The civic sociology of Herbert Blumer speaks to the fundamental problem of modernity: how freedom and equity can be ensured when institutional and personal ...

Herbert Blumer was a key figure in what came to be identified as the Chicago School of Sociology. He invented the term ‘symbolic interactionism’ as a label for a theoretical approach that derived primarily from the work of John Dewey, George Herbert Mead and Charles Cooley. But his most influential work was methodological in character, and he is generally viewed today as a prominent critic of positivism, and of the growing dominance of quantitative method within US sociology. (...) While this picture is broadly accurate, it neglects an important strand in his methodological thinking. He was committed to the goal of a science of social life, while at the same time he was uncertain whether such a science is possible. In his Appraisal of Thomas and Znaniecki’s The Polish Peasant, he identified a serious dilemma facing this project: the problem of how a scientific approach can be made compatible with the distinctive nature of human social life. In the first chapter of his most influential book, Symbolic Interactionism, he advocates a naturalistic approach to case study, and seems to treat this as avoiding the dilemma. However, there is evidence to suggest that, even towards the end of his life, he regarded the problem as still unresolved. In this article, I examine both sides of Blumer’s dilemma, and whether his attitude towards it changed. However, my interest here is not only historiographical. I evaluate Blumer’s arguments and show that his intellectual struggle with this issue remains relevant today, despite the shifts that have taken place in social science methodology and the philosophy of science since his death. (shrink)

The article analysis the views approaching quantitative and qualitative methods in social sciences as separable or irreconcilable. First, we characterize these views and show how they deal with this divide and how they view the aspects of the latter. Next, we identify the works of Herbert Blumer as the basis of that divide and subject them to an analysis. Finally, by means of categories like quantity, quality, and measure, we show that the qualitative-quantitative divide is based on a (...) wrong approach to these categories and the quantitative and qualitative methods. (shrink)

De la psychologie sociale aux Théories critiques de J Habermas et A Honneth, en passant par l'interactionnisme symbolique ou la sociologie pragmatiste héritière de l'école de Chicago, l'oeuvre de GH Mead (1863-1931) constitue une source majeure de la théorie sociale. Cet ouvrage invite à la (re)découvrir. Tout en examinant les sources de la pensée de Mead et en discutant ses concepts fondamentaux, il propose de mettre en lumière le potentiel critique et créateur des perspectives qu'elle ouvre pour la théorie sociale. (...) Il montre comment ses développements consacrés au self, à l'Autrui généralisé, à l'interaction, au contrôle social, etc., ainsi que son traitement des problèmes liés, notamment, à la conscience de soi, à la communication, à la reconnaissance ou aux institutions peuvent être mis en dialogue et en confrontation avec les analyses de A Smith, GWF Hegel, W James, G Simmel, J Dewey, RE Park, E Goffman, H Blumer, A Schütz, H Garfinkel, J Habermas, A Honneth, R Collins. Il propose des traductions inédites de textes de GH Mead qui permettent de saisir le processus d'élaboration et la richesse de sa psychologie sociale. A la fois introduction, examen critique et mise en perspective de la pensée de Mead, ce livre s'adresse aux philosophes, sociologues et psychologues, étudiants ou chercheurs, intéressés par l'auteur et, plus généralement, par la théorie sociale d'hier et d'aujourd'hui. (shrink)

The aim of the paper is to discuss the views, which approach the qualitative and quantitative methods in social sciences as either separable, or irreconcilable. First, the author gives an outline of those views and shows, how they deal with various aspects of the qualitative/quantitative divide. Next, he tries to identify the roots of that divide in the works of Herbert Blumer. Further, his analysis of the categories of quantity, quality, and measure is designed to show that the (...) divide in question is based on a wrong, one-sided understanding of the qualitative as well as quantitative approaches, which in fact can neither be separated nor conceived of as contradictory. (shrink)

