7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

1/34

Mappers of SocietyThe Lives, Times, and Legacies of Great

SociologistsRONALD FERNANDEZ

Westport, ConnecticutLondon

RAEGER

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

2/34

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication DataFernandez , Rona ld .

M ap pe rs of society : the l ives, t ime s, an d legacies of great sociologists / R ona ldF e rna nde z ,

p . cm .Includes bibl iographical references and index.ISBN 0-275-97434-0 (a lk. paper)ISBN 0-275-974 35-9 (pbk. : a lk. paper)

1. SociologistsBiography. 2. SociologyPhilosophy. I. Tit le.HM 478.F47 2003301 '.092'2dc21 2003042056[B]

Bri t ish Library Cataloguing in Publ icat ion Data is avai lable .Cop yr ight 2003 by Rona ld Fernan dezAll r ights reserved. No port ion of this book may bereproduced, by any process or t echnique , wi thout theexpress wri t ten consent of the publ isher .Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2003042056ISBN: 0-275-97434-0

0-275-97435-9 (pbk. )First published in 2003Praeg er Pu bl ishers , 88 Post Road West , Westport , CT 06881An impr in t of Greenwood Publ i sh ing Group, Inc .w w w . pra e ge r . c omPrinted in the Uni ted States of America

The paper used in this book complies wi th thePermanent Paper S tandard i s sued by the Nat iona lInformat ion S tandards Organiza t ion (Z39.48-1984).10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

http://www.praeger.com/http://www.praeger.com/

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

3/34

Conten ts

Acknowledgments ixIntroduction xi1 Kar l M arx 12 Emi le Du rkh eim 353 M ax Weber 754 Georg Simmel 1095 George He rber t M ead 1416 Tho rstein Veblen 1737 Erv ing Goffman 2038 Pe ter L. Be rger 233Conclusion 265Bibliography 271Index 275

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

4/34

CHAPTER 5George Herber t Mead

"That is the problem of society is it not? How can you present orderand structure in society and yet bring about the changes that need totake place, are taking place?"George Herbert M ead, The Problem of Society.1D I R T Y W O R KD o y o u r e m e m b e r The Jungle, Upton Sinclair ' s 1906 novel about the prepos terous ly unsan i ta ry condi t ions in Chicago ' s meatpack ing indus t ry? 2Many s tudents read i t in high school and, af ter f in ishing the book, foundi t impossible to eat a hot dog or other mystery meats for a considerablepe r iod of t ime. The boo k ex pose d a n op en sore in U.S. life an d led to ,among o ther th ings , the Pure Food and Drug Act . Congress s tepped inand theoret ical ly created condi t ions that produced, i f not the best meat ,at least a nonlethal breakfast , lunch, or d inner .The consu m er w as safe . But w ha t abou t the wo rker? As in 2003,3 in 1906a mult i tude of legal and i l legal immigrants ki l led and cut the meat placedon Amer ica ' s bes t d in ing- room tab les . They worked long and hard , on lyto be met by recep t ion com mit tees tha t inc lude d the Am er ican Pro tec tiveAssociat ion, centered in the Midwest . The roughly half mil l ion membersof th is orga niza t ion cal led "W hiskey Bill" Traynor their ant i - im m igran tleader . Traynor not only blamed Cathol ics for the economic problems ofthe 1890s, bu t he unc ov ere d a plot as nas ty as an y in A m erica n his tory.Waving a document t i t led "Instruct ions to Cathol ics ," Traynor to ld anyone wi l l ing to l i s ten tha t the document ' s au thor was the Vat ican ' s mos tfamous res iden t . Traynor argued tha t the pope meant to take over Amer-

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

5/34

142 Mappers of Societyica and was responsible for the legions of new, job-s teal ing immigrantsf rom countr ies l ike I taly and Poland. "True Americanism" therefore dem an de d tha t me m be rs take a so lem n oath to never vo te fo r a Catho l ic , toboycot t Catho l ic merchants , and to openly d iscr iminate agains t Catho l iclabor.4

Over t ime organizat ions l ike the American Protect ive Associat ion produced a movemen t t o A mer i can ize the immig r an t . 5 At the beginning ofthe twent ieth century, count less all-American com mu ni t ie s v ied w i th oneanother to f ind new ways to make the immigran t blendwillingly orunwillinglyinto the Am er ican m ains t rea m . Roches ter, N ew York crea ted"Americanizat ion factor ies" as Theodore Roosevel t s t ressed that " thecountry is a crucible , a mel t ing pot in which many dif ferent race s t rainsare bein g fused into one. If som e of the mate r ial rem ains an unfused lu m p ,it is w ort hle ss in i tself a nd i t is also a de tr im en t to the rest of the m ixtu re." 6

George Herber t Mead s tepped in to the cruc ib le wi th a courageousspeech delivered in Chicago in 1909. I ts title"The Adjus tment o f OurIndus t ry to Surp lus and Unski l led Labor"sounds l ike a strong dose ofaca dem ic anem ia, bu t its con tent wa s as confrontat ional as a socialis t leading a s t r ike . Mead argued tha t ins tead of compla in ing about the immigran t , Amer icans needed to r emember one undeniab le f ac t : immigran tscam e to the Uni ted Sta tes " to do the d i r ty wo rk ." They cont r ibu ted un to ldbenef i ts to the economy, but ins tead of appreciat ion, "I was assured thatthe business men of the ci ty had absolutely no feel ing of responsibi l i tyto the immigrant , or the sense of debt which Chicago owes to theimmigr an t . " 7

These are strong words st i l l today. In 1909 men like Whiskey Bill Traynor were l i teral ly on the prowl, eager to forcibly suppress any suppor t forimmigran ts in genera l and Catho l ics in par t icu lar . Mead never the less r eminded h is aud ience tha t " they come here because there i s a demand forthem. Many indus t r ies have sen t the i r agen ts abroad to induce them tocome. Transpor ta t ion companies spread the i r adver t i sements a l l over Europe to induce men to come, more than ought to be encouraged ." 8Mead a r gued tha t Americansespecially t he bus ines smen in Ch i cagohad responsibi l i t ies . Immigrants who died in our factor ies andm ines "hav e jus t as m uc h r igh t in th i s Am er ica as any on e ." But hav e w emade a ser ious a t tempt to adap t our schools to their needs? Do we t ry tomake i t possible for these immigrants to learn Engl ish? And have wemade suff icient ef for ts to provide the best possible industr ial educat ion."We have not ," said Mead, so he proposed a var iety of ways to achieve alifelong goal: the real bringing together of all Americans.9

Mead ' s a t t i tude toward immigran ts sugges ts two of the cruc ia l themesthat dominated his teaching, h is publ icat ions , and his s ignif icant comm u n i t y effortsfor more than twenty- f ive yearsin the city of Chicago.Firs t , Mead was always interested in social reform, an act ivi ty that he

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

6/34

George Herber t Mead 143descr ibed as "the appl ica t ion of intell igence to the control of social cond i t ions ." Wi th a pass ion as s t rong as Emile Durkheim' s , Mead be l ievedtha t educa ted men and w o m e n c o u l d and shou ld use their intell igence to"main ta in o r de r and s t ruc ture in society and yet br ing abou t the changestha t neede d to t ake p lace ." As w i th the i m m i g r a n t , if Am er icans faced thet r u th and accepted their responsibi l i t ies , a ser ious social problem couldb e c o m e a way to uni te r a ther than d iv ide the Amer ican people .1 0O n a second and deeper leve l , Mead be l ieved tha t any chance to dis cover and i nven t a new future res ted on an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the na tu r ea n d d e v e l o p m e n t of reflective intelligence. Like no other an imal on ear th ,h u m a n b e i n g s h a v e the capaci ty to talk to t hemse lves abou t t hemse lvesa n d the w o r l d in which they l ive . I could , for example, ref lect on history,the immig r an t , the b u s i n e s s m e n , and other Amer icans s imul taneous ly . Icould even put myself in the other per son ' s shoes and try to e m p a t h i z ew i th his or her way of seeing the world. Collectively, we could all see theprocess of our p a s t d e v e l o p m e n t and t hen decideafter th is process ofconscious reflectionhow we could walk into the future on the bas is ofa reevalua ted and now conquered pas t .

M e a d t h o u g h t of ref lective intell igenc e as a gif t that potentially allowedpeop le to control and change one of the mos t imp lacab le opponen t s onear th : an insti tutionalized social order .11 Thus Mead ' s focus on the or igina n d d e v e l o p m e n t of self was a search for scientific truth and a del ibera tem e a n s to a bet te r wor ld . His a r g u m e n t is bo th eno r mous ly e loquen t andexceeding ly prec ise . Unders tand the or igin and d e v e l o p m e n t of self, andyou un locked the door that explains the na tu r e and funct ioning of reflect ive in te l l igence . Unders tand the self, and you could conceivably createan A mer i ca tha t made a place for everyoneeven those who did thenat ion ' s d i r ty work .M A N F R O M O B E R L I N

By def ini t ion chambers of c o m m e r c e are f amous for hy pe . Because theytry to sell their city, no one is su r p r i s ed w hen the chamber engages inhyper bo le . In the case of Ober l in , Ohio , the c h a m b e r ' s claimthat it isthe "most cosmopol i tan smal l town in America"actually has deep roo tsin reality. In 1833 two Yankee miss ionar ies dec ided to bu i ld a t o w n andcollege at the same p lace and t ime. P ledg ing to l ive l ives that epi tomized"the plainest l iv ing and the highes t th ink ing ," they es tab l i shed a collegetha t in 1833 announced th i s admiss ion po l icy : "Youths are received asmembers , i r r espect ive of color." By the t ime George M ead en tered O ber l in(in 1877), the college and the city both had a wel l -deserved reputa t ion forr is ing above the common p r e jud ices and accep ted w i sdom of the A m e r ican mains t ream.1 2

Born in Sou th Hadley , Massachuse t t s , on Feb ruary 27 ,1863 , M ead came

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

7/34

144 Mappers of Societyto Oberlin when his minister father accepted a posit ion ( in 1869) as chairof Sacred Rhetor ic and Pastoral Theology. His mother was a graduate ofMount Holyoke Seminary , so Mead l ived in a home where bo th paren tsexem plified ano the r Ob er l in t radi t ion : in a sexis t society , Ob er l in wa s thefirst truly coeducational college in the United States.

