Reconceptualizing the Self Phenomenon: Toward an Emic Conception of the Self

In sociology, the self has been conceptualized as either self‐concept or the process of self‐reflectivity. Both notions of the self have been traced to the early thinkers—William James, Charles H. Cooley, and George H. Mead—who laid the foundation for the scientific study of the self phenomenon. In this article, I propose a revised conception of the self based on a re‐reading of the classics. I argue that the self is related to but not the same as self‐concept or the process of self‐reflectivity. The self is an emic object, that is, the entity that one takes oneself to be. More specifically, the self is the empirical existence of an individual perceived by the individual to be his or her own. As the identity the individual finds in his or her existence in a world shared with others, the self is a product of both self‐reflection and self‐enactment. Implications of this reconceptualization for some broad issues related to the self phenomenon are also discussed.     

Charles Horton Cooley,Pragmatist or Belletrist? The Complexity of Influence and the Decentering of Intellectual Traditions

This essay treats recent attempts to identify symbolic interaction (SI) founding theorist Charles Horton Cooley as a pragmatist sociologist exemplifying, and even influenced by, the pragmatism of Charles Saunders Peirce, as an example of the American exceptionalist character of SI. Beginning with Cooley's creative approach to conceptualizing the social, these attempts are scrutinized and measured against the contention that Cooley's thought can be equally if not more understood as a product of influence of the literary essay tradition. A close reading is given of the concordance of his personal journal with a selection of his published writings concerning the influence of members of Cooley's essayistic “genre matrix” – Emerson, Montaigne, and Walter Pater – on the development of his intellectual self and thought. Further substantiation is supplied by an analysis of the essayistic influence on Cooley's rigorous treatment of qualitative methodology. It is concluded that a decentered positioning of Cooley's work is preferable to a single‐origin one.     

Parts and Wholes: Goffman and Cooley

This essay begins with an outline of the part‐whole method, a way of relating particular instances to general concepts or propositions. This method is illustrated by seven propositions extracted from Cooley’s work that seem to be illustrated by concrete examples from Goffman’s writing. This method weds qualitative study with theory in a preliminary way, and ultimately, qualitative and quantitative methods. Since Goffman’s examples breathe life into our enterprise, it may be fruitful to use every one of them, connecting them not only with Cooley’s theses, but generating others as well.