Rethinking The Generalized Other in Symbolic Interactionism

• In Event: 40268 - New Looks at Old Theories

Abstract

George Herbert Mead developed a system of social psychology that was preeminently sociological. He presented human interaction based on symbols through the use of the "I," the "Me," and "the Generalized Other." The I and Me were not particularly new, but the generalized other was the concept that brought society into social psychology. However, the generalized other has been largely ignored in symbolic interactionist work. I present a theory of the "I" working with the "Me" to stage and prop a presentation of self to others. The individual's feedback from the generalized other is where society presents itself to the individual. But the generalized other is both specific to situations in the family, at work, in school, and neighborhoods, and positive, bland, or negative. Further, it is shaped and framed so that some feedback may be ignored and other reflected appraisals treasured. Some, like Donald Trump, can ignore much negative feedback even when it consists of simple facts. Others may be slaves to their compatriots. Thus, the generalized other is shaped, framed, multiple, and signed. Research needs to pay attention to this form of societal feedback. I then attach the generalized other to Collin's interaction ritual chains for interactions (cultural capital, opportunity, and emotions) for interactions and then place these chains into Sutherland's differential association theory to show how people choose to belong to different groups. The generalized other then becomes the gateway to social structure, and in later papers, I develop its connections to structuration in Giddens, Swanson, Sewell, and Levi Martin.

Author

• Thomas E. Janoski, University of Kentucky