Mead f i rs t s tudied at the Ober l in Preparatory School and formally entered the col lege in 1879. H e quickly be cam e the insep arab le f r iend ofHenry Cas t le , a young man f rom Hawai i . For twelve year s the two mencorresponded f rom al l par ts of the wor ld , providing a wr i t ten record thatof fer s tang ib le ev idence of Mead ' s p reoccupat ions , d reams, and even"making an ass o f himself."13As ear ly as 1882 M ead an d C as t le dec ided tha t "no do gm at ic ph i losophy was possible ." They serendipi tously ar r ived at th is conclusion on thew ay to c lass one mo rn in g , and " it w as an exper ience tha t was as profoundas any religious conversion could be. I t is identif ied with all the indefinitepromise of spr ing." 1 4I t i s a g rea t l ine . Mead knew what he was agains t bu t no t what he wasfor . After graduation in 1883 he taug ht school an d t r ied " to w ork for oth ersin Chr is t iani ty ." Meanwhile , he also doubted that God even exis ted. A bi t

dizzy, he felt "utter ly at sea," so in 1884 he worked as part of a crewsurve ying for the ra i l roads in nor th eas te rn M inneso ta . It w as toug h wo rk ,wi th a hard-dr ink ing , fou l -mouthed engineer o f a boss . As Mead to ldCas t le , "a d runken man howl ing ou ts ide of your ten t would des t roy theconcentrat ion of Socrates ."Cast le dec ided M ea d 's fate . H e entered H arv ard in 1887, an d so didMead . At the t ime Harvard housed ph i losophers l ike Wi l l iam James andJos iah Royce . Pragmat i sm ru led the ph i losophica l day . Mead no t on lystudied with the best minds in America here; he received an offer f romJam es to tu to r Jam es ' s son. In the su m m er of 1888, M ead l ived w ith theJameses and "m ad e an ass of himself" when he had a romantic af fai r wi thM r s . James ' s s is ter . The great phi losopher noted that "Mead was a f inem an ly fellow an d fit object for an y wo m a n to ado re, bu t Jam es w as n oten thus ias t ic about hav ing to engage in unwelcome specta tor sh ip of suchadorat ion at c lose range." 1 5With James ' s help Mead sai led for Germany, now eager to get a Ph.D.in phi losophy f rom the Univers i ty of Ber l in . While he avidly t r ied to pos i t ion himself in relat ion to the doctr ines then dominant , the pragmaticbent of his th inking was al ready evident . As he explained to Cast le , "Theonly inspir ing work that can be found is in the pract ical appl icat ion ofm ora ls to li fe ." M ea d especial ly w an te d to set t le in one city, im m erse him self in i ts poli t ics, and use science and reason to star t the process of signif icant societal change at i ts metropolitan core.16

M ead rem ained in Berl in un t i l 1891 . H e m ar r ied H en ry Ca s t le 's s i s te rHelenshe too was in Berlinbut despi te his desire for the Ph.D. , Mead

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

8/34

George Herber t Mead 145r e tu rned to the Uni ted Sta tes wi thout comple t ing h is d i sser ta t ion . JohnDewey had offered Mead a facul ty posi t ion at the Univers i ty of Michiganin A nn A rbor , an d th e M ea ds set t led there in 1891. I t w as the beg inn ingof a professional and personal f r iendship that las ted a l i fet ime. Despi teh is em bar ra ssm ent a bou t never com ple t ing h is thes i s , M ead never the lessfocused on his new teaching and research responsibi l i t ies . He never gotthe Ph.D. , and this is arguably a lesson for today 's univers i t ies . Now,a doctorate is as mandatory as a photo ID at the ai rpor t ; then, jus thaving a great mind was a suff icient basis for teaching at America ' s bestun iver s i t i es .

Dewey and Mead l ived almost s ide by s ide. Cast le explained that thefamil ies seemed to have an idyl l ic exis tence. Their homes had "splendidout looks" because the i r backyards backed up to the woods . "Ann Arboris one of the loveliest vil lages I have seen anywhere; all the streets pretty,up hi l l and down, f ine pasture and forest . George and Helen are for tunateto l ive in such a place." 1 7

The Meads agreed . But when Pres iden t Harper o f the Univers i ty o fChicago poached other schools ' facul ty , he only pi l fered f rom the nat ion ' sbest univers i t ies . In 1894 John Dewey received a generous offer to headthe Univers i ty o f Chicago ' s new phi losophy depar tment ; wi th car teblanche r ights to hire addi t ional facul ty , he asked Mead to accompanyhim to a city that h ad , ins tead of the bucol ic charm of A nn Arbor , a jum bleof skyscrapers facing s t reets ful l of crowded t rol leys , many on their wayto and f rom the s laughterhouses . Mead s tayed at Chicago for th ir ty-eightyears , becoming one of the ci ty ' s greates t boosters and one of the univers i ty ' s bes t and mos t be loved teachers .

One posi t ive proof of Mead 's classroom inf luence is th is provocat ivefac t : h i s s tudents pos thumous ly publ i shed the books tha t a re now thebas is fo r M ea d ' s r epu ta t ion a nd in f luence . Othe rs pu t in p r in t wh at M eadonly offered in class . His reluctanc e to pu bl ish h as alw ays baffled an yo netrying to unders tand his career . Go, for example, to the Library of Congress catalog, check the name John Dewey, and 178 books appea r . Manyare dupl ica tes , bu t i f Mead ' s mentor and bes t f r iend publ i shed so much ,w ha t s topped G eor ge Mead?One explanat ion is hard for the s tatus conscious to accept : in Dewey'sw ord s , M ead "w as rem arkab ly free from the usu al ex terna l s igns of busyact ivi ty . He was not one to rush about breathless with the convict ion thathe must somehow convince others of his act ivi ty ." In plainer Engl ishMead had no th ing to p rove , excep t to himself. From the day he set footin M ich igan , h i s p reocc upat ion w as the "prob lem of ind iv idua l min d andconsciousness in relat ion to wor ld and society ." Dewey wrote that Meadwas the most or iginal mind of his generat ion but , as i f Sisyphus cl imbingthe mountain , that he exper ienced great d if f icul ty master ing verbal , muchless wr i t ten, expression of his new ideas and insights . "There was not

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

9/34

146 Mappers of Societyr eady and wai t ing for h im any language in which to express himself."18Mead developed h is own terminology and , wi th no burn ing need to impress o ther s wi th h i s b r i l l i ance , Mead worked and reworked and rew ork ed h is l ec tures an d the publ ica t ions tha t never m ad e it to the pr in ter ' stable.

Today Mead would be ban ished to the academic bu l lpen or even theh in ter land b leachers ; in p resen t -day un iver s i t i es you do indeed publ i shor per ish , especial ly without a doctorate . Thankful ly , Mead survived, asa person, a father , a husband, a teacher , and a ci t izen of a democracy. Hisson recalled that he most often associated his father with this phrase: "I tought to be possible to do so and so."19 Dewey cal led him an ideal is t , butthe remarkable th ing about Mead ' s work i s tha t he didand doesofferthe conceptual tools needed to achieve peaceful yet radical change of theindividual and of his or her society.

I t i s a great body of work, al l the more interest ing because i t was thegif t of a teac her to his stu de nt s an d, as if pa ssi ng th e torch, a gif t from hiss tudents to the res t of us ." S C I E N T I F I C M E T H O D A N D T H E M O R A LS C I E N C E S "

Wil l iam James of ten emphas ized the same po in t : p ragmat i sm was amethod, a m an ne r of ap pro ac hin g the facts of life r a ther than a theory abo utthe course of human his tory or a dogma set t ing out the r ight path to theideal exis tence. In a perfect metaphor , James descr ibes pragmatism as acor r idor in a ho te l ; i t p rov ides a way to en ter " innumerab le chambers"by requir ing a specif ic "at t i tude of or ientat ion" toward the wor ld ' s s torehouse of knowledge .2 0Say you wanted to know if Jesus Chr is t was one God or , wi th Fatherand Holy Ghos t , th ree gods . Was Chr i s t ian i ty monotheis t ic o r po ly the is tic? Jame s (and s tuden ts like John Dew ey an d George Mead ) a ppro ach edsuch quest ions in th is manner : "What dif ference would i t pract ical ly maketo anyone i f th is not ion rather than that not ion were t rue? I f no pract icaldif ference whatever can be t raced, then the al ternat ives mean pract ical lythe same thing and al l d ispute is id le ." 2 1With this l ine James instant ly ignored many of the bat t les that t radit ionally d rov e ph i loso phe rs to a rgu e , wi th g rea t de ligh t , abo ut the d iv inel ight at the end of the tunnel or the pr inciples and categor ies of knowledge. Want to know if you do or do not exist? Like Rhett Butler in Gonewith the Wind, pragmat i s t s d id no t g ive a damn. Ins tead , James sugges tedthis phi losophical rule of thumb: look away f rom "f i rs t th ings" and zeroin on las t th ings, what he cal led the "f rui ts , consequences , and facts" ofhuman though t and ac t ion . Fo r pragmatistsand this was crucial forG e o r g e Mead"truth in our ideas means the same th ing tha t i t means in

