“Collective Representations” and the “Generalized Other”: A Review of the Evidence on the Convergence of Durkheim and Mead
This article is a revisitation of the investigation into of some of the scholarly points of convergence of Durkheim and Mead. A major focus is on the concepts of “collective representations” and “generalized other.” Also covered in this analysis of the major works of these French and American sociologists is their emphasis on signs and symbols, the significance of the social act, taking the role of the other, individual action and the social bond, the internalization and integration of meaning, the relevancy of the object, social pragmatism and the issue of ambiguity. The author highlights some new and classic contributions, especially Rochberg-Halton’s (1982), to the scholarly discussion on the significance of pragmatic interaction.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the 'macrothink.org' domain to your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.
Copyright © Macrothink InstituteISSN 1948-5468