This is good on how social order is made, but please go on to consider the issue of it being ‘remade’ and why it is necessary at all.
These differing views of social order point to the opposing ideas of the role of the individual within social order. Goffman, as already mentioned, sees the individual as central to social order. He thinks the individual is self-aware and actively participating in their role in society, while complying with the unspoken codes of behaviour people adjust their own behaviour to fit with each situation, and it is these interactions that establish social order. Foucault takes the opposite view saying that the individual is removed from the central stage and is not a coherent being that is self-aware and in control. Foucault sees the individual as ‘having little control over their destinies’ (Silva, 2009, p.321) He suggests that they think they are self-aware and actively participating, but in fact this is the illusion created by the discourse of individualism. Foucault asserts that individuals appear as passive, even docile, subjects who cooperate in their own subordination. (Silva, 2009, p. 322)
A further difference is the methods each used to study social order. Goffman used participant observation to gather his information. He participated in everyday situations, observing the social interactions to make sense of the invisible social order. He was not interested in social order from a historical viewpoint, instead