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

10/34

George Herber t Mead 147science." That is , al l ideas are true "just in so far as they help us to getinto satisfactory relation with other parts of our experience." 2 2From this perspect ive the search for t ruth is never completed becauseeven " the most violent revolut ions in an individual ' s bel iefs leave mostof his o ld order s tanding." New truth is "a go-between, a smoother overof the endless a rguments be tween what you were taught to be l ieve andthe wor ld that actual ly exis ts . In Mead 's words, " the facts are determinedby conflict."23 As a pragmatis t and a scient is t , your task is to resolve theconf l ict because " to be t rue only means to perform this marr iage funct ion," to ass imilate new knowledge into the s tock of bel iefs that we arbit rar i ly and involuntar i ly inher i ted f rom others .2 4

George Mead expla ins the everyday consequences of p ragmat i sm in anessay t i t led "Scient i f ic Method and the Moral Sciences ." Compliment ingthe work of S igmund Freud , he no tes tha t psychoanalys i s fo rced peopleto real ize that "w e not only do ou r th ink ing but our perceiving with m ind stha t a l r eady have an organ ized s t ruc ture which de termines in no smal ldegree what the wor ld of our immediate and ref lect ive exper ience shal lbe ." Freud focused on issues l ike dreams and their relat ion to the unconscious w or ld that inf luenced ou r thou gh ts , bel iefs, an d act ions . As a pra gm atis t Me ad seeks m ore tangible f ruits ; he wa nts to ta lk abo ut the mora lthe socialorder that a l lowed people to l ive and work together . As aperpetual , h is tor ical inher i tance f rom others , we learned to bel ieve thatthe "process of the universe" favors the creat ion of " the most admirableorder in human society ."25 In the ex t reme we learned tha t a mora l o rderpreex is ted our ow n ex is tence; l ike M oses com ing do w n f rom the m ou nt ,social order was given f rom on high and we s imply fol lowed i ts mandatesand tenets .

H ow ev er com for t ing, the ass um ptio n of a preex is t ing orde r offered nosolace to a scientist . By definit ion a skeptic, no scientist could eve r say yesto a m ora l o rder s imply becau se it ha d been s tam ped w i th the im pr im atu rof r ece ived ph i losophica l o r r e l ig ious wisdom. Noth ing was inv io lab le ,least of al l a social order untested by "a highly developed form of impart ial intell igence," that is , the scientif ic method.2 6So far the argu m en t i s abs t rac t . M ead comes r igh t do w n to ear th w he nhe discusse s dem ocra cy an d cul t values . In civics classes w e learn that th ec i t izens of a democracy wise ly debate and analyze na t ional and in ternat ional even ts . Democra t ic government supposed ly means tha t "an in te l l igent publ ic sent iment" decides any issues before the people. In real i ty ,an au thor i ta t ive publ ic sen t iment up on any th ing i s so rare " tha t m y g uessis that the number of instances of that in the history of the United Statesof America could be told on the f ingers of two hands, perhaps upon thef ingers of one hand." Mead never meant to quest ion the legi t imacy ofdemocracy. His target was the received wisdom that assumed an intel l i gent debate; perhaps we would al l be bet ter of f i f we chal lenged "old

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

11/34

148 Mappers of Societyt r u t h s " with th is argument of then-president Wil l iam Howard Taf t : "Weare governed by minor i t ies , and the relat ively in tel l igent minor i t ies areswayed by the impor t of the issue to these minor i t ies ." 2 7

The facts are determined by conflict . I f theory and reali ty do not connect , create new truths by introducing received wisdomhello!to th eworld that is actual ly there.Mead reserved real b i le for "cul t values" in general and Chr is t iani ty inpar t icular . As received wisdom he learned (at Ober l in) the "most grandiose" of al l community ideals , that Chr is t iani ty found i ts h is tor ic expression in the ideals of the Sermon on the Mount , in the parable of theGood Samari tan, and in the Golden Rule. Unfor tunately , the real facts

prove tha t " the h i s to ry of Chr i s tendom has been a h i s to ry of war andstr i fe ." For a pragmatis t "an inst i tu t ion should ar ise and be kept al ive byits own function but in so far as i t does not function the ideal of i t can beke pt al ive only by som e cul t ." In Western societ ies the churc h is the "outs tanding i l lus t rat ion" of a cul t ins t i tu t ion; "its most important function hasbeen the preservation in the minds of the comm unity of the faith in a social orderwhich did not exist" ( emphas is added) .2 8Mead is not against rel ig ion. He is against contradict ion. When the real

wor ld bear s no re la t ionsh ip to the rece ived wisdom preached by c ler icsin pulp i ts , cul t valu es nee d to s tan d a side. The scienti fic t ruth is that " thereare no absolute values ." The best we can do is an endless ly incompletesocial order ; but we wil l never achieve even a rough vers ion of that unt i lwe dispose of the received wisdom that , l ike f ly paper , keeps us s tuck inp lace .Few mental comfor ts exis t when ci t izens t ry to es tabl ish a moral orderusing the scient i f ic method. Science never has , never wil l , and neversh ou ld offer "a vision , giv en in the m ou nt , of a perfected ord er of society."Science only argues that we t ry to solve social and moral problems withthe same methods we use to so lve the prob lems of na tura l sc ience . Substi tute functional values ( i .e. , the actual facts, f ruits , and consequences ofpar t icular bel iefs and pract ices) for cul t values , and you can jump in towhat Mead ca l l s the "great secular adventure" of human life. I t is an amazing exper ience as long as you a lways temper your en thus iasm for g rand iose schemes as a l l encompass ing as the coming of communism or theperfect democracy.M ead w as an idea l is t w h o never , as if Do n Quixote , a t tacked w indm i l l s .Focus on "br ing ing about the immedia te ad jus tment" o f people to theim m ed iate p rob lem s at ha nd . "I t i s the only wa y in wh ich it [ sel f-consciouschange] can proceed , fo r wi th every ad jus tment the envi ronment haschanged , and the soc ie ty and i t s ind iv iduals have changed in l ike degree." 2 9 People reform a moral order in increments , and their chance ofsuccess is substant ial ly improved i f they never forget the weight of thepast on the present and the future. "The order of the universe that we l ive

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

12/34

George Herber t Mead 149in is a mora l order . I t has beco m e the m oral by beco m ing th e self-consciousmethod of the members of a human society . We are not p i lgr ims andstrangers . We are at home in our own wor ld but i t i s not ours by inher i tance but by conquest . The wor ld that comes to us f rom the past possessesan d controls us . We posse ss an d control the w or ld w e discove r an d inven t .And this is the wor ld of the moral order ." 30That i s pure Mead , pure pragmat i sm. We move ahead by us ing ref lective intell igence to conquer inher i ted bel iefs , values , and pract ices . Anymoral order actual ly belongs to people only when, af ter sel f -consciousand self -cr i t ical analysis , they decide i f they wish to cont inue being whatthe pas t made them. Mead ' s g rea t con t r ibu t ion in Mind, Self, and Societyi s to give us the conceptual tools needed to possess and control the socialorder .

Incidentally , M ead nev er forgot tha t it i s incredibly ha rd to conq uer thepast ; but h e also em ph as ize d that i t i s not on ly qui te pos sible , bu t it i s "asplendid adventure i f we can r ise to i t ." 31

M I N DMead beg ins Mind, Self, and Society by tell ing us that he is a social be-havior is t . I t i s an awkward term because i t associates Mead with the veryperspect ive he wants to cr i t ic ize. Seeing behavior only through the lensof s t imulus and response, t radi t ional behavior is ts acted l ike the queen inAlice in Wonderland: "Off with their heads." Behavior is ts forgot about imagery , l angu age , and consc iousness , andthe cardin al s in for Meadtheyalso forgot abou t in t rospect ion . Their s t r ange a im wa s to observe beha vior"without br inging in the observat ion of an inner exper ience." 3 2Take this example. In the ear ly 1970s, when col lege campuses s t i l lbre ath ed confrontat ion an d ch ang e, I use d an explet ive in a class. I t w asa sl ip of the tongue, but let us call i t a st imulus. After class a young manappr oac hed m e and began to shake my hand . I w o nde r ed w hy . H e ex plain ed th at m y use of lan gu ag e wa s a revo lut ion ary ge sture! I t r ied to bevery po l i te because h is r esponse was genuine . Us ing an exple t ive (mywords included "oh, shi t !") was somehow an assaul t on the bast i l les ofpol i t ical , economic, and cul tural power .The res t of my s tudents were indif ferent to my use of language. Theirresponse was no response. Fernandez talks l ike the res t of us . Big deal . Iwant to go get a beer .For Mead the key to unders tanding th i s encounter i s the process of interpretat ion between the s t imulus of fered by the use of language and thememorable r esponse , the shak ing of my hand . Mead pu ts heads cen ters tage by working f rom the outs ide to the inside. He sees the s t imulus andthen a lways spo t l igh ts how and why the per son responded in th i s o r tha tfash ion . A n eccen t ric r espon se wo uld be par t icu lar ly ap pea l ing because a

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

13/34

150 Mappers of Societysocial behavior is t emphasized " the par ts of the act which to do not cometo external observat ion." 3 3 How, based on such a meaningless s l ip of thetong ue , d id the s tud ent assu m e tha t I m ad e a r evo lu t ionary ges ture?

