Sociological Theory of Erving Goffman and George Mead - Essay Example

SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES OF ERVING GOFFMAN AND GEORGE MEAD by The of the The of the School The and The Date The theories of the relationships between the individual and society have become an important phenomenon for the discussion between the sociologists. It was predetermined by different confusing situations, which people faced, living in the community. These theories are differentiated according to the time period, as each epoch had its own peculiarities of communication. Thus, Erving Goffman and George Mead expressed their own vision on the question of relationships between the person and society. Each of them possessed a specific theory, which was very different from others. However, there were also a lot of similarities in them. The aim of this work is to analyze the sociological theories of Erving Goffman and George Mead and compare them in terms of research, expression and effectiveness. Sociological theory is a set of concepts and principles, which explain the functioning of the sociological structures. The general theoretical approaches, existing in sociology, are the following: functionalism, including evolutionary sociology; symbolic interactionism and interpretative sociology, including the theory of social action; the Marxist sociology and the theory of the conflict; formal sociology; social phenomenology; structuralism and post-structuralism. The aim of sociological approaches is to explain the processes, which appear in the chain of individual and social interconnection and analyze the nature of their emergence. A great impact to the research of the sociological issues was made by an American sociologist George Herbert Mead. George Herbert Mead (1863-1931) is an American philosopher, sociologist and representative of the Chicago school of sociology. George Mead studied at Harvard University, as well as in Leipzig and Berlin, where his sociological views were strongly influenced by Wundt. Despite the fact that he did not have an academic degree, Mead taught social psychology at the University of Chicago from 1892 until his death. It was the place, where he became acquainted with the views of Simmel, who had strong influence on the formation of his sociological theory. At that time Mead began to think over the role of the person in the society. He analyzed the behavior of children during the team games and public activities, making notes on how their reactions on different situations changed under the influence of other people. These observations gave birth to his famous sociological theory of “symbolic interractionism”, which predetermined that the personality forms under the influence of the community and reflects the characteristics, accepted in it. According to Mead, the society and individual are formed within the set of processes of interactions. The sociologist calls it a social act. It is represented as a dialogue between the individuals, which is viewed as a permanent and ongoing exchange of the attitudes and actions between them. Social act includes four stages: impulse, perception, manipulation, and consummation (consumption). Impulse is considered as a motivation of the individual in the external social environment for action. Perception is the formation of the object of future actions in the mind of the individual. Manipulation is a process of interaction between the subject and object. Consummation is the obtaining of the benefits by the object and their evaluation. Considering the social act as an interaction, an American researcher identified its two main types - non-symbolic and symbolic. The first type is a direct reaction of the individual to the actions of others. The second one is revealed through the exchange of settings, meanings and values of people by means of different forms, primarily language. The latter type can be represented by gestures, as well as the written or verbal forms of communication. Considering different types of gestures, Mead paid special attention to their analysis, considering it as a meaningful symbol of cooperation. These observations were accomplished through the process, which Mead identified as "taking the role". In practice, it is revealed by the actions of the individual, who imagines himself on the place of the person with whom communication is carried out. Through the process of adoption of the role, the individual develops the ability to present himself as an object of his own thoughts, which provides the conversion of the external social control into self-control. An American scientist stressed that the social world of the person and mankind in general is formed as a result of the processes of social interactions, in which "symbolic environment" plays an important role. According to Mead, communication between people is carried out with the help of special tools – symbols, which consist of the gestures and language. Symbolic human environment has a significant influence on the person, as it leads to the formation of his consciousness and individuality. The meaning of the gesture is the instinctive reaction of the person to the external actions. The character of the perception of the surrounding social reality by the individual is determined by the experience of his communication with other people and his ability to express the symbols (gestures and language) in the way, natural for others. According to Mead, human actions have significant social character. The behavior of an individual can only be explained in terms of his communication with the social groups. If the actions of the individual are not considered as a social phenomenon, then they cannot be explained. Mead examines in detail the problems of adaptation of the individuals to each other within the framework of the social processes. The interaction is realized through the communication: gestures at the lower levels of human evolution, and meaningful symbols. According to the sociological views of Mead, a set of processes of interaction creates the society and social individual. The formation