字幕表 動画を再生する
Symbolic interactionism takes a small scale view of society.
It focuses on a small scale perspective
of the interactions between individuals,
like when you hang out with a friend,
instead of looking at large scale structures,
like education or law.
By looking at the small scale, symbolic interactionism
explains the individual in a society and their interactions
with others.
And through that, it can explain social order and change.
The theory was compiled from the teachings of George Herbert
Mead in the early 20th century.
He believed that the development of the individual
was a social process, as were the meanings individuals
assigned to things.
People change based on their interactions
with objects, events, ideas, other people.
And they assign meaning to things
in order to decide how to act.
For example, if I had sat under the shade of trees all my life,
and I was on a long walk today and spotted a big tree,
I might want to sit under it.
The tree means shade on a hot day to me.
Herbert Bloomer continued Mead's work
and actually coined the term symbolic interactionism
to describe this theory of society.
He proposed three tenets to explain
symbolic interactionism.
Let's say I do decide to sit under that tree on my long walk
today.
I step off the path and sit down and lean back
against the trunk.
Bloomer's first tenet was that we
act based on the meaning we have given something.
I consider the tree as a place to rest,
so I'll go lean against it.
As I'm sitting there, another person
stops to warn me that all trees are infested with ants.
Bloomer's second tenet was that we
give meaning to things based on our social interactions.
The same thing can have a different meaning
for different people.
For the person talking to me, the tree
is a breeding ground for creepy crawlies,
and they are going to avoid it.
But I'm quite happy with my seat in the shade,
and I haven't been bothered by any ants.
So I'm content just to sit.
We have different views of the tree,
and so we act differently.
As I'm sitting there talking to this lovely person,
I feel something tickle my shoulder.
And suddenly I jump up as something bites my back.
Turns out the tree was infested with ants.
Now that I've been bitten under a tree,
I might not sit under the next one
I find because it might also be infested with ants.
Bloomer's third tenet was that the meaning we give something
is not permanent.
It can change due to everyday life.
The meaning I give to trees has changed after my interaction
with the infested tree.
A big tree now means shade on a hot day
with a potential for getting bit.
So let's sum up the three central ideas
of symbolic interactionism.
They are that action depends on meaning,
that different people assign different meanings of things,
and that the meaning of something can change.
But there are some criticisms to symbolic interactionism
as a theory because it doesn't ask the same questions
as the large scale sociology theories do.
It is sometimes considered as supplemental, rather than
a full theory, because it is restricted
to studying small interactions between individuals.
While this is true, symbolic interactionism
gives a different perspective to sociology
that is necessary for fully understanding a society.
It is capable of explaining how aspects of society
can change as they are created and re-created
by social interactions.
It examines society on a small scale
and gives the individual the same importance
as the society as a whole and is a necessary view
when studying a society.