Mead immedia te ly h in ts a t an answer to th i s ques t ion . He s t r esses tha tfor a social behaviorist , " the whole (society) is prior to the part ( the ind iv idua l ) , not the par t to the whole; and the par t is explained in terms ofthe w ho le , not the whole in te rms of the par t " ( emphas is added) .3 4To help un de rs ta nd the response of m y s tudent , you mu s t g rasp theinfluence of society in general and the late 1960s and early 1970s in part icu lar . At our un iver s i ty we even had a s tudent who s tood on an orangecrate near one of the campus ' s main thoroughfares . He loudly cursed for

m inu tes at a t ime; his theo ry wa s that by ov erw he lm ing u s w ith of fensivel anguage , he w ou ld e l imina te ou r inhibitionswhy be so "up t igh t"?and f ree us to act in a more l iberat ing manner .As a social behavior is t Mead s tar ts with society and works back to theind ivid ua l . H e focuses on the l ively process of in terp retat ion b ecau se thereis always a delayed reaction between any s t imulus and response . Peoplethink and then they respond to the wor ld that is there. I t i s a process , apo ten t ia l ly de l ibera te course of ac t ion , because human beings have the

remarkable capaci ty to use the i r b ra ins to shape and reshape the i r r e sponses to themselves , to others , and to society .That br ings us to mind. Mead is very f rustrat ing here because, l ikeD ur khe im in The Division of Labor in Society, M ead only def ines th is crucialterm af ter 100 pages of prose. And even then, he cal ls mental i ty a "relat ionship of the organism to the s i tuat ion which is mediated by sets ofsymbols ." 3 5 I t i s heavy language that f inal ly catches the thrust of Mead 'sappro ach . H e wi l l a rgue tha t min d i s syn on ym ou s wi th se lf -consc iousness

and that mind only ar ises because people have the wonderful abi l i ty touse symbols to communica te wi th one another .Mead 's fol lowers label th is approach symbolic in teract ion.3 6 W h e n p e o p le communica te us ing symbols such as words , they make an impl ic i tassumpt ion : tha t the symbols , the words , mean the same th ing to me tha tthey mean to you. When a f r iend of mine recent ly learned Spanish, helooked in a bi l ingual dict ionary for the verb " to embarrass ." The dict iona r y gave embarazar, so m y f riend sa id "es toy em bara zad o ." He th ou gh the said he was embarrassed; in real i ty he to ld the other person he waspregnant! In Spanish that is the col loquial meaning of the verb embarazar.Communica t ion fa i led because the symbols used were no t what Meadcalls significant symbols . They did not arouse in the other person the sameresponse they aroused in my f r iend. On the contrary, in terpret ing the symbol from a different societal perspect ive , one per son looked absurd in theeyes of the other . Even in the most l iberal Spanish communit ies , mennever ge t p regnant .What is character is t ic of any human society is the abi l i ty to share s y m -

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

14/34

George Herber t Mead 151bols . Mil l ions of people can actual ly and rel iably assume that the wordsI use mean the same th ing to me tha t they mean to them. Mead proveshis point with a lovely analysis of bears . Say I point to a footpr int andteach you that i t means bear . You learn the meaning of the symbol , andwe now can both use i t to forever identify that thisthe footprintleadsto that , the bear w e no w see in the wo od s. Because the bear is growl inganother symbol we learned to shareour in terpre ta t ion is r ap id a nd ourresponse is c lear : we need to somehow get the hel l out of the woods. 3 7Symbols of fer al l human beings great f reedom and f lexibi l i ty becausethey "const i tu te objects not const i tu ted before, objects which would notexis t except for the context of social relat ionships wherein symbolizat ionoccurs ." Remember that Mead is a social behavior is t . Symbols are therefore the "her i tage of man," and meaning is never , fundamental ly , a s tateof consciousness that exis ts outside the f ield of social experiences. On thecontrary, the meaning of symbols should be seen only in the context of aparticular set of social and historical beliefs, values, and practices. 38

Take, as an ex am ple , Betsy Ross an d th e Am eric an f lag. Pictu res of BetsyRoss labor iously darning the American f lag dot the pages of count lessU.S. elementary and high school textbooks. She is a shared and reveredsym bol to m an y A m er icans , bu t unfortunate ly , the Betsy Ross legend "hasno substant ial foundat ion in his tory." Using his f reedom to create symbols , Betsy Ross ' s grandson recounted family traditionsome w ould saymisspokeat an 1870 meet ing of the Pennsylvania Histor ical Society.39His tor ians be l ieved the grandson , and over t ime the legend became ashared symbol fo r more than 250 mi l l ion Amer icans . New immigran tseve n learn abo ut Betsy Ross w he n they s tud y for ci t izenship . But , an d thisi s Mead ' s po in t , the symbols can on ly be unders tood wi th in the contex tof a particular f ield of social experiences.

Mead never argues that symbols are accurate or t rue. As the f lag example suggests , people can share and revere symbols that are as t rustw or thy as cult valu es . For M ead tw o poin ts are crucial. First , in the processof social com m unic at ion , peo ple create , re-create , an d discard s hare d sym bols . Sym bols es tabl ish "n ew objects in na tu re" a nd be com e, l ike the BetsyRoss s tory, the "commonsense" knowledge of a society . Second, th ink ofsymbolic in teract ion as a social act with three par ts . Using symbols , oneperson begins an exchange, the other responds to the symbols of fered,an d the fi rs t perso n re sp on ds to the respon se of the other . "This threefoldor tr iadic relat ion" is the basis of me anin g. Life is a prolon ge d an d orde r ly"conversa t ion of ges tures" because , in genera l , you respond as I thoughty o u wouldand vice versa.

Shared symbols are a necessi ty for meaningful interactionand th eproving ground for the development o f mind . Mead emphas izes tha tm ind ar i ses in the process of com m unica t ion , no t com m unica t ion th rou ghmind .4 0 He bel ieves that both the genesis and the exis tence of mind are

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

15/34

152 Mappers of Societypossible only because, in symbolic in teract ion, I take the at t i tude of theo ther toward mysel f o r toward my behavior .The ability to take the attitude of the other is the foundation stone for anyunderstanding of Mead's w ork. W he n I r esp ond to you r wo rds or reac t toyo ur no nv erb al ( symbolic) exp ressions of joy, am az em en t , or d isg ust , Itake the att i tude of the other . I see myself in your eyes. This is absolutelyessent ial for the development of mind because i t i s only other people ' sat t i tudes that force me to recognize the exis tence of my own. For example,I may hate what you said , I may cal l you every name in the book, but inal l l ikel ihood, I am only so upset because you offer me at t i tudes thatd iamet r ica l ly d i sagree wi th my own. However b ru ta l , an hones t empathywith the cr i t ical a t t i tudes of others can be an enormously ef fect ive way toprecisely recognize and clar i fy my own bel iefs , a t t i tudes , and values .

Mead now moves on to the nature of ref lect ive in tel l igence. I t exis tsbecause, by using shared symbols to take the at t i tudes of others and soachiev e self-consciousness , I can then us e those same sym bols to delaymy response to a s t imulus and ref lect on what was said . Thinking forMead i s no th ing mor e than internalized conversation; we stop the act ion,an d ev en wi th no m one y in the bank , w e ta lk to ourse lves about ou rse lves ,about others , and about the nature of society . Thus, when "we speak of aper son th ink ing a th ing ou t , o r hav ing a mind ," we are on ly under l in ingthe capaci ty to "pick out a s t imulus" and then ref lect on what others saidto us and we said to them. 41

For a social behaviorist ref lective intell igence is crucial because i t is thekey character is t ic that separates us f rom other animals . "There is no capaci ty in the lower forms to give at tent ion to some analyzed element inthe f ield of s t imulat ion which would enable them to control the response.But one can say to a person, 'look at this, see this thing, and he can fastenhis attention on the specif ic object . He can direct at tention and so isolatethe par t icular response that answers to i t . That is the way we break up ouractivities and thereby make learning possible" ( emphas is added) .4 2As social scientists we learn in order to take charge of our selves andour wo r ld . W i th h is bo w a nd a r row a ime d a t on ly one ta rge t, M ead wr i testhat he seeks to "get control ," not to set t le metaphysical or o ther id leintel lectual quest ions .4 3 Understanding faci l i ta tes l i fe; thus , toward thevery end of the page s on m ind , Mea d pro v ide s ano ther def ini tion of m entali ty. Rooted in our abil i ty to use symbols as the mediators of any socials i tuat ion, mental i ty now "resides in the abi l i ty of the organism to indicatetha t in the envi ronment which answers to h i s r esponses , so tha t he cancont ro l those responses in var ious ways ." 4 4Con tro l can im ply so m eth ing negat ive , the locks tep beha vior of a s t imu lu s tha t p rod uce s the prec ise r espo nse of a con t ro lle r p res um ably dressedin a white lab coat . In Mead 's work control implies f reedom and can equall iberat ion. Min d em erge s in the proce ss of social in teract ion; by takin g th e

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

16/34

George Herber t Mead 153a t t i t udes of o the r s , I ach ieve the gift of self-consciousness and the associated abil i ty to reflect on self and w o r l d . "It is by m e a n s of reflexivenessthe tu rn ing-back of the exper ience of the i nd iv idua l upon himselfthatthe whole p rocess is thus b rought in to the exper ience of the i nd iv idua l sinvo lved in it."45

W e get cont ro l by us ing our m i n d s to u n d e r s t a n d who controls us. Thewholesocietyprecedes the par t s , you and me. We can therefore exercise our m i n d s to see w h a t s h a p e d us, and especia l ly w he n we gr asp thesignificance of self, we are w el l on the way to consciously creat ing a neww o r l d . It is an eye opening adventure , r evo lv ing , l ike a carouse l , a roundthe concept of self.

