The Theory Of Self By George Herbert Mead Essay

This explains why things have different meanings according to the situations. Finally, as meaning emerges trough interactions, it is also maintained trough them. As we acquire ways to feel, behave and think through our interactions culture is socially constructed. This explains why for symbolic interactionists, there is no Society, no greater body that controls and determines social norms, we are the ones who trough our interactions, create them. Since our responses to symbols, signs, events and situation are public, we are free to redefine to a certain extent meanings and as new things and objects emerge, we come up with new meanings. It is when we do not use a meaning associated with a symbol, for abstract ideas such as beliefs of values, that they disappear or are modified. This is how symbolic interactionists explain the change in ‘’societies’’ mentalities over time. All of these choices and these interactions implicate a Self, a reflexive process that enables us to formulate, monitor, control and react to our own behaviour, which formation we’ll explain through Meade, Cooley and Goffman.

Self is one’s awareness of ideas and attitudes about one’s own personal and social identity. Identity is shaped at a young age from interpreting concepts about one’s own self from others (Mead, 1934). The present study will compare Freud’s psychoanalytic theory of personality the (id, ego, and, superego) to George Herbert Mead’s social self-theory the (“I” and “me”). The study will give an overview of both theorist and discuss each approach in relationship to each other, and defining the key concepts. According to Schultz and Schultz, (2008) the id is defined as the source of psychic energy and the aspect of personality allied with the instincts. The ego is defined as the rational aspect of personality responsible for

Although, many people like and dislike many of their physical appearances they have to cope with the fact that they can not change them and that their unique characteristics make them who they are. My favorite characteristic is my hair; I like my hair because it is long and curly. I can do a number of different styles with my hair such as straightening it, making it wavy or leaving it curly. I’ve never been bothered with my hair because my hair is unique and not many people have the type of curls that I do. Another one of my favorite characteristics is my eyes and eyelashes. I like my eyes because they have a nice shape; like an almond their not to big nor are they too small. My eyelashes are super long, I cut them in

Mead’s “theory of self” is based on the perspective that the self emerges from social interactions, such as observing and interacting with others, responding to others' opinions about oneself, and internalizing external opinions and internal feelings about oneself. The social aspect of self is an important distinction. That’s because other sociologists and psychologists of Mead's time felt that the self was based on biological factors and inherited traits. This was the normal and conventional type of mindset from psychologists at the time. According to Mead, the self is not there from birth, but instead it is developed over time from social experiences and activities.

George Herbert Mead and Erving Goffman are two theorists in the study of sociology that have impacted the way we see sociology today. Their works, when closely examined, actually share some extreme similarities. Both of these men seemed very interested in the perception of self in the eyes of others as well as yourself. “Mind, Self, and Society” is an article written by Mead which was placed in the book entitled “Social Theory: The Classic Tradition to Post-Modernism” which was edited by Farganis with the copyright of McGraw-Hill in 2004. This primarily deals with the development of one’s self, or their identity. “Presentation of Self in Everyday Life” is an article written by Goffman which was arranged to be in the book “Inner Lives and

Four principal scholars explored the symbolic interaction theory, George Herbert Mead, Charles Horton Cooley, William Isaac Thomas, and Herbert Blumer (Smith & Hamon, 2012). George Herbert Mead proposed that through interaction with others, we learn about ourselves—this is done through three stages; play stage, game stage, and generalized other (Smith & Hamon, 2012). He identifies the movement between “I” and “me.” “I” being the spontaneous, immediate reactions to a situation, “me” being the roles learned from prior experiences (Smith & Hamon, 2012). Charles Horton Cooley had the idea of the “looking-glass self”—which explains individuals consider how they appear to others in order to create their own concept of themselves (Smith & Hamon, 2012). The third scholar, William Isaac Thomas, was known for the definition of the situation, which led to the idea that understanding perspective of the people involved in the situation was necessary to understand human behavior in general (Smith & Hamon, 2012). The Thomas Theorem stated

In all three texts, “Project Classroom Makeover,” “Biographies of Hegemony,” and “An Army of One: Me,” the authors, Cathy Davidson, Karen Ho, Jean Twenge, respectively, explore different ideas of “the Self.” They defined and expanded what it meant to be an individual through curiosity. How was the “Self” developed? What were the main factors of a more “self-celebrated” society? Why are aspects of narcissism seen more and more today? These answers were discovered when the idea of “self-focus” was introduced into society. As self-focus became prevalent in everyday normalities the individual expanded into something more than the simple dichotomy of “you” and “I,” it became a purpose for life. The evolution of humanity created a world where

