Symbolic Interactionism Perspective IN Sociology - Herbert Blumer PDF

Preview

Summary

In its most basic form, symbolic interactionism refers to a sociological perspective on social behaviour that emphasises the role of language and gestures in communication as well as subjective understanding. As a result, it's a micro-analysis of social phenomena with a small-scale perspective on so...

Description

SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISM PERSPECTIVE IN SOCIOLOGY :HERBERT BLUMER INTRODUCTION

In its most basic form, symbolic interactionism refers to a sociological perspective on social behaviour that emphasises the role of language and gestures in communication as well as subjective understanding. As a result, it's a micro-analysis of social phenomena with a small-scale perspective on society. Instead of large-scale institutions like education, law, or religion, it focuses on interactions between individuals, such as the relationship between two siblings or the interaction between a shopkeeper and a customer. Symbolic interactionism explains the individual in a society and their relationship with others by focusing on small scale activities, and thus it can explain social order and change in a society. THE EMERGENCE

OF SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONSIM

Herbert Blumer (1900 - 1986) was a professor of sociology at the University of Chicago, where he succeeded George Herbert Mead. In the journal Man and Society in 1937, he coined the term Symbolic Interactionism, making him the founder of the movement. Despite the fact that he is credited with coining the term, it has its origins in the works of George Herbert Mead, who discussed it while a professor at the University of Chicago. People remember and base their knowledge of the world on what has been useful to them, according to Mead, and are likely to change what is no longer useful "does the job People define social and physical "objects" as a result of this "They meet people in the world based on what they use them for. As a result, if we want to understand actors, we must start with what they actually do. These ideas are foundational to symbolic Interactionism, and they helped to shape the three symbolic Interactionism principles that Blumer developed after succeeding Mead at the University of Chicago.

Blumer was concerned that sociology would devolve into a study of everyday group life. Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method (1969), Critiques of Research in the Social Sciences (1939), George Herbert Mead and Human Conduct (2004), and Movies and Conduct (1933) are just a few of the important books and articles he wrote. Blumer went on to become the first Chair of Sociology at the University of California, Berkeley, where he influenced many generations of interactionist sociologists. He served as president of the American Sociological Association and the Society for the Study of Social Problems, among other positions.

SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISM AS A THEORY

Symbolic interaction, according to Herbert Blumer, is based on three principles: first, humans act based on the meanings they assign to objects and events rather than being driven solely by external or internal stimuli. Stimuli are things or events that cause an organism to respond in a specific way. External stimuli, according to Blumer, could be social forces, whereas internal stimuli could be a human being's innate and organic drives, which he is born with. As a result, Symbolic Interactionism is not a product of societal or biological determinism.  Second, according to Blumer, meanings emerge from interactions. These interpretations are not the result of chance or chance. They don't happen if one happens to be in the situation by chance and then has to decide what to do next. These meanings, however, are not fixed, and individuals can change them depending on the circumstances of the interaction. Third, these meanings are created as a result of individual interactions and are thus understood in the context of those interactions. Individuals interpret the meanings and intentions of others when they take on the roles of others. This may explain why Blumer sees society as a continuous process of interaction between different individuals who meet, interpret, and then react to one another's actions. As a result, society becomes more dynamic and lively. This is in

stark contrast to the functionalist viewpoint, which sees action as a mechanical response to the constraints of the social system. Individual social actions in a human society are made by humans through interaction with one another, according to functionalists. Rather, action is viewed as the culmination of a number of factors that are carried on and through individuals. As a result, functionalists imply that humans are merely passive recipients of societal constraints. Men's actions are shaped by the social systems' requirements. Blumer is an opponent of this viewpoint. Blumer agrees that human action is preformed and structured at some point. Humans have preconceived notions about how to respond to one another. This understanding, however, should only be used as a general guideline for behaviour. It doesn't give you a detailed, step-by-step guide on how to interact with every human being in every situation. So, within these parameters, there is still room to negotiate and adapt to various situations, resulting in mutual interpretation between two people. Blumer also acknowledges that social institutions, such as family, caste, and kinship, exist in society and that these institutions frequently constrain human behaviour. However, there is still room for human creativity within these constraints. Even the most standardised behaviour or action is the result of many interactions rather than a set of rules and codes of conduct that appeared out of nowhere. As a result, rather than social systems and structure, social actors or individuals produce standardised action.

