Interactionnism symbolic system

The interactionnism symbolic system is an approach resulting from the American sociology which underwent several inflections of its theoretical bases since its appearance, towards the end of the Années 1930. These theoretical foundations rise from a double movement.

The first time

Initially, the emergence of the theoretical framework of the interactionnism symbolic system rises from a paradigmatic rupture carried out by George Herbert Mead in social psychology. Indeed, Mead is released from the dominant psychological paradigms of the time, the Béhaviorisme and the Psychanalyse, to develop a inter-relational and Co-constructive approach direction. Its thesis is that, firstly, the cognitive access within the meaning of the phenomena, as well subjective as objective, inevitably rises from an interpretation and, secondly, that the interpretative management training rises from the dynamic processes of interindividual interaction. Thus, according to this theoretical framework meadien, developed using research in ethology, the interaction symbolic system (verbal and not-verbal communication) between the human or animal individuals determines the direction which the latter grant to the world and their own mental states.

The second time

In the second time, this theoretical framework meadien was integrated into the sociological tradition of the school of Chicago, thanks to pupils of Mead, such as Herbert Blumer and several others, which, combining the framework meadien with the methods of direct observation, developed a microphone-sociology interactionnist being opposed to the dominant paradigms in sociology: the Functionalism and the Culturalisme. The common characteristic of this double movement is, in addition to one obvious oppositional position and polemic, the fundamental refusal of a biological and social determinism of the individual.

At that time, the approach interactionnist had a multitude of steps and interpretations different, due to its autonomous and isolated position. Indeed, it is only about years 1970 that the interactionnism consolidates its prospect with the development by Turner for a theory for the role or with work for Anselm Strauss. This consolidation enables him to extend the influence of its prospect and to be incorporated in a sociological culture more “traditional”, charming to him by the fact even its critical position and polemic. It is clear that the concepts of direction and reality symbolic system are today central concepts of the social sciences. This consolidation is characterized by the stating by Herbert Blumer of three short but complete principles defining the interactionnism symbolic system:

Principles at the origin of the discipline

  1. the human ones act with regard to the things according to the interpretative direction that these things have for them.
  2. This direction is derived or comes from the interactions that each one has with others.
  3. It is in a process of interpretation implemented by each one in the treatment of the objects met that this direction is handled and modified. ” (De Quieroz, p. 31: quotation of Herbert Blumer, 1969)

Thus, the action is based starting from the direction, this last emerges through the situational interpersonal interactions thanks to an intersubjective reality resting on shared linguistic symbols. This second principle conforms directly to the pattern of thought of Mead for which “the universe of the significances emerges from a process of co-operation and mutual adaptation within the social group. ” (De Quieroz, p. 31) But it is the third principle which characterizes best the approach interactionnist and which makes it possible to exceed the deterministic executives, because it is this process hermeneutics of interpretation which creates a new direction for each individual transforming the significances of the objects unceasingly. It is this reflexive capacity which constitutes, for the subject, the base of construction interactionnist: the individual controls his actions while acting on itself and the whole according to the circumstances and the context.

At the epistemological level, the interactionnism symbolic system was strongly influenced by the development diltheyen of the understanding Tradition, in opposition with the explanatory Approche, allowing the development of new a Réalisme not falling into the objectivist error. Indeed, the interactionnism forsakes, without however rejecting, the other sociological or psychosociological methods, by developing an approach Pragmatique accepting the postulates constructivists.

See too

Researchers

Methodology

Random links:Jean VII | List communes of Estrémadure | Socompa | Economic relations between the Spanish America and Europe | Two-mountains (AMT) | Buncombe,_l'Illinois