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.     

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.     

George Herbert Mead and Karl Marx: Exploring Consciousness and Community*

Current discussions within symbolic interaction point to a concern with (a) returning to Mead's original insights, (b) extending Meadian thought beyond the micro realm, and (c) linking Mead's ideas to constructive social action. These concerns complement an effort within contemporary Marxist literature to provide a systematic social psychology for understanding new forms of domination in capitalist society. In exploring the philosophical foundations of Mead and Marx, the authors identify fundamental similarities in their approaches to the relation between consciousness and community. The authors criticize the current attempts to synthesize Marx and Freud and call for a more thoroughly sociological approach. A Meadian reading of Marx, unlike the Marx-Freud synthesis, is consistent with sociological assumptions and points to the practical possibility of transformative social change through the interpersonal act.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Mead's Lost Conception of Society

The single best word to describe the impact of George Herbert Mead's ideas on the intellectual world is “ironic.” Although Mead was a philosopher, his ideas have been more influential in sociology than in philosophy. Despite Mead's belief that it is the job of sociologists to study society, it is his notion of the self rather than his notion of society that has received the most attention in this field. Mead himself is first and foremost responsible for this ironic state of affairs because his analysis of society is so obscure at points that it is hard for most sociologists to understand. However, Mead alone is not to blame. The two main expositors of his sociological thought since his death, Herbert Blumer and Hans Joas, added to the confusion by not making clear that Mead sees society as a “body of institutions.” To correct their distortions of Mead's notion of society, I provide an alternative exposition of that notion. I disclose how Mead addresses the three main problems that he believes must be resolved before society can be understood: (1) the operation of institutions in the daily lives of people; (2) the origination of early institutions, such as language, the family, the economy, religion, polity, and science; and (3) the change of these institutions after their inception.     

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.     

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.     

Mead's Solution to the Problem of Agency*

The question of agency is central to several important debates in contemporary sociology. Unfortunately, discussions of agency can become embroiled with issues related to free will and dterminism. George Herbert Mead developed an approach to agency that avoids unsolvable metaphysical problems about free will and determinism. This paper presents Mead's work relevant to agency, revealing both Mead's method and the details of his theory. First, it shows how Mead followed the basic methods of behavioristic psychology, which require that abstract philosophical and psychological concepts are defined in terms of the actual behaviors involved. A strict focus on behavior helps in avoiding metaphysical impasses when dealing with such complex issues as decision making and choice. Second, the paper presents an overview of Mead's specific theories about awareness, meaning, decision making, choice, creativity, and social responsibility, showing how he analyzed these concepts in terms of the central nervous system, language, inner conversation, taking the role of others, reflective intelligence, the “I” and the “me”, and related concepts.     

HERBERT BLUMER'S CONTRIBUTIONS TO TWENTIETH-CENTURY SOCIOLOGY

Herbert Blumer's work has had considerable impact on the growth of twentieth-century sociology. He kept alive an interest in George Mead at a time when Pragmatism floundered. Although it is unlikely that Mead's work would have been overlooked, there can be no question that Blumer's forceful advocacy helped bring it to the forefront of modern social thought. Park first organized the subfield of collective behavior, but it was Blumer who kept it going in the face of opposition from structural-functionalism. Whether or not collective behavior endures as a separate area of specialization, sociologists will have to concern themselves with the manner in which human beings adapt to problematic situations. Although his views on methodology have been controversial, some of his positions will probably prevail. His insistence on the direct observation of people in their indigenous settings and his contention that human agency must be taken into account in explanations of social processes are difficult to counter.     

George Herbert Mead's Theory of Self: A Study in the Origin and Convergence of Ideas*

Bien que la théorie du moi de George Herbert Mead soit considérée comme l'une des contributions les plus importantes au développement des sciences du comportement, la place de cette théorie dans le processus d'évolution des idées de Mead demeure peu connue. Par le biais d'une analyse des travaux de Mead, cet article conçoit cette théorie comme étant la convergence de ses intérêts en biologie, dans la réforme scolaire, en philosophic en psychologie, et en sociologie. On y discute également les conséquences de cette constatation sur les théories contemporaines du moi. While George Herbert Mead's theory of self is recognized as one of the leading contributions to the development of the behavioural sciences, the position of this theory relative to the maturation of Mead's own idea system is unexplored. Through an analysis of the works of Mead, this paper examines the theory as a convergence of his interests in biology, educational reform, philosophy, psychology, and sociology. Also discussed are the implications of this fact for contemporary theories of the self.     

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.     

The Social Psychology of Robert E. Park: Human Nature,Self, Personality and Social Structure

Robert E. Park is widely recognized today for his contributions to urban sociology, race relations and collective behavior but his social psychology has been largely neglected. Park's inclusive and loose framework covered his interest in: (1) human nature and the bio-physiological instincts which for him were raw materials of personality; (2) formulation of self concept as an organization of roles; and (3) micro-macro linkages between individual and social structure. Each one of Park's three themes is still important for symbolic interaction theory and offers insights into contemporary investigations of emotions, role acquisition and identity.     

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.     

Some Consequences of the Meadian Self*

Mead's conception of the self is analyzed as an internal interaction process, with the “I” viewed as taking perspectives rather than being simply a biologic response. Conceptualizing the self as an intrapersonal process of interaction from differentiated perspectives permits a better understanding of false fronting, autonomy, and creativity. Emergence theory allows us to take a Phenomenological view of the self. Several levels of consciousness in Mead's theory are analyzed, and connections with Berger and Luckmann's conceptions of objectivation and the symbolic universe are suggested.     

The Body in Mind: Mead's Embodied Cognition

This article highlights the role played by the body in the work of George Herbert Mead. For Mead, the social emergence of mind depends on human physiology. This is revealed through a detailed exploration of three thematic domains in his work: the organism–environment dyad, perception, and the manipulatory stage of the act. From this, I argue that Mead saw the body as constitutive of cognition and central to the development of mind and self. Present-day research supports this view and demonstrates Mead's relevance for understanding embodied cognition.     

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?”     

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.