George Herbert Mead and Karl Marx: Exploring Consciousness and Community*

Batiuk, Mary Ellen; Sacks, Howard L.

doi:10.1525/si.1981.4.2.207

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Wilkinson (1991) refers to community as a common social life in which people partake of a shared sense of belonging, while Buber ([1947] 2002) speaks of communion in his reflections on mutual lived relations (p. 6). Batiuk (1981) likewise remarks that neither genuine community nor “the perfected self [can] be identified outside of its emergence in purposeful activity through interpersonal experience” (p. 219). A community held together by meaningful relations is neither a simple bundling together of individuals nor the sum of its parts.…”

Section: Interactional Community From An Interactionist Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

The Interactional Community: Emergent Fields of Collective Agency*

Bessant

2012

Sociological Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social interaction is generally regarded as elemental to the notion of community. Within the broader discourse on community, the field‐interactional perspective is distinctive in its explicit focus on emergent social processes and community change dynamics. Wilkinson (1970) extended Kaufman’s (1959) early work on the interactional approach through an application of the social field concept to community action. In doing so, Wilkinson (1991) outlined several key linkages between social–symbolic interaction and community agency. Despite these promising beginnings, only a modicum of research has examined the theoretical or philosophical underpinnings of the interactional conception of community. This article explores the symbolic‐interactionist tenets undergirding the field‐interactional approach, most notably Mead’s (1934, 1938) discussion of generalized social attitudes and Blumer’s (1969a, 1969b) work on joint or collective action.

show abstract

Section: Interactional Community From An Interactionist Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

The Interactional Community: Emergent Fields of Collective Agency*

Bessant

2012

Sociological Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because its methodological guidelines are well defined but not overly restrictive, working with them might helpfully supplement grounded theory without forcing concepts. Second, comparisons have been drawn between the philosophies behind activity theory and symbolic interactionism, grounded theory's parent discipline (Batuik & Sacks, 1981). Both are profoundly social.…”

Section: Grounded Theory and Activity Theory: Intersections And Contrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adopting a Grounded Theory Approach to Cultural-Historical Research: Conflicting Methodologies or Complementary Methods?

Seaman

2008

International Journal of Qualitative Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grounded theory has long been regarded as a valuable way to conduct social and educational research. However, recent constructivist and postmodern insights are challenging long-standing assumptions, most notably by suggesting that grounded theory can be flexibly integrated with existing theories. This move hinges on repositioning grounded theory from a methodology with positivist underpinnings to an approach that can be used within different theoretical frameworks. In this article the author reviews this recent transformation of grounded theory, engages in the project of repositioning it as an approach by using cultural historical activity theory as a test case, and outlines several practical methods implied by the joint use of grounded theory as an approach and activity theory as a methodology. One implication is the adoption of a dialectic, as opposed to a constructivist or objectivist, stance toward grounded theory inquiry, a stance that helps move past the problem of emergence versus forcing.

show abstract

“…First, Joas believes that the notion of practical intersubjectivity is comparable with the notions of important German thinkers, including Buber, Dilthey, Hegel, Husserl, and Kant, who were preoccupied with some of the same problems that Mead was (Joas 1981:180; [1985] 1997:x, 33–89). Second, and more important, Joas (1981:179; [1985] 1997:14, 33–36, 44; 1993:214) thinks that the use of the notion of practical intersubjectivity could greatly facilitate the use of Mead's thought to improve certain underdeveloped Marxian notions, such as “praxis.” Joas is certainly not alone in this belief (see, e.g., Batiuk and Sacks 1981; Zeitlin 1973:220).…”

Section: The Leading Expositors’views Of Mead's Picture Of Society: Amentioning

confidence: 99%

Mead's Lost Conception of Society

Athens

2005

Symbolic Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The single best word to describe the impact of George Herbert Mead's ideas on the intellectual world is “ironic.” Although Mead was a philosopher, his ideas have been more influential in sociology than in philosophy. Despite Mead's belief that it is the job of sociologists to study society, it is his notion of the self rather than his notion of society that has received the most attention in this field. Mead himself is first and foremost responsible for this ironic state of affairs because his analysis of society is so obscure at points that it is hard for most sociologists to understand. However, Mead alone is not to blame. The two main expositors of his sociological thought since his death, Herbert Blumer and Hans Joas, added to the confusion by not making clear that Mead sees society as a “body of institutions.” To correct their distortions of Mead's notion of society, I provide an alternative exposition of that notion. I disclose how Mead addresses the three main problems that he believes must be resolved before society can be understood: (1) the operation of institutions in the daily lives of people; (2) the origination of early institutions, such as language, the family, the economy, religion, polity, and science; and (3) the change of these institutions after their inception.

show abstract

George Herbert Mead and Karl Marx: Exploring Consciousness and Community*

Cited by 11 publications

References 11 publications

The Interactional Community: Emergent Fields of Collective Agency*

The Interactional Community: Emergent Fields of Collective Agency*

Adopting a Grounded Theory Approach to Cultural-Historical Research: Conflicting Methodologies or Complementary Methods?

Mead's Lost Conception of Society

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About