We Maintain And Perpetuate Society When We Talk To Ourselves

George Herbert Mead’s Social Psychology
Commentary On Self Continues

Mead, in putting together his social psychology drew heavily upon the converging
currents of thought that filtered through the universities where he took up
residence. The emerging doctrines of Evolution, Functional Psychology, and
Pragmatism, in various degrees, eventually found expression in Mead’s social
psychology. Mead asked the question: “How do human being’s express cooperative
behavior?” Humans are many times more flexible and creative then their
biologically determined animal counterparts in expressing themselves. The answer
to this question, according to Mead, is that what sets humans apart from the
rest of the animal kingdom is the ability to communicate with oneself (to have a
self) and identify symbols. This particularly human ability allows for the
experience of shared meanings, a common vocabulary and shared expectations.
Consensus, as Mead points out, not only forms the basis of human society, it
also permits dialogue to occur within oneself. In our capacity to talk to
ourselves, we actualize the mechanism that maintains and perpetuates society. The
individual, through his/her imaginative (symbolic) completion of the act, is
able to take on the roles of other people and in this way share in the social
experience of other people. By engaging in role taking we become socialized
to the norms, mores and folkways of our culture, as we become part of that
culture.

What’s interesting here is that Mead’s concept of self (and my concept of self)
cannot be understood in terms of traditional psychologies which view the self as
a thing occurring in a mind. The “self” is a process wherein symbolic
communication occurs. The self must be conceived within the interdependent
network of symbols, gestures and roles that are encountered in the daily round
of one’s life. As I develop the capacity to act toward myself I acquire mind,
and, as I acquire mind I begin to recognize those people who become, for me, my
significant others. In the recognition of the qualities held in common by these
significant others, I am able to conceive what Mead calls the “generalized
other.” In so far as the self develops in this way, the beliefs, values,
desires, and motives, which I internalize, are the shared beliefs, values,
desires, and motives internalized by others. For Mead, this intertwining of self
with social environment produces the minded activity that relates objects to
meanings, images, and “plans of action.” The resulting plan of action is what
directs and modifies my behavior. Both Mead’s self and the self that I have
described in the Venn circles should be understood in terms of all the above
characteristics.

About these ads