of “self” is entirely a social process, which main purpose is to form the idea of self-consciousness, which distinguishes the human being from inanimate objects and living organisms. The theoretical position of Mead attempts to develop his idea that the process of growth of individuality takes place in the society. Small child discovers his “self” only in the interaction with others. If a child communicates with only one person, his development as a personality is relatively straightforward and one-dimensional. The process of formation of individuality requires a group of people, who react differently to the actions of the child. Considering the ability of the human mind to use symbols and gestures, Mead believed that a person can be both the subject and object for his psychological experiments. The sociologist managed to hold various researches in order to prove his theory of “self” formation within the society through the process of “role taking”. Mead considered the children as the best objects for sociological researches, as their “self” remains in the process of formation. The infant is born within the society and acquires its major characteristics. Having researched the process of infant behavior, Mead wrote “the baby’s inborn gestures begin the social acts that the infant cannot complete without assistance from others; and normally the parents complete the acts. The infant gets a response from those around him, and it is they who actually carry out or complete his acts. For example, the infant’s cry indicates a need for help, and adults respond by coming to the child and changing the diapers” (Mead, J. H., 1986, 91). This experiment proved Mead’s theory of socialization. Considering the process of “role taking” in the formation of “self”, Mead also applied a lot of interesting experiments. He provides the example of symbols, which predetermines the formation of “self” by means of application of different mechanisms: visual, imaginary and so forth. He describes the situation in the following way “young children are capable of the simplest level of role taking as soon as they begin to use significant symbols. For example, when a little girl tells her mother, “I love you, Mommy”, she hears her own words and comprehends their meanings much the same as the mother does. She understands that she has just said something caring to her mother. Hearing herself talk gives her an objective perception of her own behavior, as if she were standing outside of herself, “taking the role of the other”, viewing herself from the role of another person” (Mead, J. H., 1986, 95). Though, the example concerns child’s behavior, Mead considered that it can be applied to people of all ages. It is a natural process, which takes place by means of consciousness, existing sometimes even behind human’s mind. These researches tell us about the specific insights offered by the theory of “self” formation and “role taking” with reference to the relationship between the individual and society. Mead explains them in the following way “because we can “hear” the words of our inner conversation much the same as if they were spoken aloud, the mechanism of role taking operates just as well as the inner conversation as in overt social communication” (Mead, J. H., 1986, 95). Having no formal status, Mead did not publish any of his books. Despite this, he had a great influence on the further generation of sociologists and his lectures were collected and published by them after his death. After the death of Mead, his theories received much attention from those who were interested in studying sociological processes. One of such people was Erving Goffman, an American sociologist of Canadian origin, the representative of the "second generation" of the Chicago school of sociology. Goffman was the seventy-third President of the American Sociological Association. The most significant contribution of Goffman to sociology became his study of the symbolic interaction in the form of a game, which he had begun in 1959 and explored during his whole life, expanding the scope of the study. Goffman was born on June 11, 1922 in Mennville. When he was a child, his family returned to the province of Manitoba. Goffman’s sister, Francis Bay, said that as a child Erving was a great joker, and they could never think that he would reach any success. Having started his education in the technical secondary school of St. John in Dauphin, Manitoba, he chose the specialty of chemistry at the University of Manitoba in 1939. In 1945, he received a Bachelor of Arts at the University of Toronto, and in 1949 and 1953 - a Master of Arts and Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Chicago. In 1952 he married Angelica Choate. She was a psychologist by profession, who often experienced emotional problems and the need for mental health care. In 1964, she committed a suicide. A lot of scientists associated the interest of Goffman to psychiatric hospitals and sociological experiments with the state of his wife. Since 1954 he lived in Washington and spent much time in psychiatric hospitals, watching the patients and holding the observations on the progress of their diagnoses. However, this paper describes the sociological theory of Erving Goffman, which became one of the most discussable in the history of sociological evolution. Thus, it is important to analyze the factors, which influenced the formation of Goffman’s theory of “symbolic interaction perspective”. Goffman was one of the best American sociologists of his generation. His studies were strongly influenced by George Herbert Mead and Herbert Blumer in the development of his own sociological theory. At the University of Chicago, Goffman studied with Everett Hughes, Edward Shils and Lloyd Warner. Interpersonal interaction or microsociology became one of his first studies. Goffman developed the "dramaturgical approach" to the interaction of humans and introduced a set of concepts, which made significant contributions to sociology. Goffman considered himself a sociologist, and preferred not to concentrate much attention on the