[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-detail-33064":3,"doc-seo-33064":27},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",{"doc_id":7,"user_id":8,"nickname":9,"user_avatar":10,"doc_module":4,"category_id":11,"category_name":12,"doc_title":13,"doc_description":14,"file_id":15,"file_url":16,"file_type":17,"file_size":18,"view_count":4,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":19,"is_downloadable":19,"audit_status":19,"page_count":20,"language":21,"language_code":22,"table_of_contents":23,"faqs":24,"seo_title":13,"seo_description":14,"update_tm":25,"read_time":26},33064,1649267921044,"Ava Thompson","https://us-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/1800007509477c92dfb?_k=1779183583414876462",8,"Research & Report","Anthropology and Social Theory Culture, Power, and the Acting Subject","Anthropology and Social Theory: Culture, Power, and the Acting Subject presents theoretical work on how social life is shaped by culture, structural forces, and power while still accounting for human agency. The text situates practice theory in relation to interpretive/symbolic anthropology, Marxist political economy, and French structuralism, highlighting shared concerns with constraint. It argues that constraint-only approaches become inadequate without attention to how constraints are produced and reproduced through everyday social practices, and it frames practice theory as a way to overcome the structure–agency opposition.","cbCailwcw6VQ3Zo1","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCailwcw6VQ3Zo1","pdf",1536824,1,193,"English","en","# Introduction\n# Chapter One: Updating Practice Theory\n## Theoretical paradigms in the late 1970s and early 1980s\n## Constraint, structure, and the agency problem\n## Interactionism and its limits\n## Practice theory as an alternative framework","[{\"question\":\"What three major paradigms does the text describe as dominating the theoretical landscape in the late 1970s?\",\"answer\":\"The text describes interpretive (symbolic) anthropology, Marxist political economy, and some form of French structuralism (later displaced by poststructuralisms).\"},{\"question\":\"Why does the author argue that a purely constraint-based theory becomes problematic?\",\"answer\":\"Because human agency is neglected and insufficient attention is given to the processes that produce and reproduce constraints through social practices.\"},{\"question\":\"How does practice theory address the structure/agency opposition discussed in the text?\",\"answer\":\"Practice theory is presented as a response that overcomes the opposition by connecting actors’ practices on the ground with larger structures and systems.\"}]",1782202088,486,{"code":4,"msg":28,"data":29},"ok",{"site_id":30,"language":22,"slug":31,"title":13,"keywords":32,"description":14,"schema_data":33,"social_meta":84,"head_meta":86,"extra_data":88,"updated_unix":25},105,"anthropology-and-social-theory-culture-power-and-the-acting-subject","",{"@graph":34,"@context":83},[35,52,66],{"@type":36,"itemListElement":37},"BreadcrumbList",[38,42,46,49],{"item":39,"name":40,"@type":41,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":43,"name":44,"@type":41,"position":45},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":47,"name":12,"@type":41,"position":48},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":50,"name":13,"@type":41,"position":51},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/anthropology-and-social-theory-culture-power-and-the-acting-subject/33064/",4,{"url":50,"name":13,"@type":53,"author":54,"headline":13,"publisher":56,"fileFormat":59,"description":14,"dateModified":60,"datePublished":60,"encodingFormat":59,"isAccessibleForFree":61,"interactionStatistic":62},"DigitalDocument",{"name":9,"@type":55},"Person",{"url":39,"name":57,"@type":58},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-06-23",true,{"@type":63,"interactionType":64,"userInteractionCount":4},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":65},"ViewAction",{"@type":67,"mainEntity":68},"FAQPage",[69,75,79],{"name":70,"@type":71,"acceptedAnswer":72},"What three major paradigms does the text describe as dominating the theoretical landscape in the late 1970s?","Question",{"text":73,"@type":74},"The text describes interpretive (symbolic) anthropology, Marxist political economy, and some form of French structuralism (later displaced by poststructuralisms).","Answer",{"name":76,"@type":71,"acceptedAnswer":77},"Why does the author argue that a purely constraint-based theory becomes problematic?",{"text":78,"@type":74},"Because human agency is neglected and insufficient attention is given to the processes that produce and reproduce constraints through social practices.",{"name":80,"@type":71,"acceptedAnswer":81},"How does practice theory address the structure/agency opposition discussed in the text?",{"text":82,"@type":74},"Practice theory is presented as a response that overcomes the opposition by connecting actors’ practices on the ground with larger structures and systems.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":50,"og:type":85,"og:title":13,"og:site_name":57,"og:description":14},"article",{"robots":87,"canonical":50},"index,follow",{"doc_id":7,"site_id":30}]