Sociological approaches are “systematic, sceptical and critical study of the social. It studies the way people do things together”. (Macionis and Plummer 2012) It also “goes beyond everyday common sense by using systematic methods of empirical observation and theories” (Boundless [online] 2015). I will be using Goffman’s functionalist sociological approach of Dramaturgy to understand human life and to analyse my first few weeks of university. Goffman’s sociology is “concerned with everyday life, in particular with showing the tenuous nature of social life.”(Smart, n.d) His theory is based on symbolic interactionalism and used widely to look at micro sociological accounts of social interactions which occur in day to day life. Over my first few weeks at university I noticed a wide range of social practices and observed people handing unfamiliar situations as well as experiencing them first hand myself. Therefore I felt that taking the functionalist approach of dramaturgy was a relevant and fitting theory to explain an approach to understanding both human and university life and the presentation of self in society.

Erving Goffman was a sociologist known for developing the symbolic interaction and dramaturgical theory perspective. The dramaturgical theory is a social psychological perspective that studies human behavior and social interaction in terms of the analogy of the theater. This perspective is also related to symbolic interactionism. Symbolic interactionism is a theory based on interaction and communication, facilitated by many different words, gestures, and other symbols that have acquired various meanings. Dramaturgical theorist focus on how people manipulate various aspects of themselves and their settings to influence how others define and respond to them. In this perspective, “the self” is constructed of the various roles that one acquires, in order to present their various selves in ways that sustain particular impressions to their audiences. “The self” is a private possession established in and reflective of an individual’s personality, which includes ones values, beliefs, motives, traits, and dispositions. In addition, a person’s “self” is acquired through social relationships and is a structurally fundamental process that may change due to various situations. As humans interact with one another they are placed in social categories based on their attributes and actions. These assessments are primarily based on ones knowledge of roles.

     The descriptive claim made by Psychological Egoists is that humans, by nature, are motivated only by self-interest. Any act, no matter how altruistic it may seem on the outside is actually only a disguise for a selfish desire such as recognition, avoiding guilt, reward or sense of personal ‘goodness’ or morality. For example, Mother Teresa is just using the poor for her own long-term spiritual gain. Being a universal claim, it could falter with a single counterexample. And being that I believe this claim to be bunk I will tell you why!

Welcome to radio 350 todays radio show is entitled, "Self and Society." The guests on the show include: George Herbert Mead, W.E.B. Du Bois, Erving Goffman, and Anthony Giddens. The purpose of the show for today is to provide the listening audience with a clear understanding of how each of these authors have contributed to our understanding of the relationship between self and society. What kinds of questions and issues animated their research? What were they trying to demonstrate? Where does their work converge and diverge?

According to the theory of Psychological Egoism, “there is only one thing that motivates human beings: self-interest” (Landau, 2015, p. 91). In the article “Psychological Egoism,” the authors described the theory as, “a doctrine of motivation, to the effect that human beings are so constituted that each seeks, and can only seek, his own welfare” (Glasgow, 1976, p. 75). In this view, individuals would not engage in actions that would not provide benefits or would make them worse off (Landau, 2015, p.93). This theory suggests that a stranger would help an old woman from a collapsing building if it would make him better off as a result. For example, the stranger would save the old woman not because he wants her to live more and be with her loved ones a little longer

The theory of psychological egoism is indeed plausible. The meaning of plausible in the context of this paper refers to the validity or the conceivability of the theory in question, to explain the nature and motivation of human behavior (Hinman, 2007). Human actions are motivated by the satisfaction obtained after completing a task that they are involved in. For example, Mother Teresa was satisfied by her benevolent actions and activities that she spent her life doing. As Hinman (2007) points out, she was likely to reduce in activity if she experienced any dissatisfaction in her endeavors.

From the time I was born, I was given certain characteristics that follow through my life which creates limits on opportunities that I can obtain. Every person has a unique way of expressing themselves because no one grew up exactly the same. I wouldn’t have my own identity if I didn’t carry morals and beliefs I had while growing up. I also gained characteristics that represent me from the society we live in today. Thinking of the daily tasks I partake in and how I do them in a certain way makes me wonder why I do it. Sociological imagination determines how individuals in society differ from one another based on their historical or social circumstances. This essay will define sociological imagination, and how race, religion, and gender

     The social constructionist perspective holds the view that the self is continuing "shaped and reshaped through interactions with others and involvement in social and cultural activities" (Wetherell & Maybin, 1996, p 220). Social constructionist is concerned with explicating the processes by which people come to describe, explain, or otherwise account for the world (including themselves) in which they live (Gergen, 1971). Thus, the social constructionist approach implies that the self is shaped by social interaction within historical, cultural and social contexts. Social constructionist's apply an analysis of societal level which explain the self through social relations. Conversely, the