967) writings is that he moves fluidly between structural and agential explanations of effects. He argues that it is only the black man that can make himself whole again, advocating here for an agential view. Then he moves to argue that economic and social conditions of are the causes for behaviour, which is a structural view. This fluid movement gives his argument a holistic sense that prevents extremism and offers many opportunities for intervention.