S E L FTher e ough t to be a law. Even if it is ano the r Mead , D ur khe im, or Simmel , no magnif icent mind wil l ever again be a l low ed to pub l i sh a grea t

book un t i l and un les s he or she precisely def ines their terms at the verybeg inn ing of any long d iscuss ion . In Mead ' s case his s t u d e n t s put hisbooks together , so we could b lame them if we choose to do so . Bu t, w ho m ever we t h r o w the dar t s at, the problem remains: Mead offers no exactdefinit ion of the self. So, for us self is w h a t you th ink of you. You couldbe lying to yourself; you could be f irmly rooted in reality. Either way selfrefers to your concept ions of who you are as an object in the w o r l d ofexper ience.4 6

This is Mead ' s log ic . If only because we use w o r d s to descr ibe ourselves , the self does not exist at bi r th . It ar ises in the process of sociald e v e l o p m e n t and as a resul t of symbol ic in terac t ion wi th o ther people .O ur pa r en t s are the mos t obv ious and (in many ins tances) the most influent ial o thers we encounter , but whoever f i r s t spoke to you a b o u t youin i t ia ted the process of y o u r o n g o i n g d e v e l o p m e n t of self.

A s va lues of Amer ican cu l tu re , advocates can a p p l a u d the self -madem a n or w o m a n , all the while l is tening to Frank Sinatra croon "I did it myway." Me anw hi le , Mead wi l l answ er wi th th i s : nons ense . Because we canno t deve lop a self unless others init iate the process , our l ives are a lw aysa n d foreverinextricably l inked to the at t i tudes , bel iefs , and va lues ofother people. Like the f amous Siamese twins , o ther s and the deve lop ingself coexist from the f irst breath taken by any h u m a n b e i n g , a n y w h e r e onearth.47

In d i s t inguish ing be tween the self and the body , Mead wr i tes tha t ab o d y can exist and function effectively without the exis tence of self. W h a tcharacter izes the self is t ha t "it can be an object to itself and tha t character is t ic dis t inguishes it from other objects and the body." 48 The eye can seethe foot, and the ear can hear the cracking of our knuck les , but nei ther

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

17/34

154 Mappers of Societycan see the bod y as a wh ole . The bo dy nev er sees itsel f as a to tal i ty in thesame way that the self gets to grasp the completeness of i ts exis tence.

As an object in the world of experience, the self can use the symbolsinherited in a language to intell igently ref lect on i ts own existence. Thisreflexive quality of the self is possible because the self is not only an objectto itself; it is also, simultaneously, the subject of its own reflections.49 W hi leth is may seem imposs ib le , cons ider the fo l lowing example .

You w an te d to date a par t ic ular pers on. You f inally got the nerve to askher out , and she said yes . You meet at the s tudent center , you approachhe r to say hel lo , bu t ins tead of pu l l ing the do or in yo ur direct ion, y oupush i t in on her . Once you pick her up off the f loor, she st i l l kindly agreesto dinner . Dur ing the meal she reacts to your jokes l ike a mourner at afuneral . Final ly , you spi l l spaghet t i sauce on her white blouse, and sheins tan t ly develops a migra ine . She mus t go home a t once .

Ten minutes la te r you are in your dorm room, mul l ing over your humil iat ing exper ience. You are alone, the l ights are out , and you are th inking, ta lking to yourself about your self. When you re l ive , wi th yourstomach turning, knocking her f la t on her back, you are the object of yourown specu la t ions . But , because you are th ink ing about yourself, you ares imu l t aneous ly the subject of your own speculations. I t is as if the self canbe spl i t in two. From one perspect ive you go over the exper iences of theidiot who just made a fool of himself; f rom the other you are the id iotbecause the mental p ictures are a mir ror . You are looking at you.

Mead never argues that we necessar i ly te l l the t ruth to ourselves as weref lect on the past . Few people want to th ink of themselves as id iots , soas your thought processes cont inue, you twis t and dis tor t your ref lect ions .She never fel l because you s lammed the door on her ; she fel l because shewas c lumsy . And she never laughed a t your jokes because she rea l izedtha t you were ou t o f her league . Anybody as wi t ty as you would neverwas te h i s t ime on someone as lack lus ter as she .

Mead of fer s no "open sesame" to the t ru th . He on ly prov ides the conceptual tools needed to get there.

By re em ph as izi ng the ref lexive qu ali ty of the self ( i .e. , i ts abil i ty to bebo th subject an d object) , M ead del ibera tely rep eats a crucial point : no on ecan be an object to him- or herself unti l they are f irst the subject of otherpeople ' s speculat ions . Others need to make you the subject of their a t t i tudes , and then, by taking the at t i tudes of the other , you become an objectto yourself. In plainer Engl ish you cannot ta lk to you unt i l o thers ta lk toyou. And i f those others are crazy or confused, your chances for a sol idsense of self have appreciably diminished.

Mead s t resses that " the uni ty and s t ructure of the complete self ref lectsthe u ni ty an d s t ruc ture of the social process as a wh ole. . . . The orga nizat ion and unif icat ion of a social group is ident ical with the organizat ion

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

18/34

George Herber t Mead 155and unif ication of any one of the selves ar ising within the social processin which that group is engaged or which i t i s car rying on." 50Say you are a second-genera t ion Jam aican born an d ra i sed in the nor th eastern par t of the United States . One of your selves is the ethnic ident i tyof being a Jamaican. But because you l ive in the United States , you arealso toldnormally not by you r parentsthat you must be a b lack manor a black woman. As an inher i tance f rom society , the two ident i t ies areof ten m utu al ly e xclusive an d therefore confusing. You m ay thin k the prob lem is yours, while in reali ty i t derives from the larger society, in theprocess o f t ak ing the a t t i tudes o f o ther s . At our campus many s tudentsreso lve the inher i ted d i lemma by embracing the iden t i ty Jamaican andrefusing to be black. This , in turn , causes pro blem s with a nd confusionfor many African-American s tud en ts . The consterna t ion is eve n greater ifthe Jam aican w h o refuses to be black is very da rk skin ned an d the Afr icanAmerican is not .51

Who are these other people? Is there a way to be more specif ic aboutthe actual inf luence of othe rs on yo ur self and m ine? M ead a nsw ere d th esequest ions with a wonderful concept , the not ion of the general ized otherswho provide crucial information about self and wor ld .T he generalized other refers to the organized community or social groupthat g ives the indiv idu al h is or her un i ty (or disun i ty) of self.52 Mead usesthe example of a basebal l t eam to show how groups prov ide the ru les o fthe game and the individual ' s par t icular par t in i t . To successful ly playbal l , you need to s imultaneously take the at t i tudes of at least n ine otherpeo ple . That inclu des the eight other play ers on the field a nd b at ter in thebox. You can be the catcher, bu t yo u also nee d to knowafter m a n y h o u r sof practicewhat eve ryo ne else on the field c an and sho uld b e doing . Youcannot play successful ly unless you have f i rs t learned, f rom others , therules of the game.5 3In i ts widest sense the general ized other refers to American or Cubanor Engl ish (and so on) society . However , to get a f i rmer handle on whathappened to any one of us , you can break down the larger society in tothe specif ic groups, such as religious, ethnic, family, or poli t ical , that offered y ou their vers ion s of self and w or ld . W hate ver the gro up s, yo u of tenlearn the rules of the game by playing; but ins tead of enter tainment , playis very serious business. "The game represents the passage in the l i fe of the

chi ld f rom taking the role of others in play to the organized par t that isessential to self-consciousness in the full sense of the term." 5 4Right down to the camouf laged c lo th ing , GI Joe toys offer children aw ay to p rac t ice and learn about war ; w ho m they learn to k il l de pe nd s o nthe na t ion ' s con tem pora ry enem y. In 2003 Arabs hav e rep laced Russ iansas the target of choice. Toy vacuums and i roning boards suggest thatho use ke ep ing is also a ga m e, bu t if yo u wo uld no t b uy yo ur f ive-year-oldnephew a toy vacuum or i ron , he i s p robably learn ing about the ru les o f

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

19/34

156 Mappers of Societythe game f rom the perspect ive of t radi t ional family bel iefs , values , andpract ices . Presumably, i roning is s t i l l women's work.Play is an essent ial way to help the individual move f rom one s tage ofself -development to another . Mead explains that the f i r s t s tage includesonly an "organizat ion of the par t icular at t i tudes of other individuals toward himself and toward one another in the specif ic social acts in whichhe par t ic ipa tes wi th them." This might inc lude your paren ts and yourbro ther s and s i s te r s . They symbol ize the particular ind iv iduals you arel ikely to meet in your ear l ies t encounters with others . But over andthrough t ime, " the self is const i tu ted not only by an organizat ion of thesepar t icular individual at t i tudes , but also by an organizat ion of the socialat t i tudes of the general ized other or the social group as a whole to whichhe be longs ." 5 5

Once you know how to "p lay ba l l , " you no longer need to th ink aboutthe rules and the posi t ioning of others in the family or rel ig ious groupsof society . You kn ow h ow to be a good m em be r of an I tal ian, Pu er to R ican,or Indian family because what was outs ide ( in the at t i tudes of others) isnow inside, that is , in ternal ized at a very deep level in your mind. In thesecond s tage of self-development, the rules have become the accepted "ofcourse" assumptions of social l i fe . You get along wel l wi th others becauseyou successful ly learned the shared and accepted "universe of discourse"in your society and in the specif ic social groups that hal lmark your part icular exper iences .

