THE ROMANTIC ANTECEDENTS OF MEADIAN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY*

Mead's life-long interest in Romanticism is the least studied aspect of his work. As summarized in Movements of Thought in the Nineteenth Century, Meadian explorations in romantic philosophy and sociology provide a valuable insight into his substantive contributions. The present paper seeks to amplify this insight and explores its relevance to the interactionist tradition in sociology. Special attention is given to the Meadian claim that the modern notion of self first appears in the romantic literature. Mead's emphasis on the interplay between the social structure and the structure of the self is linked to the romantic vision of the self as the microcosm of the social macrocosm. The current controversy over Mead and Chicago sociology is given a new interpretation in light of the dialectical premises inherent in the Meadian and romantic theories of self.     

MEAD AND THE ART OF TRASH TALKING: I GOT YOUR GESTURE RIGHT HERE

ABSTRACT

Trash talking has rarely been studied within sociology at a time when the behavior itself has been flourishing in amateur and professional sports. George Herbert Mead's ideas on gestures, symbols, and language, in conjunction with the overarching transcendency of the community aid in understanding the development of self and the subsequent behaviors that emanate from and within trash talking in college athletics. Here a Meadian perspective is used to explain the act of trash talking at both macro- and micro-levels. Three areas were identified where Meadian philosophy applies: (1) the game and the role of the generalized other; (2) play and significant communication; and (3) self-development.     

The Hobbesian Microcosm: On the Dialectics of the Self in Social Theory*

If Parsons is not guilty of holding an over-socialized conception of man, Wrong's critique does apply to the work of the “reality-constructionists” and “symbolic interactionists.” In underemphasizing Mead's “biologic individual” or “I,” contemporary sociological social psychology manages to evade the Hobbesian problem and, hence, amounts to a largely disembodied dialectic. By way of contrast, the compatibility of the Meadian and Freudian perspectives is stressed and the need for further development of a psychoanalytic sociology reaffirmed.     

THEORY AND METHOD IN STATUS ATTAINMENT RESEARCH*

This paper analyzes a contradiction between theory and method in status attainment research. The authors argue that the Meadian social psychology adopted by the status attainment researchers is incompatible with causal modeling which they use as their principal analytic tool, because Mead's ideas are inconsistent with any method which assumes unidirectional causality. A symbolic interactionist interpretation of the process of status attainment is offered in place of the causal interpretation. The symbolic interactionist interpretation removes the contradiction between theory and method and is, in addition, shown to be compatible with current sociological knowledge of the process of education. Finally, it is argued that the symbolic interactionist interpretation is also compatible with American political language, while the causal interpretation is not, and that therefore the adoption of the symbolic interactionist interpretation would permit the findings of status attainment research to speak to the question of the degree of equality of opportunity in American society as that question is asked in American politics.     

Social Behaviorism on Emotions: Mead and Modern Behaviorism Compared*

This paper presents George Herbert Mead's work on emotions from the perspective of social behaviorism and compares it with the modem behavioral analysis of emotions. The two positions are strikingly similar. The main difference between modern behaviorism and Mead's social behaviorism is that contemporary behaviorists have access to a larger empirical data base and more refined theoretical models than Mead had. The modern behavioral analysis of emotions confirms most of Mead's basic observations and expands upon them. Empirically oriented symbolic interactionists who identify with Mead's social behaviorism can benefit by drawing upon the extensive behavioral research and theories developed in the decades since Mead worked. In fact, there is an enormous potential for developing productive research and theory at the interface between Mead's social behaviorism and modem behaviorism in the study of emotions and most other social psychological topics.     

George Herbert Mead and the “Division Of Labor”: Macrosociological Implications Of Mead'S Social Psychology*

By presenting some results of an extensive reconstruction of George Herbert Mead's work published as yet only in German it is argued that Mead's work as a whole and particularly his social psychology contain an implicit conception of social order. This can be characterized as the idea that it is not normative integration as such, but communicative coordination that makes possible human society and social order. This is shown by findings on the early development of Mead's ideas (Hegelianism, Definition of the Psychical), on German influences in Mead, and on the meaning of democracy as self-government in Mead's political biography. Some hints to a comparison of Mead with other concepts of social order (Durkheim; negotiated order approach) are given.     