A plea has been made for replacing the perspective of “symbolic interactionism” with a new interactionist's perspective—“radical interactionism.” Unlike in symbolic interactionism, where Mead's and Blumer's ideas play the most prominent roles, in radical interactionism's, Park's ideas play a more prominent role than either Mead's or Blumer's ideas. On the one hand, according to Mead, the general principle behind the organization of human group life was once dominance, but it is now “sociality.” On the other hand, according to (...) Park, this general principle is now and has always been dominance. Blumer takes a position much closer to Mead's than Park's arguing that the general principle underlying the organization of human group life is sociality. Under certain special conditions, however, it can become dominance. Although like radical interactionism, symbolic interactionism is rooted in pragmatism, unlike in radical interactionism, symbolic interactionism is still plagued with strains of utopian thought, among which the notion of sociality is the most virulent. Sociality may be the principle on which human group life is organized in heaven, but, down here on earth, it remains organized on the basis of domination. Thus, radical interactionism provides a much-needed antidote to the idealistic overtones still found in symbolic interactionism. (shrink)

One of the main assumptions of mathematical tools in science is represented by the idea of measurability and additivity of reality. For discovering the physical universe additive measures such as mass, force, energy, temperature, etc. are used. Economics and conventional business intelligence try to continue this empiricist tradition and in statistical and econometric tools they appeal only to the measurable aspects of reality. However, a lot of important variables of economic systems cannot be observable and additive in principle. These variables (...) can be called symbolic values or symbolic meanings and studied within symbolic interactionism, the theory developed since George Herbert Mead and Herbert Blumer. In statistical and econometric tools of business intelligence we accept only phenomena with causal connections measured by additive measures. In the paper we show that in the social world we deal with symbolic interactions which can be studied by non-additive labels. For accepting the variety of such phenomena we should avoid additivity of basic labels and construct a new probabilistic method in business intelligence based on non-Archimedean probabilities. (shrink)

J. David Lewis and Richard L. Smith provide a history of pragmatism and Chicago sociology based on the positions of realism and nominalism. This issue is indeed the key to understanding pragmatism’s foundations in Charles Peirce’s original formulation. Lewis and Smith claim that there are two pragmatisms, a realistic one characterized by Peirce and Mead and a nominalistic one (which Lewis and Smith claim has no value) illustrated by James and Dewey. They argue that Chicago sociology, including Herbert (...) class='Hi'>Blumer, was under the influence of the nominalistic pragmatism, and that Mead exercised little influence during his lifetime. The argument is based on an ahistorical, a priori "metatheoretical" realism-nominalism distinction that claims to be based on Peirce's discussions of realism and nominalism. Yet the authors support their understanding of realism by appealing to Mead’s discussion of “contact experience,” and claim that Peirce’s realism must be based in non-symbolic “pure resistance.” Ironically, such a view represents the main tenet of nominalism, that only individual particulars are real, and amounts to a denial of Peirce’s category of Thirdness as reducible to the “pure resistance” of Secondness. Lewis and Smith attempt to correct the subjectivist tendencies of symbolic interactionism yet would problematically replace them with an equally subjective view of what constitutes objectivity: individual reaction with an object. American Sociology and Pragmatism tends to present a monistic universe hinging on a nominalistic interpretation of realism, a single-visioned view that places more emphasis on labels than on the substance and pragmatic import of a theorist's thoughts, resulting in serious distortions pro and con. Yet it also has opened up for serious questioning the whole foundations of symbolic interactionism and Mead's place within pragmatism and Chicago sociology. Though the authors claim to be "revisionists," it seems to me that they are also "fundamentalists" in safely preserving Mead at the center of a history they claim he did not significantly influence. In my opinion the ongoing controversy will result in a broader understanding of the antecedents of contemporary symbolic interactionism, one that will call for Mead's now dominating role as the sole representative of pragmatism for many American sociologists to be reevaluated and placed within the context of the quite substantial contributions of Peirce, James, and Dewey. (shrink)

