Symbolic Interactionism and Muslim Behaviour: Part One

I’ve been wondering for a while about the motives behind our behaviour. Why do some of us smoke? Why do others jump off buildings to their death? Why do we give in charity? I came across a sociological theory developed by university professors in America in the 20^th century called Symbolic Interactionism. I think it explains in some part how we come to act the way we do.

The term “symbolic interactionism” was originally coined by Herbert Blumer. It operates on

three fundamental assumptions: 1) that human beings act towards things based on the

meanings the things have for them; 2) that these meanings are derived from social interaction; and 3) that such meanings are created and modified through an interpretative social process (Blumer 1969:2).

Simply put, symbolic interactionists view behaviour as motivated by the meaning it carries for the doer of the behaviour. An advantage of this theory is that it can explain how the same action can mean different things when performed by different people. Take prayer as an example. Praying can be an example of obedience to God where a person prays solely out of the intention to obey God’s command to pray. On the other hand, another person may pray with a conscious or semi-conscious belief that others will think good of them; here, prayer denotes showing off.

In both situations, the individual acted after an interaction in their mind. In the first instance, the person reacted to a command from an “Other” (i.e. God). In the second instance, the person reacted to the praise of an “other” (i.e. a fellow worshipper in the mosque). Thus, Symbolic Interactionism says that both interactions with a physical or abstract other influenced the behaviour of an individual. While on one level (i.e. God) the meaning of prayer is unchanging, on another level (i.e. that of people), the meaning the actions of a prayer take on depend on the intention behind them.

This analysis of prayer through symbolic interactionism shows that the theory supports the Prophetic narration “actions are but by intentions” (ref). Amazing that a sociological theory that academics came up around fifty years ago, lends credence to what the Prophet Muhammad said some 1430 years back.

Are there any other instances of Muslim behaviour that Symbolic Interactionism may shed light on? Don’t hesitate to share in the comments.

Conflict Theory and Islam

Wishing to keep my blog in focus, the next few posts will be the sharing and documenting of reflections which I stumble upon while reading up on the major sociological theories and what they say about religion and character. Every blog post will end with a focused question, to enable further reflection and thought. Your comments are welcome.

I’m currently musing doing a research degree on the topic of character. Because my potential primary supervisor is trained in sociology, I need to approach the subject of character from a sociological perspective.  

One social theory is “Conflict Theory.” Per Conflict Theory, religion can reinforce and promote social inequality and social conflict. This view is partly inspired by the work of the German philosopher Karl Marx, who famously said that religion was the “opiate of the masses”. By this he meant that religion, like a drug, makes people happy with their existing conditions. Marx repeatedly stressed that workers needed to rise-up and overthrow the bourgeoisie. To do so, he said, they needed first to recognize that their poverty stemmed from their oppression by the bourgeoisie. But people who are religious, he said, tend to view their poverty in religious terms. They think it is God’s Will that they are poor, either because He is Testing their faith in Him or because they have violated His rules. Many people believe that if they endure their suffering, they will be rewarded in the Afterlife. Their religious views stem from a spiritual belief and therefore do not lead them  to blame the capitalist class for their poverty and thus not to revolt. For these reasons, said Marx, religion leads the poor to accept their fate and helps maintain the existing system of social inequality.

The rise of Islam in 7^th Century Arabia is evidence against Marx’s views. The Prophet Muhammad battled against the oppression of the poor by the bourgeoisie of his society because of religious values. He taught his fellow Arabians that a person’s worth is not determined by what clan he is born into—in those days some clans were thought to be more prestigious than other clans—but by his God-fearingness and character. Character is the mark of a man, not possessions or lineage.

Marx’s theory may have related to a certain people at a certain time, but it does not translate or transcend era and culture. Do you think Conflict Theory relates to the unfortunate circumstances individuals in Muslim majority countries find themselves in?

Update!

Dear reader

I've been travelling since the last post on this blog. Travels took me from London to Kuala Lumpur to Sydney. I left Australia in November 2015 single and returned married, to a wonderful, loving lady from England. 

Sincere apologies for not informing you of my hiatus. I now return to normal activity (i.e. one post per week). Posts will be much the same as before, general reflections on life and other topics. 

Thank you for visiting. Take care. 

Rizwan