More handpicked essays just for you.
Sociology symbolic interactionism application
Sociology symbolic interactionism application
Sociology symbolic interactionism application
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Theories of Symbolic Interactionism Exchange Theory and Rational Choice Theory This essay will address actions of individuals and the contribution individual actions make to the social structure, how society flows to the actor via the “Me” and is constructed or reconstructed by the “I,” giving the “I” a place in creating society. I will further analyze the theories and explore the impact of norms and values on the decisions by the actors. This analysis will include the concepts and theories of symbolic interactionism, exchange theory and rational choice theory, through the works of Mead, Blau, Homans, and Ritzer. Mead was a pragmatist, and felt that reality does not exist but is created through actions; this demonstrates the need for interactions between the actor and the world. People, base their actions on what they remember being useful to them, and finally people have the ability to interpret the social world and act based upon the meaning of events to them rather than directly to events. (Ritzer 2000). The theory of symbolic interactionism grew from the understanding the mind was not a thing or structure, but was a process of thinking (Ritzer, 2000). This process comprised of three stages, which includes defining objects in the social world, outlining possible modes of conduct and seeing the consequences of alternative actions and elimination of unlikely possibilities allowing a focus on selecting the most optimal course of action (Ritzer, 2000), this process allows the “self” the ability to adjust with interactions with others. (Ritzer, 2000) Mead used the term society to mean the ongoing process that precedes both the mind and self (Ritzer, 2000) Clearly defined by Mead, society represents an organized... ... middle of paper ... ...el or being influenced by the macro level. He fails to look in detail at the influence that the individual or the micro has on the macro. Ritzer’s Major Levels of Social Analysis (2000) does a wonderful job of describing the American society. In looking at the model, area one of the macro would encompass the US government; area two is present cultures and norms. The micros would follow the model of Mead in allowing the individual the ability to make decisions and form or change society. The macros can influence or be influenced by the micros in an open society; this also would allow change to occur from a macro- to- macro or a micro-to-micro interaction. Bibliography: Jeong, Ho-Won. 2000 “Peace and Conflict Studies An introduction,” Burlington USA: Ashgate. Ritzer, George 2000 “Sociological Theory,” Fifth Edition, New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
The argument behind symbolic interactionism is that cognition can, and usually does, interfere with human decision making based on practicality alone. And the results of the previously mentioned survey validate the understanding of the “generalized other” played out in the minds of those men deciding on purchasing a big, black Ford Raptor.
Symbolic interactionist’s like to understand the world through understanding the specific meanings and causes that society attributes to particular events. When analyzing health and illness symbolic interactionist’s like to look at individuals or groups and how they give meaning to their particular illness. Then they take that information and see how it affects their relationships with others and how it makes them view themselves. The symbolic interactionist theory also claims that we socially construct health and illness much like we do with race. For instance if someone spends his days staring at the sun and goes blind people blame him for staring at the sun. They believe that if they do not engage in sun staring then they will not go blind. The same reasoning usually follows people who get lung cancer or AIDS. The person is blamed for having the illness regardless of how they got it; people assume the sick brought it upon themselves.
McCall. (2006). Symbolic interaction theory. In P. Burke (Ed.), Contemporary Social Psychological Theories (pp. 1-12). Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=7M82yReFf4sC&dq=social exchange and rational choice theory definition
We understand and perform on social objects. Our most important form of social objects are people. Symbolic interactionism is also called symbolic interaction perspective, the major framework of sociological theory as we know it today. People rely upon interaction with others; socializing has become the key factor of our everyday lives. Symbolic Interactionism is the meanings that we impose on objects, people, and sometimes even behaviors. Our society is a huge structure built by human interpretations.
The “Me” which is the social part of the self, is highly influenced by what society thinks. The “Me” is determined to please society by conforming to its norms and values. The “Me” believes that if it goes against society then it is going against the social order of society, that one is expected to uphold. It also predicts the behavior of others and helps to keep them in check. For example religion and the court have a system that promotes and upkeeps social order.