What influence did Josiah Royce's academic work (1913-1917) have on the development of classical Symbolic Interactionist thought? And which philosophical influences shaped Royce's social and philosophical thought? This book provides a holistic approach to Royce's academic work and the social philosophy that shaped Symbolic Interactionist theory. By critically evaluating the works of Royce, this book reveals how his ideas and social philosophy made significant contributions to both Symbolic Interactionist thought and sociological theory. Situating his contributions within a socio-historical time frame, (...) Royce's social philosophy is compared and contrasted to the major concepts of George Herbert Mead (Mind, Self, and Society) and Herbert Blumer's core synthesized components of classical symbolic interactionist thought (Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method). Thus, demonstrating that Royce's later academic works closely resemble not only the basic ideas of Mead but also have a strong correspondence with Blumer's synthesis of the three basic premises and eight root images that outline the theoretical core of Symbolic Interactionist thought. For those looking to investigate or discover new aspects of symbolic interactionist theory from a classical viewpoint, this book offers a unique insight into an American philosopher whose contribution to the development of Symbolic Interactionism has been largely unnoticed. (shrink)

The astounding flourishing of fashion we have witnessed for the past centuries would not have been possible without a range of specifically modern phenomena like capitalism, the rise of an ambitious middle-class, the growth and diversification of mass-communication, and the Industrial Revolution. However, there is yet another interesting link between the two as they both have a common ‘condition of possibility’, that makes them interconnected. In this paper I will argue that such a condition is what I loosely call a (...) ‘will to novelty’. Following some of Herbert Blumer’s suggestions, I will argue that the quest for renewal remains probably the best explanation of all possible candidates in explaining the incessant change of fashion (one of such candidates being Simmel’s famous class-differentiation analysis). My claim is that such a pursuit of renewal is undertaken for the sake of renewal itself, and this is a key aspect that connects fashion with modernity, namely an aesthetic concept of modernity, which I will outline, in the footsteps of Michel Foucault and Matei Călinescu, as a quest for novelty and change. Unlike the bourgeois modernity or the scientific one, the aesthetic modernity does not innovate for the sake of profit or truth respectively, but for the sake of innovation itself. Like fashion, the aesthetic modernity is an expression of the ‘will to novelty’. (shrink)

This philosophical examination investigates the complex processes through which people develop their identities within various cultural settings and examines the function of symbolic interactionism in constructing cultural identities. Symbolic interactionism, which has its roots in the writings of academics like Herbert Blumer and George Herbert Mead, describe the role of relationships, meaning negotiation, and symbols in social reality and human behaviour. Symbolic interactionism provides a useful paradigm for comprehending how people use cultural symbols, customs, and social interactions (...) to negotiate their identities in particular cultural situations. This concept is relevant to the field of cultural identity formation. People manage their feelings of belonging within their cultural communities and express their cultural affinities through language, rituals, traditions, and other cultural artefacts. Furthermore, symbolic interactionism emphasizes how social interactions and alterations in the social environment constantly negotiate and redefine identities, describe cultural identity's dynamic and fluid nature. This approach also appearances at how power dynamics shape the construction of cultural identities, demonstrate the complexity of social inequity and resistance within cultural contexts. This philosophical investigation advances our knowledge of how cultural identities are formed and emphasizes the significant impact that symbolic connections have on social reality and the human experience. Overall, the research found that symbolic interactionism offers a useful framework for comprehending how interactions and symbols play a part in developing cultural identities. By analyzing how people interact with cultural symbols and navigate their identities in social settings, we may learn more about the intricate and ever-changing processes involved in forming cultural identities. This philosophical approach provides greater knowledge of how people create, manage, and traverse their cultural identities in various social settings. (shrink)

