answersLogoWhite

0

Who are the advocators of structuration?

Updated: 9/17/2019
User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago

Best Answer

Its most prominent representatives have been French philosopher Claude Lévi-Strauss, linguist Roman Jakobson, and psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan.

User Avatar

Wiki User

10y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: Who are the advocators of structuration?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Related questions

What is the process of structuration?

relationship between farmer and technology


What rhymes with perpetrators?

respirators, accommodators, administrators, advocators


What is structuration theory?

Structure exists only in and through the activities of human agents meaning people do things following a design, not just trying to complete a goal for personal gain. Combining structure and human agency is known as the structuration theory.


How would structuration theory be applied in the war on terror?

Considering the war on terror is everyday life for most of the world structuration wouldn't really apply. Military would be the closest example though, every human agent is designed to follow the same procedures, but it's not much of a social environment, they are completely controlled.


What has the author Mark C Suchman written?

Mark C. Suchman has written: 'On the role of law firms in the structuration of Silicon Valley' -- subject(s): Practice of law, Organizational behavior


Who were John clay and John calhoun known as?

They were War Hawks, or advocators of war against Britain; people who encouraged the War of 1812. Also it's actually Henry Clay and John Calhoun.


What has the author Christopher Bryant written?

Christopher Bryant has written: 'Stafford Cripps' -- subject(s): Politics and government 'Giddens' Theory of Structuration' 'The biology of respiration' -- subject(s): Tissue respiration, Respiration 'The River Within'


What words with at least 13 letters can be made from cricket without boundaries?

13antiscorbutic, architectures, backcountries,checkerboards, contradictors, contrarieties,cordwaineries, correctitudes, counterstated,counterstrike, counterstroke, counterthreat,counterthrust, countertrades, creaturehoods,deconstructor, decortication, decorticators,deterioration, interdistrict, orchestration,reattribution, reconstituted, reconstructed,recreationist, rectitudinous, redecorations,retrodictions, rubicundities, structuration,subcontracted, subcontractor, taciturnities,theoreticians, thunderstrike, thunderstroke,thunderstruck, tubocurarines14authenticities, contradictious, counterthreats,decortications, deteriorations, osteoarthritic,reattributions, redistribution, reductionistic,trisoctahedron15contradictories, technostructure


Are there hydrogen bonds between molecules in steam?

Water is a polar substance. In liquid water, this gives rise to hydrogen bonds between molecules, making it structurally more compact. However when water is heated up to steam, those hydrogen bonds break up and the molecules cannot be maintained globally as aggregates. The forces in play in steam are of collisional type and the polarity of the molecules does result in short-range attractive forces yielding negative second virial coefficients but in no way the molecules arrange themselves to conform to a hydrogen-bonded structure. The probability of simultaneous collision between several molecules though rare in steam may become important at high pressures below the critical point, but should not be confused with the structuration between neighbouring molecules in liquid water where hydrogen bonding takes place due to the closeness between water molecules. What is sure is that there is no hydrogen bonds above the critical point of steam. In steam hydrogen bonding is just not taking place for the molecules are too distant from each other. Collisional binary encounter does not generate hydrogen bonding!!!


What do the colors on the African liberation flag represent?

From the CIA World Factbook- "green symbolizes agriculture and forests, yellow the friendship and nobility of the people, red is unexplained but has been associated with the struggle for independence."


What were Napoleon's biggest political mistakes?

Napoleon made quite a few bad blunders. First of all, he executed the Duke of Enghien on charges of aiding Britain. This shocked the European royals, including Russian Tsar Alexander I, who vowed to destroy Napoleon. His attempted blockade against Britain was completely unenforceable and failed. Finally, he made the mistake of attacking Russia, which resulted in devastating human losses, and eventually his defeat.


What do nonbelievers of human activity causing global warming do to prove their point?

There is evidence that the earth may be cooling over the last few years. As for your question, they are doing research to disprove global warming, but the burden of proof should be on the advocators of global warming, not on the detractors.Answer:Yes, there is evidence that the earth has cooled slightly in the last few years, but even a cursory glance at the global average temperature graph between 1880 and 2006 shows how insignificant it is. The general rise, in the last 50 years especially, is undeniable. Anyway, that's off- topic. The question is about what is causing it. Here are some of the arguments put forward by sceptics of human-induced global warming:The Medieval Warm Period was warmer than today, therefore the recent warming is a natural process. This is untrue. Ice cores, sediment and tree ring studies have shown that the Northern hemisphere temperatures were unusually warm for about 300 years, but still cooler than today. Furthermore it was confined to the northern hemisphere. It is believed to have been caused by an orbital anomally.Global temperatures actually decreased between 1940 and 1980, and this period saw a huge increase in industrial output, so today's emmissions can't be the cause of the recent rise in temperature. Well, they did decrease, but very slightly. It was also brief, and probably caused by the cooling effect of aerosol and particulate pollution, which was greatly reduced in the 1970s. Other natural factors may also have been involved, including volcanic activity,and the El Nino cycle.In the past, according to ice core records, increased carbon dioxide has followed risingtemperatures, by a lag of 800 years, so therefore todays CO2 increase can't be the cause of the increasing temperatures. This statement ignores the feedback relationship between CO2 and temperature. The warming events the ice cores show had causes other than CO2. The increased temperatures caused the release of CO2 from the oceans, from more fires, and permofrost melting, and this caused more warming. The same is occurring now, but increased CO2 is the trigger.Volcanoes produce more CO2 than man does. That is hardly worth discussing, because it's a well known fact that volcanoes produce less than 2% of the amount produced by man.The increased temperatures are the result of solar activity. The sun's output has increased by about 0.2% since pre-industrial times and the increase in the twentieth century is almost insignificant.As you can see, their arguments don't stand up to even the most basic scientific scutiny. Burdon of proof? How much proof do you need? There are mountains of evidence that we are causing this, and those who deny it are very rarely qualified climate scientists and usually on the payroll of big oil. They always claim that there is a great deal of disagreement among climate scientists about whether global warming is human induced. That may have been true 30 years ago, but today, the 400 climate scientists of the IPCC are almost totally unanimous about the cause, their opinions differing only on the finer details.