THE

METHODOLOGICAL

APPROACH

OF

SYMBOLIC

INTERACTIONISM

Blumer was concerned not only with explaining human behaviour, but also with developing an appropriate methodology for viewing this human interaction. He despised sociologists' proclivity to analyse any social phenomenon they had not personally witnessed, and he despised grand theories in particular. Such theories, according to Blumer, are all-encompassing and abstract in nature. He would frequently emphasise a sociological research methodology that builds concepts from personal experience. Such ideas and theories would be based on empirical evidence. According to him, such a methodology aids in the confirmation of these theories

because it is simple to go back and find evidence to back them up. This is why he is credited with inventing the concept of "grounded theory." According to him, a researcher should try to go beyond simply establishing causal relationships. He objects to the simple assumption that one causes the other without considering the actor's perspective on the situation. By doing so, one runs the risk of imposing operational definitions of the social world over their actual relevance to that world. This means that, rather than viewing social reality through the eyes of an individual, many sociologists have attempted to view it through the lens of preconceived notions and concepts. This is a common blunder made by blind followers of natural science methods and methodology, and Blumer cautions his readers to avoid it. Instead of falling prey to this fallacy, Blumer suggests that a sociologist should try to immerse himself in the area of life he is studying; he must be able to comprehend the individual's perspective on social reality. Because an individual's meanings guide their actions, sociologists must try to understand the process of interpretation that guides their actions. This means that the researcher should try to put himself in the shoes of the person whose behaviour is being studied. Blumer provides no simple solutions for how a researcher could accomplish this. Nonetheless, he believes that "disciplined imagination, flexibility in study, pondering over what one is finding and a constant readiness to test and recast one's views and images of the study area" should be able to assist any researcher in discovering the meanings that underpin and create human actions.

CRITICISMS

Many sociologists have criticised Herbert Blumer's Symbolic Interactionism. The following are two basic points of criticism: Many critics argue that Blumer's Symbolic Interactionsim is merely a supplementary theory rather than a complete grand universal theory. Integrationists are accused of failing to explain why people consistently choose to act in certain ways in certain situations because they only study individuals.

Nonetheless, the recent growth of literature in symbolic Interactionism suggests that it has weathered these criticisms and is proving to be a useful framework for social science research.

LETS SUM UP

Symbolic Interactionism is a sociological perspective on social behaviour that emphasises the role of language and gestures in communication, as well as their subjective interpretation. It is a micro-analysis of social phenomena and a view of society on a small scale. Symbolic interactionism explains the individual in a society and their relationship with others by focusing on small scale activities, and thus it can explain social order and change in a society.  Herbert Blumer, the founder of this tradition, coined the term Symbolic Interactionism in the journal Man and Society in 1937. Although he is credited with coining the term, it has its origins in the words of George Herbert Mead, a professor at the University of Chicago who spoke about it during his time there. Within the social sphere, Meadhad discussed the development of the self and the objectivity of the world. Mead was interested in gestures and social objects with complex meanings as stimuli. People remember and base their knowledge of the world on what has been useful to them, according to Mead, and are likely to change what no longer "works." As a result, people define the social and physical "objects" they come across in the world based on how they are used. As a result, if we want to understand the actors, we must start with what they actually do. Symbolic interaction, according to Herbert Blumer, is based on three principles. To begin with, rather than being driven solely by external or internal stimuli, humans act on the basis of meanings they assign to objects and events.

Stimuli is a thing or event that causes an organism to have a specific functional reaction. Stimuli can be external, such as social forces, or internal, such as a human being's innate and organic drives, but Symbolic Interactionism is not a product of either societal or biological determinism, as such stimuli are. Second, according to Blumer, these meanings emerge as a result of interactions. These meanings are not set in stone, and individuals can change them depending on the circumstances of the interaction. Third, these meanings are created as a result of individual interactions and are thus understood in the context of those interactions. Blumer sees society as a continuous process of interaction among various individuals who meet, interpret, and then react to one another's actions. As a result, society becomes more dynamic and lively. Symbolic Interactionism opposes the functionalist perspective, which views action as a mechanical response to the social system's constraints, and believes that an individual's actions are shaped by the social system's needs. Blumer agrees that human action is preformed and structured at some point, though only as a general guideline for behaviour. Even the most standardised behaviour or action, according to Blumer, is the result of many interactions, not just of norms and codes of conduct that appear out of nowhere. Blumer also acknowledges that social institutions, such as family, caste, and kinship, exist in society and that these institutions frequently constrain human behaviour. However, there is still room for human creativity within these constraints. Blumer was also concerned with developing an appropriate methodology to view this human interaction, in addition to explaining human action. He despised sociologists' proclivity to analyse any social phenomenon that they had not personally witnessed. Blumer was a proponent of a sociological research methodology that builds concepts from personal experience, and he is credited with inventing the term "grounded theory."

Personal evidence and experience, according to Blumer, are more important than blindly following predefined notions and concepts, as is common in natural science research. Because an individual's meanings guide their actions, sociologists must try to understand the process of interpretation that guides their actions. The researcher should try to put himself in the shoes of the person whose behaviour is being studied. Many critics argue that Blumer's Symbolic Interactionsim is merely a supplementary theory rather than a complete grand universal theory. It only looks at the individual, and in doing so, it elevates the individual to the same level as society. Integrationists have been accused of failing to explain why people consistently act in certain ways in different situations....