Sembolic Interactionism

Introducing the Symbolic Interactionizm Theory Before discussing the interactions between self and the social world and terms of “I” and “me”, we should focus on The Theory called Symbolic Interactionism. This is “A theoretical approach in social psychology and sociology, stemming largely from the writings of the US social psychologist George Herbert Mead (1863-1931), in which people are assumed to respond to elements of their environments according to the meanings they attach to those elements, such meanings being created and modified through social interaction involving symbolic communication with other people” (Colman, 2006). According to this approach “people communicate through symbols and either the individual reality or the social reality are created from meaningful interactions among people, interpreted by those symbolic communication; thus the point of view of the person depends on how he/she interprets those symbols. All kinds of realities can be seen as conducted realities. In other words, social reality and human behavior are symbolic and subjective in terms of both form and content” (Budak, 2005). The evolution of the “self” concept is created by other people in the social life. In other words, other people are like mirrors which bring the concept of “self” to the concept of “reflective self”. According to this, one’s first mirror is the face of mother. The infant perceives its own face through mother’s face. So called self image of the individual is not constant and unchangeable. It’s produced and conducted again and again in the social conduct. So self is emergent (Mead, 1913). Along with socialization self can find many other mirrors in its social surrounding. At the beginning there are only the family members but afterwards the number of the reflection increases. One finds him/herself in the culture not only shaping his/her way of thinking, feeling etc. but also shaped by him/her. As a background, culture takes an important role of self

References: Arslantaş, H. A. (2008). Kültür - Kişilik ve Kimlik. Doğu Anadolu Bölgesi Araştırmaları. scholar.google.com.tr Birkök, M. C. (1994). Bilgi Sosyolojisi Işığında Kimlik Sorunu. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Sosyal Yapı ve Sosyal Değişme Bilim Dalı. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi. scholar.google.com.tr Budak, S. (2005). Psikoloji Sözlüğü. Bilim ve Sanat Yayınları. Ankara. İnal, K. (1995). Sosyolojik Açıdan Yorumcu (Interpretative) Paradigma ve Eğitime Uygulanması. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt:27, Sayı:1. scholar.google.com.tr Colman, A. M. (2006). Dictionary of Psychology. Oxford University Press Inc., New York. Mead, G. H. (1913). The Social Self. The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods, Vol. 10, No. 14, pp 374-380. Özgür, T. (2007). Kültürel Farklılıklar ve Yönetimi. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü İşletme Anabilim Dalı. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. scholar.google.com.tr Wetherell, M. & Maybin, J. (1996). The Distributed Self: A Social Constructionist Persfective. In: Stevens, R. (ed.) Understanding the Self. London, Thousand Oaks & New Dehl: Sage Publications & Open University Press, pp. 219-265.