Verheggen and Baerveldt’s (2007) recent paper critiques the concept of ‘sharedness’ in Social Representations Theory (SRT). However, these arguments against sharedness are themselves founded upon an implicit argument against the role of ‘representation’ in SRT. This constitutes what I call the phenomenological critique of SRT. From a discussion of Heidegger’s phenomenology one can better understand Verheggen and Baerveldt’s argument. By concentrating on anchoring and objectification, the notion of ‘representation’ can be conceived as both a ‘conscious’ and a ‘non-conscious’ account of meaning. A Heideggerian phenomenological approach can unify the conscious and non-conscious elements of SRT into a common framework. Such phenomenological appreciation of SRT can contribute to a theory of meaning for cultural psychology.
Andersen, H.C. ( 1842). A poet’s bazaar. Available at: http://scandinavian.wisc.edu/schmidt/danish/hca/glossary/trains.htm
2.
Baerveldt, C., & Voestermans, P. (2005). Culture, emotion and the normative structure of reality. Theory & Psychology, 15(4), 449-473.
3.
Bauer, M., & Gaskell, G. ( 1999). Towards a paradigm for research on social representations . Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 29(2), 163-186.
4.
Ben-Zeev, A. ( 1987). A critique of the inferential paradigm in perception . Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 17(3), 243-263.
5.
Christopher, J.C., & Bickhard, M.H. (2007). Culture, self and identity: Interactivist contributions to a metatheory for cultural psychology. Culture & Psychology, 13(3), 259-295.
6.
Costall, A. ( 1995). Socializing affordances. Theory & Psychology, 5(4), 467-481.
7.
Costall, A. ( 2007). The windowless room: ‘Mediationism’ and how to get over it. In J. Valsiner & A. Rosa (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of sociocultural psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8.
Daanen, P. ( 2008). Repairing ruptured identities: Understanding the polarization of identity in English-speaking Montreal. Paper delivered at the Fifth International Conference on the Dialogical Self, Cambridge, 27 August.
9.
Dewey, J. ( 1922). Human nature and conduct. An introduction to social psychology . London: Allen and Unwin.
10.
Dewey, J. ( 1925). Experience and nature. Chicago, IL : Open Court.
11.
Dreyfus, H. ( 1991). Being-in-the-world: A commentary of Heidegger’s Being and Time, Division I. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12.
Gibson, J.J. ( 1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
13.
Hall, H. ( 1993). Intentionality and world: Division I of Being and Time . In C. Guignon (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Heidegger (pp. 122-140). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14.
Heidegger, M. ( 1996). Being and time. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
15.
Herzlich, C. ( 1973). Health and illness. London: Academic Press.
16.
Howarth, C. ( 2002). Identity in whose eyes? The role of representations in identity construction. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior , 32(2), 145-162.
17.
Jodelet, D. ( 1991). Madness and social representations. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
18.
Lakoff, M., & Johnson, M. ( 1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.
19.
Markova, I. ( 1996). Towards an epistemology of social representations. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 26(2), 177-196.
20.
Markova, I., & Wilkie, P. ( 1987). Representations, concepts and social change: The phenomenon of AIDS. Journal of the Theory of Social Behavior, 17, 389-409.
21.
Moscovici, S. ( 1976). La psychanalyse, son image et son public (2nd ed.). Paris: PUF .
22.
Moscovici, S. ( 1984). The phenomenon of social representations. In R.M. Farr & S. Moscovici (Eds.), Social representations (pp. 3-69). Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
23.
Moscovici, S. ( 2000). Social representations: Explorations in social psychology . New York: NYU Press.
24.
Philogène, G. ( 2001). From race to culture: The emergence of African American . In K. Deaux & G. Philogène (Eds.), Representations of the social: Bridging theoretical traditions (pp. 39-41). Oxford : Blackwell.
25.
Potter, J., & Billig, M. ( 1992). Re-representing representations: Discussion of Räty and Snellman. Papers on Social Representations, 1, 15-20.
26.
Potter, J., & Edwards, D. ( 1999). Social representations and discursive psychology: From cognition to action. Culture & Psychology, 5, 447-458.
27.
Ryle, G. ( 1949). The concept of mind. London: Penguin.
28.
Uexküll, J. von. ( 1982). The theory of meaning. Semiotica, 42(1), 25-82.
29.
Varela, F., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. ( 1991). The embodied mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
30.
Verheggen, T., & Baerveldt, C. ( 2007). We don’t share! The social representation approach, enactivism and the ground for an intrinsically social psychology. Culture & Psychology, 13(1), 5-27.
31.
Voelklein, C. & Howarth, C. ( 2005). A review of controversies about social representations theory: ABritish debate. Culture & Psychology, 11(4), 431-454.
32.
Wagner, W. ( 1996). Queries about social representation and construction . Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 26(2), 95-120.
33.
Wagner, W., & Kronberger, N. (2001). Killer tomatoes! Collective symbolic coping with biotechnology. In. K. Deaux & G. Philogène (Eds.), Representations of the social: Bridging theoretical traditions (pp. 147-164). Oxford: Blackwell.
