Эссе на тему "Symbolic interactionism in psychology"

In psychology there are various schools of thought that in one way or another have had and continue to have an impact on people's social lives. One such school is symbolic interactionism.

Symbolic interactionism emerged in Chicago in the 20s and 30s. The term was first formulated and introduced by the American sociologist and social psychologist Herbert Bloomer in 1937. However, the true progenitor of the concept is considered to be the American philosopher, sociologist and social psychologist George Herbert Mead. Symbolic interactionism is based on interpretations of human behavior in which meaningful symbols carrying social information are "read". This is a special kind of interaction that is carried out by people. The peculiarity of such interaction is that "people interpret or define each other's actions rather than simply reacting to them.

There are five central ideas of symbolic interactionism:

1. The individual must be perceived as a social individual. It is the constant striving and seeking of social interaction that influences our behavior and actions. Instead of focusing on one individual and their personality, or on how society or the social situation affects human behavior, symbolic interactionism actively examines the actions that occur between actors. Interaction is the basic unit of cognition. While personality is formed through interaction, society, in turn, emerges through the process of social interaction. Our actions depend on interaction with other individuals earlier in life and in the present moment. Social interaction is the main point of departure for our actions. If we want to find out the reason, we need to focus on the social interaction.

2. Human beings must be seen as thinking beings. Human actions are justified not only by the interaction of individuals. But also the interaction within the individual himself with his inner self. However, our ideas and systems of views and values are not as important in this case as a constant, continuous active thought process. We are not mere creatures with a conditioned reflex, we are not mere beings who are influenced by others, we are not mere products of society. We are, in our very original essence, thinking animals who are in constant conversation with ourselves, interacting with others. If we want to understand reason, we need to focus on human thinking.

3. humans do not directly perceive their environment; instead, they determine the situation in which they find themselves. The environment may exist in reality, but more important is how we define it. This definition is not the result of chance, it is a consequence of constant social interaction and thought process.

4. The cause of human action is the result of what happens in the present particular situation. Reason is revealed in the process of social interaction, thinking, and definition occurring in the present moment. It is not the encounter between society and us in the past or our past experiences that serve as the cause for action, but, on the contrary, it is social interaction, thinking, and definition of the situation that takes place in the present moment in time. Our past is involved in action mainly because we think about it and resort to it in determining the present situation.

5. People are described as active beings in relation to their environment. Words such as restrained, responding, controlled, imprisoned and formed are not used when describing humans in symbolic interactionism. Unlike other social-scientific views, the concept of symbolic interactionism asserts that people are not passive beings in relation to their environment. On the contrary, they are actively involved in what they do.

There are major representatives of this trend.

Thus, G. Mead fundamentally distinguishes between "action" and "social action. The former implies the act of one individual, while "social action" implies the involvement of two or more people, taking into account their mentality. Symbols can be gestures, which G. Mead divides by their nature into insignificant and meaningful. There is such a division of gestures:

1. insignificant gestures are gestures capable of provoking reactions in which there is virtually no thought. These are actions of one person capable of stimulating unconscious actions in another. (These gestures are typical of fast-paced sports: boxing, wrestling, hockey, etc., as well as the courtship process)

2. Significant gestures are sound gestures, especially specific language words. Meaningful gestures contribute to human society because they lead to meaningful interaction.

3. According to J. Mead, meaningful gestures are gestures that are unique to humans. They are capable of eliciting a sufficiently definite and predictable reaction from those to whom they are addressed. Thanks to this, according to G. Mead, human communication arises. From a pragmatic point of view, a meaningful symbol creates qualitatively new opportunities for human interaction as compared to those used by animals.

Another scientist and representative of this trend, Herbert Bloomer, believes that symbolic interactionism rests on three basic premises:

1. The first premise states that people act in relation to "things" on the basis of the meanings that things have for them. By things we mean everything that people perceive in the world around them: people, physical objects, social institutions, social categories (friends and enemies), ideals (freedom and honesty), the actions of people and various situations that people encounter in their everyday lives.

2. According to the second premise, the meanings of these or those things are by no means fixed and not formulated in advance; on the contrary, they appear, are modified and develop in interaction with the social environment, in various interactive situations. Participants of interaction do not automatically follow the established norms, as well as the established roles.

The third theoretical premise states that these meanings are used and modified in the process of human interpretation of the things around them. In other words, meanings are the result of interpretations that have been carried out in interactive contexts.