This theory examines society as a complex collection of relationships and beliefs among people (Claerbaut, 2004). These relationships among people consist of the core of society. According to this perspective, society could not function without them. In regards to how people interact in their relationships, Boundless.com states, “The basic notion of symbolic interactionism is that human action and interaction are understandable only through the exchange of meaningful communication or symbols. In this approach, humans are portrayed as acting, as opposed to being acted upon.” Ashley Crossman further describes the symbolic interactionalism perspective by
Symbolic interactionism perspective is defined as “the study of how people negotiate the meanings of social life during their interactions with others” (Rohall, Milkie, and Lucas, 2014, p.27). It asserts that “we construct meaning about things that are important in our own lives and in our society” (Rohall, Milkie, and Lucas, 2014, p.28). These meanings derive from social interactions among individuals which
Social norms are the rules of behavior that are acceptable within members of a society. They are acceptable expectations that must be followed by a group or society. Some social norms are flexible according to the environment or situation. These norms also vary within different cultures, social groups, and social classes. Interactions provide the social setting for appropriate behavior and is the basis for the social roles that individuals play as a member of a social group. As each social role is portrayed, a proper behavior must manifest to fit the expectations of that role. These basic terms of social norms, interactions, and roles are associated with the Symbolic Interactionism Theory, which focuses on the actions of an individual and the social interaction that individual contributes to. The framework of the theory is dependent upon the social interactions between individuals and the meaning that is given to their actions.
Symbolic Interaction Theory Developed in the late 19th century, symbolic interactionism dealt with people and how they hold the relationship with one another. George Herbert Mead, even though never published his work, is said to be the founder of symbolic interaction (Introduction to sociology 2015). This theory deals with the relationships we have with one another. If an individual is trying to use symbolic interaction in a scientific manner, they would observe the patterns someone faces. Certain patterns all come back to a certain event any individual has had in the past.
...lay in societal change. However it was only until the works of Durkheim and Simmel that the role of individual interaction and society is brought to the forefront. Durkheim largely viewed the individual as needing society as a mechanism of constraint to the aspirations of an eternal goal. Finally, Simmel was able to expand on Durkheim’s dualism by noting that society could be viewed as more than a mechanism of constraint rather as an accumulation of individual interaction. Either through a combination or as individuals each theorist distinct view of the relationship between the individual and society demonstrates a new understanding towards the nature of social reality.
In today’s society people tend to be followers. People wear things or do things that they see others do, not knowing that everyone is born their own person. Things that make people unique and different from others is what makes them stand out. That leads me to introduce the topics to this paper. From nature-nurture, Bronfenbenner’s ecological system, and overall our culture is what makes us humans. Going through certain phases and transtions in life helps us to define ourselves over time. After reading this paper, it would give you a better understanding of my life and who I am as a person.
Macionis, John J.. Society: the basics. 12th ed., Annotated instructor's ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 2013. Print.
To fully understand the Social Exchange theory is to understand its concept. The Social Exchange theory, as stated by Unger and Johns...
Therefore, society evolves as an organism with various structures, which perform different distinct functions. Scholar Jennie McIntyre, who believes in this approach, addresses the society in the realms of important functions played by the distinct elements of the societal structures. The structures here include customs of a particular society, its traditions, the norms applicable in the society, and the institutions that surround a particular society (Kingsbury & Scanzoni,
Social interaction is defined as the process by which people act and react in relation to others (Macionis 583). Symbolic Interaction Theory is a micro-level orientation, a close up focus on social interaction in specific situations. Social construction of reality, the foundation of the symbolic-interaction theory, is the process by which people creatively shape reality through social interaction. Quite a bit of reality remains unclear I everyone’s mind, so we present ourselves in terms that suit the setting and our purposes, we try to guide what happens next, and as others do the same, reality takes shape. Reality then is a product of social