In “Categories of the Orientation and Organization of Action”, Talcott Parsons and Edwards Shils discuss the four main points related to the conceptualization of behavior that is developed within the frameworks of the theory of action. In addition, they argue that behavior is a ‘regulated expenditure of energy’ that appears to be very important for a better understanding of the nature of behavior (Parsons, & Shils, n. d., p. 66). In the following paper, some of the interesting ideas that can be found in Parsons and Shils’ work will be addressed in terms of their connections with the other readings of the course.
First, speaking about the valuable findings made by Parsons and Shils, the main points of their work should be addressed. In their paper, they argue that:
- behavior is oriented to achieve particular goals that are important for an individual;
- behavior may be observed in concrete situations;
- behavior is regulated by norms and standards,
- behavior is always connected with an outflow of energy, efforts, motivation (Parsons, & Shils, n. d.).
In addition, the authors explain the relationship between behavior and action, and provide a number of illustrations of when the behavior of an individual can be called ‘action’. One more important point of their argument is in explaining the nature of orientation as the attitude of the one who exercises the action to this particular action and the objects that are bound with the action.
Critically reflecting on Parsons and Shils’ findings, and their value, I should say that I am especially interested in their practical explanation of the theory of action. To help their audience grasp the depths of their ideas, the authors offer a number of effective examples. One of them is the example of a fisher and his actions that Parsons and Shils apply to explain their four-point theory of behavior. They say that (1) when the fisher goes to the destination where he is planning to fish, his behavior has a final goal which is in getting to the place of his activity; (2) the behavior of this man can be observed in a particular situation including the situation on the road, in the car, in the place of his destination, and so on; (3) the fisher’s behavior is regulated by certain standards, and in this case, these are the standards established by his intellectual power; and (4) the fisher’s behavior is connected to the outflow of his strength and energy because when he collects his things, puts them to the car, drives the car, and starts fishing, his inner recourses are spent. By means of meditating on this effective example, I was able to see the application of the theory described by the authors in their work.
Speaking about the connection of the given reading with the other course readings, I should say that they are quite clear. Earlier, the theory of action was introduced in the other reading in its perspective, and the given reading offered an opportunity to see how this theory is applicable in practice. In addition, the given reading provides an opportunity to fill a want between the notions of behavior and action.
In conclusion, it should be stated that in their work, Parsons and Shils provide a logical and coherent argument on the application of the theory of action. Their work appears to be of special value to me because of their practical approach to the study, and a good number of effective illustrations explaining their way of reasoning.
References
Parsons, T., & Shils, E. (n. d.) Categories of the Orientation and Organization of Action. EMERGENCE THROUGH CONVERGENCE, 66-80.