Symbolic interaction and classical greek scholarship: Conceptual foundations, historical continuities, and transcontextual relevancies

Reconceptualizing the Study of Community Life:

“…In the present text, Durkheim engages the pragmatist divide not only by contrasting American pragmatism with Cartesian/Kantian rationality but also by formulating what may be defined as a "sociological pragmatism." 11 Although in essential agreement with most of Challenger's (1994) commentary, particularly Durkheim's broader intellectual indebtedness to Aristotle, I would stress the pragmatist nature of Aristotle's considerations of human group life (see Prus, 2003Prus, , 2004Prus, , 2007aPrus, , 2008 as well as Durkheim's pragmatist intrigues with human knowing and acting. statement is more consistently focused on the pragmatist features of Durkheim's scholarship and its implications for the study of human knowing and acting more generally.…”

“…(Durkheim, Pragmatism andSociology [1913-1914], Whitehouse and Allcock, 1983: 1-2) In the preceding extract, Durkheim sets the basic agenda for his lectures. Like many academics, Durkheim seems largely unaware of the long-standing Greek roots of pragmatist thought and the pragmatist divide that generated in the way that he (in variance with Socrates [469-399BCE] and Plato ) approaches the study of human knowing and acting (Prus 2003(Prus , 2004(Prus , 2007a(Prus , 2008see Aristotle, 1984 andPlato, 1997). Still, Durkheim is mindful of the centrality of life and action for the sociological venture and it is here that he appreciates the exceptional analytic potency of pragmatist thought.…”

“…16 Although pragmatism may have been more explicitly and extensively pursued through "American pragmatism," it is apparent that American pragmatism has its roots in classical Greek scholarship (particularly in the works of Aristotle on ethics, rhetoric, poetics, politics, categories). See Prus (2003Prus ( , 2004Prus ( , 2007aPrus ( , 2008). James, 17 Durkheim (P&S: 9-14) focuses most directly on James' notions of pragmatism.…”

“…3 Ironically, too, whereas James' Varieties of Religious Experience may have been particularly consequential for drawing Durkheim to American pragmatism more generally, it also is James' more psychologically oriented approach and James' analysis of religion in particular that Durkheim finds especially inadequate. Indeed, because Durkheim envisions pragmatism primarily in ways that approximate James' 2 Although Durkheim does not draw any connections between American pragmatism and its European predecessors (back to the classical Greek era; see Prus 2003Prus , 2004Prus , 2007a in this set of lectures, it is apparent that that Durkheim (1887) had acquired some base-line familiarity with classical pragmatist (vs. structuralist) thought through his exposure to Wilhelm Wundt's Ethics (also see Jones, 2002) As well as in developing his own The Evolution of Educational Thought.…”

Engaging the Student Role

“…However, given the twists of fate and the shifting interests of the people involved in preserving and destroying scholarship over the centuries, as well as the highly diversified nature of classical Greek thought, the transitions have been far from consistent, comprehensive, or cumulative (Prus, 2003(Prus, , 2004. Furthermore, as Durkheim (1977) observes, educational theory of a more conventional sort (things have not changed appreciably since Durkheim's time) has been dominated by a structuralist, quantitative emphasis championed by René Descartes (1596-1650) and an idealist (child indulgent) emphasis promoted by JeanJacques Rousseau (1712-1778).…”