Analysis of Kenneth Burke's Occupational Psychosis

"When I walk into a room, I have a feeling that I'm entering an ongoing conversation, one that started before I came that will continue when I leave. I want to enter the conversation but constantly ask myself, where do I fit in? Kenneth Burke believed that all human beings are constantly trying to orient themselves to a situation that is already in progress. We tune in and try to react, hoping to mesh with the already set pattern, but are unsure how do so. Because of this lack of confidence, once we find situation that we feel comfortable with, we stay with it, even if over time it can prove to be harmful. This theory is of orientation is called trained incapacity. Walter Lippmann held a similar belief that we are watching life and trying to respond to what was previously laid out for us. His theory was formed through our use of stereotypes. He believed that we use the stereotypes others have created for a particular situation we are approaching to shield us from the unwanted aspects of that situation. We adjust to the stereotypes and begin to only see the situation one way allowing reality to pass us by. Is it possible that these two theories are interrelated?

Kenneth Burke believed that people adjust to situations in life in an attempt to adapt to an ongoing society. From this, he created a theory called orientation, which stated, "all living things are critics" (Burke, 1954, 5). This theory states that all things (people, animals, etc.) size up situations, and then react to them, later discussing them in an attempt to figure out what happened. (Explain more about Orientation).

From this theory of orientation, he applied Veblen's concept of trained incapacity, which further exemplifies orientation. Trained incapacity is defined as "that state of affairs whereby one's very ability can function as blindness" (Burke, 1954, 7). He gave an example of this by using chickens who equate the sound of a bell to mean it is time to eat dinner. The chickens orient themselves to believe the bell means dinnertime and come each time they hear the bell, even if one day the bell is used to call them to be punished. Their comfort lied in the belief that this bell symbolized their dinner and nothing else. While a chicken's ability to reason is not the same as a person's, Burke created the argument from Veblen's theory that human beings use similar symbols to adapt to situations in life. More importantly, he argued that we train ourselves to adjust to these symbols to avoid or escape a situation, never questioning if the routine created through our training is inappropriate.

Burke felt that Veblen's use of the term was restricted to people trying to orient themselves only for the means of escape or avoidance of a situation. He believed that the term was broader and could be used to include more areas of life. "The concept of trained incapacity has the great advantage of avoiding the contemporary tendency to discuss matters of orientation by reference to 'avoidance' and 'escape' (8). To broaden Veblen's idea of trained incapacity, Burke introduced "training, means selecting, and escape," which not only suggested that people orient themselves to situations for the means of escape, but they also create theories to be able to see situations in any other way but the way it is actually occurring. He felt that some of the people who train themselves to adjust to situations as a means of escaping an undesired situation often create "a faulty selection of means due to a faulty theory of causal relationships" (Burke, 1954, 9). This means that people create a desired situation in their minds in an attempt to achieve results that will never occur.

Burke believed that being trained to function a certain way for escape or avoidance can incapacitate an individual because the adjustment is so profound that even if the situation became unsatisfactory, the person would not recognize it as unsatisfactory. He felt that people fall into this trap because "their past training has caused them to misjudge their present situation" (Burke, 1954, 10). Burke believed that orientation and trained incapacity function through the desire to fit in and adjust to what others are doing, to move in a world that was already moving when you arrived. It can be interpreted then that these people have been imprisoned by their own conventions. Walter Lippmann held a similar theory based on the stereotypes people use to define their environment.

"In the great blooming, buzzing confusion of the outer world we pick out what our culture has already defined for us, and we tend to perceive that which we have picked out in the form stereotyped for us by our culture" (Lippmann, 1922, 55). Lippmann believed that our world functions and sets standards for us before we are born, and when we do arrive, we are opt to make opinions on it. We simply see what others have defined for us and until a situation is defined, one thing that we see is no different than any other thing we see. An example of this idea is given by John Dewey:

"...Only gross differences of size or color are perceived by an outsider in a flock of sheep, each of which is perfectly individualized to the shepherd ... The problem of acquisition of meaning by things, or (stated in another way) or forming habits of simple apprehension, is thus the problem of introducing (a) definiteness and distinction and (2) consistency or stability of meaning into what is otherwise vague and wavering" (as cited by Lippmann, 1922, 54).

Much like Burke, Lippmann believed that society plays a major role in the way we function as human beings. Our desire to learn and understand the world is dependent upon others giving us that understanding. Similarities in Burke's and Lippmann's theories lie in this connection between human behavior and interaction with other human beings. Burke was trying to explain how people set themselves to a routine to orient to their situations in life. Lippmann discussed how people give and receive opinions about the world and create stereotypes before entering the situation to create a cushion or a sort of protection against unwanted aspects of the situation upon entering. This is a way to escape or avoid an unwanted situation. "For these blind spots keep away distracting images, which with their attendant emotions, might cause hesitation and infirmity of purpose" (Lippmann, 1922, 75). Their connection of blindness and wanting to shield unwanted situations, creates a commonality which can now be applied to a theory created by Dewey called occupational psychosis.

Occupational psychosis is a specific example of orientation that Burke gives to try to further explain his theory. A simple way to explain occupational psychosis would be to say that a person psychologically buys into what a company believes in order to function on a job. But the definition is not limited to working at a company. It can also be expanded to include the state of mind necessary to function in any situation. To further explain, the term can be broken apart. Occupation, while definitely allowed to mean a nine to five job, is also meant as an acceptance of ownership or responsibility of a situation. And psychosis was not necessarily intended to mean a psychotic state of mind, but was used as a metaphor to explain how people marry a particular state of mind, accepting it as a reality. An example Burke gives of occupational psychosis is when a person's interest lies within a particular situation because of what they choose to "employ" at that particular time in life. "A philosopher, if he has a toothache, is more likely to be interested in dentistry than in mathematical symbolism" (Burke, 1954, 37). The point Burke made with that passage is that though at one point the philosopher may have accepted mathematical symbolism as a part of his occupation, at this moment, dentistry affects his life more than anything else, so he has accepted it as his psychological occupation.

Burke believed that occupational psychosis is a form of orientation because the person adapts to a situation by changing the state of mind to reflect the situation. Thus the person is reacting to a situation that is already in process and is simply trying to fit in and adjust. This theory applies if it is an actual occupation, for it would be necessary to buy into the ideas of a job to function in it everyday. In his book he talks about occupational psychosis as a trained incapacity. In his example he applied Veblen's theory to Dewey's to come to an understanding of how people get stuck into employing a particular state of mind, making them incapable of change. He did however say that the two theories are somewhat unclear.

From what we know about occupational psychosis, as given to us by Burke, I would like to apply Dewey's theory to a modern day situation to see if Lippmann's theory of stereotypes applies to occupational psychosis. Because Burke has already included trained incapacity as a function of occupational psychosis, only comparing the stereotypes to occupational psychosis is necessary to show if the two theories are interrelated as they appear to be in their definitions.

References

Lippmann, W. 1922. Public opinion. New York City: Free Press Paperbacks.

Burke, K. 1954. Permanence and change: An anatomy of purpose. Los Altos, CA: Hermes Publications.