A way to prove the exis tence and power of the general ized other is tospeak everyday Engl i sh . Say you are p lanning a wedding and you wantto do i t r ight ; every " t" wil l be crossed with class and every " i" dot tedw ith s tyle an d sop his t icat ion. Your invi tat ion s wil l inclu de a scented pieceof onionskin paper ins ide the cover ful l of raised- let ter pr int ing; and thepaper wil l dr i f t out when you pick up the invi tat ion. Someone quest ionsyour choices , and you br i l l iant ly answer with th is retor t : "That ' s the wayi t ' s done . That ' s what they say you are supposed to do ." You may neverget to meet or talk with "they." But i t is nevertheless a tangible manifestation of the power and signif icance of the generalized other . Test this inyour own l i f e the nex t t ime you use the word they to resolve a quest ionof dress s tyles or seat ing ar rangements or any of the other et iquet te predic am en ts of liv ing prop er ly in U.S. society . In m y exp er ience w e of tenhave no idea who " they" are. Mead, however , of fers us a concrete answer ,with the not ion of the general ized other .Like parents to a newborn, o thers are the indispensable in i t ia tors ofyour o r my se l f - image. Mead lays tha t g roundwork and then moves onto " the central posi t ion of th inking when consider ing the nature of theself."56 The essence of the self is cognitive; i ts heart is the internalizedcon versa t ion that I ha ve with myself abou t myself and the other pe op lewi th whom I come in con tac t . Because Mead wants to g rasp the ac tua l

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

20/34

George Herbert Mead 157nature of that conversat ion, he uses two pronounsthe " I" an d the"Me"to conceptual ize the in terna l d ia logue tha t we have wi th our selves . The best w ay to prov e the pers is t ing br i l l iance of these co ncep ts isto just ta lk . Speak s t reet Engl ish , and ou r con versat ion s in the twenty-f i rs tcen tury prove the po in ts made by Mead more than e igh ty year s ago .The "me" is the attitudes of others that one a ssumes as affecting his or her ownconduct. Say, for example, that I have received s tudent evaluat ions at theend of a course I have taught . I have for ty of your evaluat ions in myhands ; some of you jus t answered the mul t ip le-choice ques t ions , o ther shave wr i t ten an en t i r e page of the mos t p rec ise comments and suggest ions . For the sake of argument, al l forty of you agree: you tell me that Ican ' t teach wo r th a lick. M y lectures w ou ld p ut a Starbucks add ict to s leep,my tests are totally unfair , and even my clothes st ink. Overall , I get an Ffrom the class.

As I th ink about the evaluat ions , I ask some quest ions . I s that what thes tudents th ink of me? Do they really think of me in such negat ive terms?And most ominous of al l for my sense of self -es teem, are the s tudentsr igh t in what they sa id about me?Each of the three t im es I use d the wo rd "m e" indicates m y taking or

assuming the a t t i tudes o f o ther s . For ty of you to ld me someth ing , andnow I have to r espond to what you to ld me.The "I" is the response of the individual to the assumed attitudes of others. A tleast four possible responses are possible: agreement , d isagreement , uncertainty, or indifference. In the case of the student evaluations, "I" canagree with what you said about me. You are r ight . I s t ink as a teacher .I can also disagree. You people are wrong about me. "I" am just tooin te l l igen t fo r words , and you responded negat ive ly about me because

you are unable to grasp the las t ing luster of my br i l l iant lectures .Uncer ta in ty could go l ike th i s : " I " do no t know what to th ink aboutwhat you to ld me in the evalua t ions . Give me the weekend , and we canall talk in the next class.Finally, indifference could be expressed in this fashion. "I" don' t give ada m n w ha t yo u th ink about m e or abo ut my teach ing . I hav e tenu re , andthe forty of yo u sh ou ld ta ke a long w alk aro un d the mal l . It i s a l l the sam eto me .My point is Mead 's . The "I" is a lways a var ied react ion to the at t i tudesof others . Indeed, " i f you ask, where direct ly in your own exper ience theT com es in, the an sw er is tha t it com es in as a historical f igure. I t is wh atyou were a second ago that is the T of the 'Me. ' "57 Remember tha t t he"I" an d the "M e" are in terconnected a nd inseparab le . But w he n I s top torespond to what others to ld me about my teaching abi l i t ies (or my obl i gat ions to God or my t rai ts as a personal i ty) , I look back at a point inhis tory that could have occurred a second ago, a week ago, or ten yearsago. The beauty of Mead 's conceptual izat ion is that i t a l lows me to look

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

21/34

158 Mappers of Societyback a t my own historythe I "scopes out" the Meand then dec ide ,with a signif icant degree of self-consciousness, if others were r ight aboutm e , an d , if no t , ho w I w an t to chan ge m y d ispos i t ion tow ard myself,tow ard o ther s , an d tow ard soc ie ty .Society is involved because, s ince the "Me" gives the form to the "I ,"the s t ructure of any self is a lways convent ional . We are al l inextr icablypa r ts of the society 's es tabl ishm ent . In fact, w e think ab ou t ou r ho m ero omclasses in learning to be a son, a daughter , a husband, a wife, a mother , afather ; in each and every instance I can only respond to what others , asrepresentat ives of the general ized other , to ld me about self and wor ld . Ican d isagree w i th the a t t i tudes of o ther s , bu t even when I disagree, I a m stillf i rmly rooted in a convent ional por t rai t of myself.Take th i s example . Dur ing the 1960s many young Amer icans revol tedagainst societal convent ions. Youthe representat ives of "s t raight" societytell m e that crew cuts are in ; I res po nd by bec om ing a long hair. Youte l l me to wear deodoran t ; I t e l l you no way . Deodoran t masks the rea lm e ; I w an t to be fragran tly na tura l . A nd w he n you tel l m e to respectauthor i ty , I te l l you that I wi l l cont inual ly quest ion authoritycops a re"pigs"in al l i t s pol i t ical , economic, and educat ional manifestat ions .

Would I as a rebel have long hair unless the representat ives of conventional society f irst told me to have short hair? If the answer is no, thenM ea d ' s po in t i s p rov en . The "M e" g ives a s tandard form to the " I " ; italways calls for a certain sort of "I" insofar as we meet the obligationsthat are given in conduct itself, but the "I" is always something different fromwhat the situation itself calls for.58 In the language of Kar l Marx, the relat ionship between the "Me" and the "I" is d ialect ical ; one acts back uponthe o ther in a never -ending process o f s t imulus , in terpre ta t ion , and thenresponse to the at t i tudes of others .Mead wri tes that " the possibi l i t ies of the T belong to that which isactual ly g oing on , takin g place, an d i t i s in som e sense the m ost fascinat ingpa r t of our exper ien ce." The fascinat ion exis ts bec ause the "I " is w ha t ad d snovel ty and f reedom to our exis tence and to our chances for consciouscontrol of sel f and wor ld . The "I" is the locat ion of our most impor tantvalues, and i t is "the realization in some sense of this self that we arecont inual ly seeking."5 9The "I" is the locus of the f reedom and potent ial control that Meadpromised because , desp i te the convent ional na ture o f any self, the " I "g ives hu m an beings subs tan t ia l room for per sonal and soc ia l chang e . Thisoccurs on at least three levels . W he n " I" disag ree with the ne gat iv e s tud en teva luat io ns , I ma nifest my f reedom to chal leng e, d isre gard , or de ny theexpressed at t i tudes of others . While my response is something dif ferentthan was cal led for , a s imply defensive or dismissive response suggestsno effort at ser ious self-consciousness, change, or control .

But if I engage in a deliberate and ( to the extent possible) objective

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

22/34

George Herber t Mead 159ref lection about the validity of the att i tudes of othersabout w hat t hes tudents to ld methen I have potent ial ly achieved a greater degree off reedom. I t r ied to hon est ly assess w ha t others said abo ut m e and tochange my self based on that object ive assessment .The third level of resp on se offers th e greates t op po r tun i t ies for f reedom ,control , and change. Mead def ines social control "as the expression of the'me' against the expression of the T. ' I t ( the 'me') sets the l imits, i t givesthe determinat ion that enables the T, ' so to speak, to use the ' m e ' as themeans of car rying out that is the under taking that a l l are in terested in ." 60So, thinking of the "I" as ref lective intell igence at work, I can see how thegeneral ized other t r ies to control me, and I can also see the predictableresponses I am l ikely to have, g iven what they told me. In the case ofrebels with long versus shor t hair , I can see that my response was moreor less determined by the convent ional at t i tudes of others . Equal lyimpor tant , I can ask this potent ial ly l iberat ing quest ion: Are a mil l ionpeople with long hair rebels? Or is th is s imply a new form of predictableconformity?

Great f reedom l ies in the abi l i ty to see not only what they told me buta l so ho w I r esp on de d to w ha t they to ld me. Al th oug h th i s l evel of hon es tyis very hard to achieve, i t i s the pregnant promise of Mead 's concepts andthe reason he argues that the "I" is the locat ion of our most impor tantvalues . Using the human abi l i ty to ref lect on our exper iences , men andwomen can f ind wide lat i tude for self -expression and self - real izat ion. "I"select what is most impor tant to me and then walk into the future on thebasis of my conscious choices . This is a pr ivi lege denied to other animalsand to the members of many societ ies . Mead is , af ter al l , a quintessent ialAmerican. He applauds self - real izat ion, yet many societ ies do not . In Firein the Lake, an analysis of the Americans in Vietnam, Frances Fi tzgeraldexplains th at the t radi t io nal V ietnam ese family del iberately left l it tle roomfor self -expression. In fact , ins tead of using the pronoun "I ," youngsterswere taught to say "your ch i ld" o r "your younger b ro ther ." Paren ts t r iedto make i t conceptual ly impossible for their chi ldren to th ink of themselves apar t f rom the group. 6 1 By contrast , a society that celebrates the "I"sanct ions rad ical isolation f rom othe rs . From th e outset I see myself ap ar tf rom and in opposi t ion to the groups that potent ial ly s t rangle my al l -American r ight to self -expression.

