The concept of the self
This is an excerpt from the paper...
The concept of the self may be difficult to discuss, since the study of the self may difficult to do objectively, however several sociologists have tried including Charles Cooley, George Herbert Mead, and Erving Goffman, especially in regards to the concept of symbolic interactionism. According to Ritzer (2000), symbolic interactionism came out of the Chicago School of Sociology and is concerned with the development of the self in regards to the interaction of that self with others (p. 28). One of the first developers of this concept, Georg Simmel, believed that understanding the interaction between people was one of the major tasks of sociology.Charles Cooley was considered to be a part of this Chicago school of thought. According to Ritzer (2000), Cooley, like Mead, refused to separate the consciousness of the self from the social context. He believed that the self was developed and shaped on a continuing basis through social interaction. This is known as the "looking-glass self". The second idea developed by Cooley in relationship to the "looking-glass self" was that of the "primary group". The "Primary group" includes those individuals that provide intimate, face-to-face interaction with an individual, and in so doing help develop the "looking-glass self" as it is reflected back from those individuals. This is an especially important concept in regards to the social development of children (p. 50). According to Ritzer (2000), Cooley also tried to get sociologist
. . .
reflexive structure to analyze the relationship between culture and social stratification. According to Gartman (1991), Bourdieu ôseeks to reveal the indispensable contribution that the consumption of symbolic goods makes to reproducing class domination through legitimation and selection. In this case, the ôfieldö is not only economic, but also cultural or symbolic. The ôhabitusö is the grid or internalized system that people used to understand and gain control in the cultural and symbolic fields. Gartman (1991) calls this a ôprocess of socializationö wherein people from different classes are exposed to different types of symbols and materials of existence, which in turn produces different cultural tastes, according to oneÆs class.
Just as in economic struggles, people use the ôcapitalö that they have earned, acquired, or inherited to increase their ôprofitö. In the case of culture, however, it is all symbolic, meaning that the cultural ôcapitalö is used to improve the symbolic ôprofitö, otherwise known as status. For example, someone born into a family with an upper middle class income will most likely be exposed to discussions regarding classical art, music, literature, and so forth. This individual will also, most likely
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
According Barnhart, Seven Question, Mass Reificationö, Bourdieu Frankfurt, Wuthnow Witten, According Gartman, Ralph Turner, Florence Nightingale, Virgin Mary, Cooley Mead, ritzer 2000, gartman 1991, barnhart 1994, virgin mary, charismatic leader, response question, wuthnow witten 1988, wuthnow witten, witten 1988, edition boston ma, boston ma, ma mcgraw-hillshort, third edition boston, sociological theory third, theory third edition,
Approximate Word count = 4846
Approximate Pages = 19 (250 words per page)
|