Two Different Aspects of Social Order

Abstract

We can draw distinction between the two different aspects of social order, ‹rule› on the one hand, ‹regularity› on the other. ‹Rule› is an order of which the participants of a society are aware. With relation to ‹rule› each bodily movement of the participants is understood as intentional “action”, since they are able to choose whether to obey or disobey to this ‹rule›. Compared to this, ‹regularity› is another form of order. It is utterly unknown by the participants themselves, but can be known by the strangers to this society as nothing else than what is indicated by the existence of factual bodily movements of the participants. These bodily movements are not usually understood as intentional or chosen “actions.” In the case of ‹regularity›, there exists no difference between social order itself and the whole of individual bodily movements. Accordingly, for we as participants to recognize this ‹regularity›, we have to differentiate it from our own bodily movements, and establish ‹rule› purposefully. This paper examines the socio-logical process of transformation of habitual ‹regularity› to coercive ‹rule› by making the concept of “action” as catalyst.