Some of the affirmations -that we will leave now only as ideas, and this will save us the tedium of developing(*).
1) social life, The interactions, are composed of meanings. There is No such thing as the interaction is not significant. That is the basis of all the qualitative techniques: finding the meaning.
2) Now, the significant part of the social life is, finally, clear to the actors. They may not have clarity or be well versed to explain the topic, but yes, they know the social meanings of the practices. Ultimately, if the actors believe that the meanings of their practices are X, is that they are X. If you don’t know, might not be the meanings of those practices.
3) The practices of the other, and their meanings are opaque, for one. But of the own practices.
4) But although the social life can be constituted significantly, is not composed only of meanings. The network of the actions and their consequences can be full of cultural significations, but its effects are not reducible to the culture.
5) This fabric can be transparent -well-known – or can be opaque. But there is no need to be known by the actors.
In other words, subjects know, to put it another way, the meanings of the work, to know the practices and customs that are supposed to do when looking for work. Now, what are the real possibilities of finding work, the effectiveness of the various strategies, the situation of the context in this regard is something that may or may not know each other.
And that’s what I hang to say that the qualitative serves to study the meaning, and that the quantity comes out perfect to measure the network of actions and consequences. Which means, then, that it makes no sense to measure networks qualitatively and that there is no sense to measure meanings quantitatively. So, following one of my prejudices preferred, say not to study sociology of attitudes.
(*) How to note at times that one writes the post near the 24:00, between various jobs, and more as placeholders than anything else. In order to.