Mead ' s work a lways had an under ly ing goal : con t ro l in the serv ice ofself -expression and conscious social change. Toward the end of his d iscussion of the self, he wri tes that " the s i tuat ion in which one can let h imself go, in which the very structure of the ' m e ' opens the door for the T, 'is favorable to self-expression." 62 In sharp cont ras t to Vie tnam, manyAmerican parents raise their chi ldren to th ink for themselves . They mayforever regret the day their chi ldren quest ion their author i ty , but i f youteach " m e" to th ink for myself, do no t be surpr i sed w he n " I " do so . In the

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

23/34

160 Mappers of SocietyUnited States , the conventional structure of the self is often rooted in thene ed for self -consciousness a nd self-expression. To take anoth er exa m plefrom the 1960s, I kn ew a coup le that only pu rch ase d leathe r couches a ndchairs for their hou se. Their chi ldren w ere inv olved in the process of to i lett raining, and the parents did not want to inhibi t the chi ldren ' s f ree expression of self. So if the kids ur i na ted on the couc hes, i t w as m uc h easierto clean leather .

That is a t rue s tory. By contras t , George Herber t Mead was nevert h a n k goodness!that progressive. But in the f inal section of Mind, Self,and Society, he does offer som e prov oca t ive ideas abou t social organ izat io nan d the "obs tac les and prom ises in the develo pm ent o f the idea l society."63I t i s a prop osa l for using the "I" and the "M e" as tools for the control a ndchange of social condi t ions .

S O C I E T YMead begins with a chessboard. He chooses the great game of s t rategic

thin kin g becau se "a goo d chess play er has the resp ons e of the other pe rso nin his system. He can carry four or f ive moves ahead in his mind." 6 4 As ifin a game of chess , human beings have the un ique ab i l i ty to comprehendan ent i re process; they can take the at t i tude of the other , ref lect on whatthey d id and may do , and even s t r a teg ize about a new way to p lay thega m e or orga nize a society. "The pro ble m is in the ha nd s of the co m m un ityin so far as i t reacts intell igently on i ts problems." 6 5

Mead is f iercely adamant about one thing: social ins t i tu t ions need notsquash or constrain individual i ty . He s ingles out " the church" for par t icular cr i t ic ism because i t represents an inst i tu t ion that is "oppressive, s tereo typed , and u l t r aconservat ive ." Churches inh ib i t o r deny ind iv idual i ty ,yet there is "no necessary or inevi table reason" that social ins t i tu t ionscanno t be organ ized in a m an ne r tha t a l lows peop le "p len ty of roo m " forfree express ion . Al thou gh I do ub t Me ad w ou ld ha ve sanct ioned the ch i ld -rear ing pract ices of my f r iends with the leather furni ture, he under l ines apoint that is as val id today as i t was eighty years ago. People can createinst i tu t ions that f ree rather than oppress al l members of society .

Remember tha t Mead i s wr i t ing under the very dark shadow of Wor ldWar I. N o one w an ted to see an oth er 10 m il l ion de ad soldiers , so M ea dfocused o n creat ing inst i tu t ion s that exp ressed a "univ ersa l" character . H isideal was economic society . People t raded with one another , "and thenthe very processes themselves go on integrat ing, br inging a closer relat ionsh ip be tween communi t ies tha t may be opposed to each o ther po l i t ically."66 I f people could f ind a medium of political communica t ion tha tpromised the same degree of in tegrat ion as the pursui t of prof i t and t rade,human beings could conceivab ly crea te a fu ture " in which the ind iv idual

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

24/34

George Herber t Mead 161maintains himself as a ci t izen only to the degree that he recognizes ther ights of everyone else belonging to the same communi ty . " 6 7

Mead conf ron ted the same prob lem as Emi le Durkheim. How, g iventhe w ide sp r ead p r a i se for self-expression, can yo u integ rate the indiv idu alinto the social whole? How can you celebrate f ree expression and nevertheless assume that people will st i l l desire poli t ical l inks that t ightly integra te them in to loca l , na t ional , an d even in terna t ional com mu ni t ies?

Mead answers these ques t ions by ask ing h is r eaders to r emember democracy and more specif ical ly , the social contract suggested by authorsl ike Jean Jacques Rousseau and events l ike the French Revolut ion. Democracy of fered a po ten t ia l ly un iver sa l medium of communica t ion because i t furnished a way for people to real ize themselves "by recognizingothers as belonging to the same pol i t ical organizat ion as themselves ." 6 8

Mead never los t fai th in the power inherent in people ' s abi l i ty to takethe at t i tude of the other . I f men and women put themselves in the otherperso n ' s moccas ins , they could crea te "a h igh ly develop ed a nd organ izedhuman society ." That is , they could create a wor ld in which people recognized the i r "common socia l interests,interests in, or for the betterment o f societyand yet, on the other hand, are more or less in conflictrelat ive to numerous other in terests which they possess only individual ly ,or else share with one another only in smal l and l imited groups." 6 9

Creat ing this ideal required a clear unders tanding of one fact : reconstruct ing society and reconstruct ing the individual are two s ides of thesame coin. I t i s a "reciprocal" relat ionship because self develops in theprocess of social exper ience and therefore contains a convent ional s t ructu re . Change that s t ructure, and in the process of social izat ion you couldcreate a self that realizes his or her most important values in aff irmingco m m on social in terests . The "I ," the locus of f reedom an d ou r mo st prec ious va lues , would mesh with the "Me," with the at t i tudes of others thattaught chi ldren to real ize themselves by focusing on the bet terment ofsociety.70

I f th is sounds too ideal is t ic , then so is Thomas Fr iedman in an edi tor ialin The New York Times of Decem ber 9 , 2001 . Fr iedm an com pl im ents Pres ident Bush on his handl ing of the war in Afghanis tan and then suggeststhat the president focus at tent ion on the social values that theoret ical lyset us apar t f rom other nat ions . The war against ter ror ism was also a warfor the bel iefs , values , and pract ices that set us apar t f rom other nat ions .So, how about a na t ional campaign to make us energy independent in adecade? How about tak ing the a t t i tude of the o ther and demanding tha t"we Amer icans , who are 5% of the wor ld ' s popula t ion , don ' t con t inuehog ging 25% of the wo r ld ' s e nergy ?" A nd in a sugges t ion keyed to thenat ion ' s youth, Fr iedman asks us to " imagine i f the President cal led onevery young person to consider enl is t ing in some form of servicethe

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

25/34

162 Mappers of SocietyArmy, Navy, Mar ines , Air Force, Coast Guard, Peace Corps, Teach ForAmerica, AmeriCorps, the FBI , the CIA." 71When i t comes to se l f - rea l iza t ion th rough the common good , Fr iedmanis an equal oppor tun i ty employer , and so was George Herber t Mead . Hegrasp ed the ex t raord inary po ten t ia l of m esh in g the " I " an d the "M e" inthe service of society and self - real izat ion. However , he also unders toodthe problems that h is ideal encountered in the real wor ld .

I t was easies t to in tegrate the individual in to the groupthe "I" in toth e "Me"when the person wil l ingly par t icipated in , for example, oneorga niza t ion, team , chu rch, or associat ion. O n a spo r ts tea m I m igh t eve nhate the other members of the group, but in the in terests of our victory, Iwil l work for the team and forget my personal feel ings . Or , in Japan,workers sometimes receive half their pay based on the prof i ts earned bythe ent i re corporat ion. Thus both the machinis t on the factory f loor andthe engineer p rogramming the computer s d i l igen t ly work for the groupbecause i ts success is their success . The "I" and the "Me" demonstrate asmuch harmony as the robots manufac tur ing a g rea t car .

Prob lems appear when people par t ic ipa te in two or more d i f feren tgroups , "groups whose respect ive soc ia l purposes o r in teres t s a re an tagonistic or conflicting or widely separated." 7 2 Mead d iscusses cap i ta l andlabor as h i s p r ime example of g roups whose members are e i ther asocia lor host i le . Other examples are easy to f ind. Any univers i ty is a hotbed ofconf l ict between dif ferent depar tments compet ing for resources; d if ferentrel ig ions also provide examples of las t ing enmity . Growing up in Brooklyn, I was told by nuns to s tay away f rom Protestants . Cathol icism wasthe perfect rel ig ion, an d w he n Pro testan ts rejected i t, Go d reserve d anespecial ly warm place in hel l for al l the var ious manifestat ions of thePro tes tan t per suas ion .The prob le m s som et ime s seem inso lub le , ye t so lu t ions can and d o occur.In the na m e of harm ony , the U.S. Co nst i tu t ion specif ically en do rses b othfreedom of rel ig ion and th e sep arat io n of chu rch and s tate . M y tea chersin Brooklyn certainly tr ied to st ir up the pot of hate, but in the service ofour common social in terests , the United States has been remarkably f reeof rel ig ious bat t les . As President Eisenhower once noted, "Our governm en t m ak es no sense unle ss it i s fou nd ed in a dee ply felt rel ig ious faithan d I do n ' t c are w ha t i t i s ." In add i t ion , "I am the mo st in tensely rel ig iousm an I know . That does n ' t m ea n I adh ere to any par t icu lar sec t. A de m ocracy c ann ot exis t w i tho ut a rel ig ious base. I bel ieve in democracy." 7 3

To br id ge the gap be twe en the ind iv id ual a nd groupand even between cap i ta l and laborMead underlined that "a difference of functionsdoe s no t p rec lud e a com m on exper ience ." We can take the a t t i tude of theother , imaginat ively par t icipate in his or her humanity , and decide tochange ou r behav io r because w e now under s t and the o the r ' s d i l emma.For ins tance , in Thomas Fr iedman ' s New York Times ar t icle , he suggests

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

26/34

George Herber t Mead 163that a l l corporate execut ives immediately announce that they wil l take a10 percent cut in pay so that more average Americans are never la id of f .Al though execut ive pay cu ts might be a g rea t way to express our comm on in teres t s , the p r inc ipa l gap in M ea d ' s ana lys i s is ho w yo u m ove f romem pa thy to ac t ion . L ike Emi le Du rkhe im , George M ead w as a decen t m an .Many of the rest of us are more self ish. In fact , however great a tool forsocial chan ge ref lective in tel l igence is , i t nev er g ua ran tee s tha t peo ple wil lwork for the common good rather than for themselves or for the groupsto which they be long .As a great g if t , Mead gave us the conceptual tools required for controlof self and society. But only we, in the process of acting on ou r em pa the t i cunders tanding of o ther s , can make Mead ' s idea l our r ea l i ty : "The impl i cat ion of democracy is that the individual can be as highly developedwithin the possibi l i t ies of his own inher i tance, and s t i l l enter in to theat t i tudes of others whom he af fects ."74

In the service of the common good, the "I" and the "Me" can actual lym esh as wel l as Ge orge M ead did in to the city of Chicagoand i t s mountain of social problems.

