ABSTRACT
Social constructionists argue that our social world, unlike our physical world is not a pre-given but is actively created. In effect this argument is part of a wider philosophical debate in psychology and the social sciences about whether a positivist version of science can legitimately be applied to the study of human experience and action. Similarly, constructivism had argued that meaning is central and that a psychology that focused predominantly on behaviour was fundamentally limited. However, further to constructivism, social constructionism gives priority to language and argues that language contains the “building blocks”, the materials from which we construct our experiences (Foucault, 1975). Like systemic theory, social constructionism also sees interaction and communication as central. Through the processes of conversation, meanings are mutually shaped. Rather than being seen as essentially located within individuals, meanings are seen to be co-constructed, so that with each conversation new meanings, interpretations, and nuances are developed. Importantly, it is suggested that even in our private moments our thinking features 110internalized conversations with ourselves and with others. I may rehearse conversations that I wish to have with people, or attempt to edit conversations that I have had to get my point across better, and so on.
