A reinterpretation of the influence of American pragmatism on symbolic interactionist theory (Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, Margaret Mead, Charles Horton Cooley).

摘要

This dissertation addresses the influence of American pragmatism upon symbolic interactionism. It posits that current symbolic interactionist (SI) theory has overlooked and misinterpreted many concepts and principles developed by the American pragmatists. On the basis of a critical analysis of Peirce, James, Mead, and Cooley, it argues that important concepts pertaining to consciousness, the social order, meaning, macro-micro linkages, self, and sentiment, are not reflected in current SI theory. It proposes that future SI theorizing and research should (a) formally incorporate Peirce's semiotics into SI theory; (b) evaluate and test James' conceptions of apperception, ideo-motivation, anticipatory images, and will; (c) evaluate Mead's assumptions that symbols constitute a macro-micro linkage and that internalized symbols are the basis of self-control and social control and thus central to social integration; (d) address Cooley's arguments that sentiments constitute a macro-micro linkage, that consciousness, self, and the social order are composed of sentiments, and that sentiments direct conduct and, thus, are a primary source of motivation; (e) empirically determine the degree to which symbols are associated with sensations and thereby constitute sentiments; (f) evaluate the relationship between meaning and sentiment; (g) evaluate and incorporate the institutional models of self put forth by Mead and Cooley into SI theory; (h) evaluate Cooley's assumption that sentiments associated with the social order will dominate consciousness and direct conduct; and (i) critically evaluate Cooley's model of self as sentiment and his assumption that sentiment is central to meaning, reasoning, morality, and aesthetics.