S E R V I C E T O S O C I E T YToday we might call i t , with an air of disdain, applied sociology. Aperson happi ly leaves the ivory tower and, once on the s t reet , actual lyengages real people, wi th real problems. As a response to such ef for ts ,many contemporary un iver s i t i es de l ibera te ly separa te programs like socialwork f rom departments l ike sociology; con tam inat ion is proh ibi ted bec auseno ser ious scholar wants to mix social theory with a service mental i ty . Byall m ean s , l et wel fare w orke rs he lp the com mun i ty , bu t p lease , keep themaway f rom the scholars who need to th ink about the theoret ical solut ionsto society ' s social problems.In M ead ' s t ime the example of Jane A da m s prov id ed a d if feren t m ode lfor scholars actively engaged in social activism. Traveling in London inthe 1880s, A da m s witne ssed l iv ing con di t ions s imilar to those descr ibe dby Engels in his 1845 The Condition of the Working C lass in E ngland. A d a m salso saw the response of some Engl ish univers i ty s tudents ; a t Oxford andCambr idge ac t iv i s t s r eac ted by es tab l i sh ing "se t t lement houses ," where

they taught workers how to read and wr i te , among o ther th ings . WhenAdams returned to Chicago, she eventual ly es tabl ished ( in 1889) HullHouse , the model fo r the se t t l ement home es tab l i shed by the Univers i tyof Chicago in 1894. His tor ical do cu m en ts fail to explain w he n M ead fi rs tgot involved in the univers i ty ' s ef for ts , but when he cl imbed down f romthe ivory tower, he not only got his hands dir ty, he offered a model ofappl ied soc io logy tha t cha l lenges today ' s wisdom.7 5In 1907 M ea d spo ke at the unive rs i ty ' s chape l on "S et t lement S unda y."

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

27/34

164 Mappers of SocietyBy now, you have grasped his negat ive feel ings about rel ig ion in generaland the church in par t icu lar , and Mead used h is morn ing in the pu lp i t todenounce i t in no uncer tain terms. "The pulpi t i s cal led upon to inspireus to r ight c ond uct , no t to f ind out w ha t is the r ight . . . . W hen , then ne wpro ble m s ar ise , . . . the pu lpi t i s un ab le to solve them , bec ause i t ha s no tthe apparatus , and the scient i f ic technique which the solut ion of suchproble m s d em an ds . . . . The on ly over t soc ia l i s sues w i th whic h the p u lp i tin recent t ime has ident i f ied i tsel f have been temperance and chastity."76

I f the univers i ty ' s chaplain or other minis ters were in the audience,Mead offers no indicat ion of their react ions to his sermon. Temperanceha d i ts p lace, bu t not w he n Professor M ead spo ke abou t the scienti ficsolution of social problems. "The central fact in all sett lements has beenthat these people have l ived where they have found their in terest . Thecorner s tone of set t lement theory has been that the res idents have ident i f ied themselves wi th the immedia te por t ion of the communi ty wherethe i r w ork i s found by m akin g the i r ho m e there ." M ead ce lebra ted se t tl e ment workers as he s imul taneous ly d i s t inguished them f rom miss ionar iesor scient i f ic observers . The set t lement worker is a t home in her communi ty ; she has a sense of "ne ig hbo rhood consc iousness ," wh ich me ans tha tshe l ives near factor ies or meat packing establ ishments , "not to save soulsf rom perd i t ion" bu t to m ore in te l l igen t ly com preh end the "mise ry" of thepeople who l ive next door .77

Mead argues that set t lement houses of fer the scient is t a great opportun i ty . H e excited ly descr ibes h i s enco unter w i th an un na m ed patho log is twho worked a t the famous leper co lony es tab l i shed by Father Damien atMolokai , in the Pacif ic Ocean. The pr ies t was a missionary, whereas thepathologis t combined good works with a great scient i f ic problem. UnlikeFather Damien, who died f rom leprosy, " the pathologis t knows that hecan protect h imself f rom infection." H e wa s "a very lucky fel low" b eca usehe had a scientific goalcuring leprosythat also a l lowed h im to work"under the mos t f avorab le c i r cumstances , wi th un l imi ted resources behind him." Whether the lepers also saw their c i rcumstances as favorablewas apparen t ly bes ide the po in t . They were the in t r igu ing prob lem, and"it is just t his difference betw een an ob l iga tion to un de r tak e a d i sagreeab leduty and a growing interest in an intel lectual ly in terest ing problem thatis represented by the at t i tude of the res ident in the set t lement house." 7 8In my reading of a number of Mead 's papers on social reform, i t i sexceedingly rare for his enthusiasm to ever bl ind him to people ' s pain .The lepers were in no way guinea pigs , yet they never theless of fered thepathologis t the scient i f ic oppor tuni ty of a l i fet ime. Mead saw the samepossibi l i t ies in any set t lement house in the nat ion because "you wil l f indthe se t t l ements a t the po in ts where the mos t in tense ly in teres t ing problems in modern industr ial and social l ife are centered. I t is the good for-

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

28/34

Gecge Herber t Mead 165tune of our t ime that moral consciousness has been able to tap so large astream of intellectual interest ."7 9

Recal l Mead 's in tel lectual roots . He was a pragmatis t who focused onthe incremental advances that produced tangible f rui ts , facts , and consequenc es . The bea u ty of the se tt l ement hou ses was tha t they a l lowed wo rker s to approach socia l p rob lems wi th no preconcept ions , " to be theexponents of no dogma or f ixed rules of conduct , but to f ind out what theproblems of the community are and as par t of i t to help toward theirso lu t ion ." Hid de n in th is com m entary i s a chal lenge to the academic com for tably nest led behind a mahogany desk and a high-resolut ion, f la t -screen computer moni tor . Maybe theory needs a new in t roduct ion torea l i ty? Maybe l iv ing in the communi ty wi l l t each us about p rob lems ori ssues we never imagined , much less encountered f i r s thand?

As a p ragmat i s t Mead l ived by th i s d ic tum: t ru ths have "a despera teinst inct of sel f -preservat ion and of desire to ext inguish whatever contradicts them." 8 0 Mead courageous ly ce lebra ted the se t t l ement houses because they could chal lenge accepted bel iefs , values , and pract ices . Byincremental s teps places l ike Hull House got us closer to the real t ruthsof the real wor ld; a l l the while , they provided the most in tensely in ter esting issues for social scientists who wanted to use ref lective intell igenceto take the at t i tudes of the thousands of others who l ived in miseryjustblocks away f rom a magnif icent univers i ty bui l t wi th funds provided byJohn D. Rockefeller , the general of America's captains of industry.

Mead ended his sermon by focusing on moral i ty . Americans l ived in"painfu l doubt" about the meaning of r igh t and wrong . The se t t l ementhouses never of fered instant cures , e i ther to leprosy or the abysmal condi t ions of the working classespecially th e immigrantsin Chicago. Butthe houses did al low us to discover "what the evi ls are ." By combining apract ical bent with the scient i f ic method, they even al lowed us to "forma new mor a l j udgmen t . " 8 1Mead never noted the precise detai ls of that new moral judgment . I twas a work in p rogress , a mora l mas terp iece tha t would on ly be comple ted by s tepp ing d ow n f rom the pu lp i t and l iv ing in a se t t lem ent hou se .You had to work with real people, and for more than twenty-f ive yearsMead did just that . His ef for ts included not only the set t lement housesbut also in t imate involvement in the school system, in the powerful Ci tyClub of Chicago, and in a variety of other civic projects. 82Mead may have rejected Chr is t iani ty , but the good works celebrated atOberlin were a part of his l ife unti l the day he died.N A T I O N A L - M I N D E D N E S S A N D O S A M A B I NLADIN

The f lags were everywhere. Three months af ter the hideous ter ror is tattack on New York's World Trade Center , homes and cars were st i l l f i l led

7/29/2019 5.1. despre G.H. Mead

29/34

166 Mappers of Societywith American f lags of every s ize and descr ipt ion. On most Connect icuts t reets , the f lags appeared in one doorway af ter another , for homes withporche s , a com m on touch w as to d rap e a hug e flag over the ra i l ing . M e a n while, cars , t rucks, and every brand of SUV spor ted f lags in the windowsor on the bumpers; in addi t ion, a large or smal l f lag of ten waved in thebreeze, a t tached to the vehicle ' s radio antenna. Normally , the f lags aretheir own message of patr iotic fervor, but especially in New York City,"G od Bles s A mer i ca" r egu la r ly appea r s a s an adden