Habermas,Mead, and Rationality

This paper takes the position that symbolic interaction can become more relevant to the social issues of modernity and postmodernity by overcoming its traditional tendencies to be apolitical and to focus predominantly on micro aspects of social relations. It considers a serious reading of Habermas' Theory of Communicative Action as a contribution to this effort. Specifically it sees Habermas' reconstruction of the conception of the individual actor involved in communicating through significant symbols into one consistent with speech act theory and the concepts of speaker and listener as constructive and helpful. The paper also examines Mead's behav-ioristic theory of attitudes, types of attitudes and taking the attitude of the other(s), and relates it to his logical formulation of rational universals. It suggests that Mead's optimistic image of society and his position on rationality are no longer appropriate for discussing social issues in a global society with multiple rationalities. It sees possibilities for reformulation in Habermas' theory because, like Mead's theory, it construes rationality in communicative terms.     

Sociological Perspectives in Bernstein's Sociolinguistics*

An interpretation of selected portions of Bernstein's sociolinguistics is presented. The interpretation suggests that linguistic performance intervenes between social structure and self-concept. The theory is specified through a research application. The specification holds that two views of social structure are implicit within the theory: one micro-cosmic and the other macrocosmic. For Bernstein these views are linked to Mead and Durkheim, respectively. However, the present analysis attempts to show that both are properly understood as Meadian. Linguistic performance is related to self-derogation within a strict Meadian interpretation. The contribution of the theory seems to lie in a specification of a Meadian view of self relative to selected aspects of language.     

Surface Tension: Boundary Negotiations around Self,Society, and Nature in a Community Debate over Wildlife

This study draws on extensions of a Meadian framework to explore the possibility of nature as a “generalized other” that is experienced through a dialogical eco‐self. The author revisits Mead's work, tracing an emerging literature on the eco‐self, and investigates constructions of human–nature boundaries using interviews from a community reacting to the human destruction of a cattle egret nesting colony. She introduces the concept of “surface tension” to capture the fluid, negotiated, and often contradictory quality of narratives about nature and the self. The findings highlight the eco‐self as an emergent and ongoing accomplishment that is not reducible to any one formulation.     

G. H. MEAD'S SOCIAL BEHAVIORISM VS. THE ASTRUCTURAL BIAS OF SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISM*

Symbolic inleractionism has been criticized for having an astructural bias. This paper presents a response to that criticism by examining the ontological stance contained in Mead's social behaviorism and contrasting it with the ontological stance of symbolic interactionism's chief architect, Herbert Blumer. Mead's social behaviorism is shown to be a nondualist philosophy of conduct based solidly on conceptions of the human community and of individual conduct as organized on the basis of social acts–a view not shared by Blumer.     

Mead's Theory of Emergence as a Framework for Multilevel Sociological Inquiry

This article explores Mead's theory of emergence. The essence of this theory is conditional interactionism. In this perspective, every social fact is an emergent arising out of preconditioned interaction between the acting unit and the social and nonsocial environment. Its nature is shaped by (1) the patterns, processes, and contents of the interaction, including their mediation by such factors as perception/meaning, reflective thinking, role‐taking‐based rationality, emotion, nonsymbolic power in use, and reality testing; and (2) the preexisting conditions of both the acting unit and the environment that underlie this interaction. I argue that Mead's conditional interactionism can be used as a powerful guide for sociological inquiry at all levels of research and that it has the potential to function as a metatheoretical approach to compete with both the objectivist/structuralist and the subjectivist/phenomenological traditions. Mead's theory of emergence is probably the greatest treasure we can unearth from his semineglected legacy.     

The Emergence of the Emotional Self: A Developmental Theory

G.H. Mead (1934) offers a set of stages of development which describes how infants transform into mindful and self-reflexive social beings through social interaction. He does not, however, provide any parallel set of stages in the development of emotionality. This paper attempts to extend Mead's model by specifying seven stages in emotional development which are interdependent with Mead's stages of development of mind and self. These stages specify how individuals learn to share emotions with others, and learn to identify and interpret their own and others' emotional selves. Fundamental to this analysis is that self development and emotional development are inextricably linked. A framework is offered for the analysis of emotions that (1) recognizes emotions as processual; (2) notes the hierarchial relations among emotions; and (3) presumes that cognition and emotion are not mutually exclusive. The framework illustrates its utility by answering the question, “How does an infant transform from a being who experiences sensations into a being who experiences emotions?”     