methodological approach to phenomenology and post-modernism. Thus, he was especially interested in "closed" communities in the context of the large modern societies (remote villages, monasteries, prisons, hospitals), separated from the surrounding life by a symbolic barrier. Goffmans work, to a certain extent, is similar to the “symbolic interactionism” of Mead. The sociological direction, developed by Goffman is sometimes called "the dramatic perspective in sociology". Its fundamental difference from the theory of social roles is revealed through the emphasis of the analyst not on the regulatory requirements and proper performance of "roles", but on its design, adoption, maintenance and transformation in the process of interaction, as well as the attention to uncertainty and ambiguity of the situations and errors of the performers. The theoretical position of Goffman attempts to develop the idea that the aim of the interactive individuals it to create a certain understanding of the "self", which will be accepted by others. Social situations represent the drama in miniature and on a course of the action people tend to create a certain impression. Goffman believed that people create their own situations in order to express the symbolic meanings, by means of which they made a good impression on others. The aim of the actions of any person is to regulate the behavior of others, especially their response. It creates the impression that causes the desire of others to follow his purpose. A person can represent both roles: the actor and audience, but there is a gap between the role and the content of “self”. Due to the large number of roles, few people are concentrated on some specific behavioral frame. Role gap means the degree of distancing of “self” from the frames of social behavior. The researches of Erving Goffman for the theory of impressions are revealed in his observations of social rituals, established as the standard patterns of functioning of the individual. He considered that these rituals help to understand the nature of “self” and its interconnection with the society. They reveal the particularities of social institutions and the ability of people to behave and think in terms of the generalized rules. In order to prove his theory, Goffman writes “the individual’s role enactment occurs largely through a cycle of face-to-face social situations with role others, that is relevant audiences. These various kinds of role others for an individual in role, when taken together, have recently been termed as role-set” (Goffman, E., 1961, 86). He also provides the following example to represent his theory “if, for example, a funeral parlor is to stay in business, than the role of the director, of the immediately bereaved, and the deceased must be performed regularly” (Goffman, E., 1961, 88). By this example, the sociologist represents us the established norms, which should be strictly abide by the individual, in other case his behavior will not be accepted in the society. Thus, the concept of accepting roles greatly influences the relationships between the individual and the society and regulates the frames of their communication with each other, and the rules of its implementation. Comparing the theory of “symbolic interractionism” of George Mead and “symbolic interaction perspective” of Erving Goffman, one can notice many similarities between them and it is no wonder, as Goffman was the follower of Mead’s theory and made his observations on the basis of the researches of his predecessor. For example, both of them supported the idea, that the individual is formed by means of his interaction with the society, acquiring the particular features, established in it and then reproducing the similar situations in their life. The difference is that Mead concentrated on symbols, as the means of expression of “self” in communication with others, while Goffman viewed the presentation of “self” by means of dramatic approach, representing society as a theatrical stage and people as the performers, who choose their roles by themselves. Taking into consideration their analysis of the process of role taking, it becomes obvious that the sociologists developed the same idea: social environment is the main factor of the development of personality, which is predetermined by the interaction and as a result establishment of the frames for the comfortable functioning of the person within it. Concluding this article, it is necessary to mention that the observations of Mead and Goffman brought a significant influence to sociology. The influence of the chosen theoretical perspectives within sociology is revealed through the understanding that the relationships between the individual and society depend upon the ability of the person to assimilate to the norms and frames, established in it. Nowadays, one can observe many cases, when people do not perform the particular functions within the society and what is the result of it? A good example is the case of racial, age, or any other type of discrimination. It becomes obvious that even the inborn differences between people, such as skin color become the reason for disputes and conflicts, despite the fact that these peculiarities are not the fault of the object of discrimination. The situation with the behavioral frames is even worse, as any deviation from them is considered as the threat for the traditional existence of social norms. These are the reasons, why Mead and Goffman paid so much attention to the described theories, which have gained great popularity nowadays. Twenty-first century is the time of reorganization of human values and consequently their behavioral patterns within the society. That is why, the theories of Mead and Goffman remain acute till nowadays. References Goffman, E., 1961. Encounters. Two studies in the sociology of interaction. The USA: the Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc. Mead, G. H., 1986. A Unifying Theory for Sociology. The USA: Sage Publications, Inc. Smelser N. J. 1969. Sociology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.,Prentice-Hall. Read More