The religious rites of Shia remain a mystery to Malaysia’s Sunnite majority. One such rite is the ziyarat (visits to sacred sites). This essay highlights the ritualsconducted and performed by Malaysian Shi’ites during their seasonal pilgrimage to Iran and Iraq. Their rituals and behaviors during these pilgrimages to holy shrines in Iran and Iraq were documented from the standpoint of a cultural anthropologist. Rites from two sites, Mashad and Karbala, are presented in this study. Applying Herbert Blumer’s symbolic (...) interactionism as a conceptual framework, and Charles Brooks’s methodology through social interaction and participant-observation, this essay aims to analyze and understand their rites, and the values and significance of these rites. By doing so, the axiological aspects of the rites were observed and clarified, thus enabling non Shi’ite Muslims to perceive greyest area of Shia rites, as performed by Shi’ites from Malaysia in their pilgrimage to Iran and Iraq. (shrink)

This article proposes "equality" as a topic for interactionist research. By drawing on the perspectives of Herbert Blumer, Alfred Schutz, and Harold Garfinkel, an attempt is made to lay the theoretical groundwork for studying the interpretive and experiential aspects of equality. Blumer's fundamental premises of symbolic interactionism, Schutz's analysis of relevance and typification, and Garfinkel's treatment of reflexivity and indexicality are explicated and applied to the subject of equality. I then draw upon the moral theory of John (...) Dewey to suggest the positive role that interactionist theory and research might play in the resolution of problematic situations that are framed in terms of equality. Collectively, the complementary aspects of Blumer's, Schutz's, Garfinkel's, and Dewey's thought are used to justify and launch a program of research on a neglected yet important topic: the social construction of equality in everyday life. (shrink)

Introduction -- The classical theories -- Emile Durkheim -- Talcott Parsons and structural functionalism -- Karl Marx and marxism -- Max Weber -- The successors -- Norbert Elias -- Critical theory, the Frankfurt school and Jurgen Habermas -- Herbert Blumer and symbolic interactionism -- Michel Foucault -- Pierre Bourdieu -- The present -- The latest modern age -- Modernisation theory -- Conclusions.

Although it is central to the social sciences, the notion of the collective has been elaborated primarily in fields of study which are concerned with deviant behavior, and then only in the sense of »collective behavior.« In order to consider the emergence of collectivity, the present paper suggests a re-reading of this sociology (especially of Herbert Blumer). By means of a reading of Walt Whitman, who was important as a lyrical and journalistic source of inspiration to early American (...) sociology, a concept of material and medial infrastructures (particularly transport media such as the ferry) is obtained, which is also significant for the current theoretical interweaving of collectivity and infrastructure. (shrink)

Cette thèse universitaire, consacrée à Hegel, s'attache à relire le philosophe à la lumière des concepts d'historicité et de vie. L'ambition de Marcuse est de tenter d'articuler la logique ontologique et la phénoménologie de l'histoire. Le devenir de l'être du monde et celui de l'être psychique et social de l'humanité obéiraient alors à des principes identiques. Cette recherche passe nécessairement par la radicalisation de la pensée hégélienne au XXe siècle, c'est-à-dire par la relecture de l'œuvre de Dilthey et par la (...) discussion détaillée de la question de l'historicisme. (shrink)

This article analyzes the concept of the legal mobilization of laws and institutions for the redressal of “justiciable” problems—problems for which a remedy can potentially be obtained through legal processes. The dispute-processing approach initiates the naming, blaming, claiming framework, to understand the reasons that substantial “perceived injurious experiences” do not mature into lawsuits. This article proceeds further with the discussion of the idea of a “dispute pyramid.” This method presents a real problem of asserting injuries that are unperceived, subjective in (...) nature. Broad methodological approaches are applied in empirical research regarding claiming. The expansive methodological spectrum includes, structured surveys, institutional records ethnography etc. This article then examines the explanations that have been advanced for variations in claiming patterns, both at the individual and the aggregate levels. It analyses the points of general agreement and issues where agreement is lacking and proposes an agenda for future research related to claiming. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in (...) the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)