Caregiver-Child Interaction in the Development of Self: The Contributions of Vygotsky,Bruner, and Kaye to Mead's Theory

A way of updating Mead's half-century old formulations is suggested. It entails regarding Mead's formulations as one of a class of interactionist theories of the genesis of self. Such theories regard the internalization of symbols and social relations as the basis of self development and stress the role of the interaction between caregiver and child. Sensitizing concepts developed by other theorists, namely, zone of proximal development (Vygotsky), scaffolding (Bruner), and the child-as-apprentice (Kaye), are reviewed as heuristic devices which specify the nature of the interaction between caregiver and child which facilitates the latter's self development.     

George Herbert Mead on Intelligent Social Reconstruction*

Many thinkers have discussed the possibility of intelligent social reconstruction; but few have examined the nature of such reconstruction as closely as did George Herbert Mead. This paper explores Mead's analysis through his understanding of human nature and intelligence, his discussion of value conflicts and the possibility of their resolution by means of the community, and his recognition of the need for popular commitment as a necessary condition for any wide-spread success. While pointing to certain problems with his position, this paper concludes that there is a basic soundness to Mead's approach.     

Extending the Symbolic Interactionist Theory of Interaction Processes: A Conceptual Outline

This article outlines the elements of a more robust symbolic interactionist theory of interpersonal processes. I argue that George Herbert Mead's conceptualization of interaction processes can be extended to explain not only micro‐level social processes but also key elements of meso‐ and macro‐level dynamics. By expanding Mead's and more recent symbolic interactionist theorizing, and incorporating key ideas from other theoretical traditions outside symbolic interactionism proper, it becomes possible to develop a theory of interaction that fills in important conceptual gaps in theories on the dynamics of micro‐, meso‐, and macro‐level social phenomena.     

Evil as Indexical: The Implicit Objective Status of Guns and Illegal Drugs

We use C.H. Mead's perspective on the meaning of social objects and his theory of the past and Harold Garfinkel's application of indexicality to describe how people respond to social objects as evil. Mead's notion of an implied objective past illuminates how social actors not only connect objects to past evils but also invoke an objective past to index evil in the future. Focusing on guns and illegal drugs, we maintain that responses to each draw on conceptions of the past in ways that attempt to make their connection to evil in the past and future justifiable. Such responses create meaningful categories that actors then use to anticipate future responses to objects. We note that while people appear to be comfortable using pasts and indexical expressions to define Schedule I drugs as evil in themselves, the attempt to make guns into evil objects has met with strong resistance and requires elaborate contextualization.     

The Person Behind The Word: Mead's Theory Of Universals And A Shift Of Focus In Symbolic Interactionism

Careful consideration of Mead's theory of universals proves to be a corrective to a number of tendencies evident in the work of at least some influential contemporary symbolic interactionists. Mead avoids any realistic hypostatization of separate universals (“meanings,” “forms,” or “essences” while at the same time eschewing nominalistic and conventionalistic views of language. His principle of the objective reality of perspectives (1932:161-175) allows him to grant objective reality to universal characteristics of concrete objects, but entails neither hypostatization nor idealization of the universal. In addition to contravening nominalism and conventionalism, Mead's theory of universals provides a perspective from which the reality of the self, and the importance of intentional action for the development of a firmly felt sense of self and autonomy, can both be affirmed. Far from being an illusion or mer.e symbolic construct, the self is seen to be an objectively real universal within the perspective of social action.     

THE SOCIAL REALITY OF PERSPECTIVES: ON G.H. MEAD'S POTENTIAL RELEVANCE FOR THE ANALYSIS OF CONTEMPORARY SOCIETIES

Mead's rarely explored notion of an “objective reality of perspectives” serves as a point of departure for a discussion of the implications of his work for general sociological theory and the analysis of contemporary societies. The epistemological background is explored to the point where sociology can be viewed as pragmatist mode of response to the inevitable relativity of knowledge. Mead's well known theory of identity formation plays an essential role in this context. The concept of perspective may serve as bridge for a generalization of the notion of identity in order to demonstrate the genuine sociological character of Mead's work. Illustrations are provided of the potential inherent in Mead's thought for research and to the study of contemporary societies. Finally sociology itself is conceived as a special kind of perspective, concerned with the inevitable perspectivity of human behavior.     

THE SOCIAL PRESERVATION OF MIND: THE ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE EXPERIENCE

Data from the Alzheimer's disease (senile dementia) experience are interpreted to extend and refine George Mead's theory of mind. While Mead conceived of mind as an internal conversation, the disease experience shows that the reality-status of mind is more practical and radically dialogical in organization. Taken as collectively preserved, mind is circumscribed through agents by means of rule-guided articulations and closures. Suggestions are offered for a more fully dialogical appreciation of Mead's view.