Simboliese interaksionisme: 'n mikrososiologiese oriëntasie

Abstract

Symbolic Interactionism: a micro sociological orientation. Symbolic interactionism has become one of the most prominent theoretic sociological approaches; it is certainly comparable to structural functionalism and conflict theory. This article focuses on the nature and unique character of this typically American trend of thought which originated in the work of R.E. Park, W.I. Thomas, C.H. Cooley, and especially G.H. Mead. An exposition of the basic assumptions of symbolic interactionism is presented, which reveals its micro sociological orientation and the specific emphasis on the individual, his subjective stance, and such micro elements and micro processes as are found in interaction. The particular nature of symbolic interactionism is elaborated upon in terms of central characteristic conceptual constructs, including the nature of symbols and symbolic interaction; role-taking, self-objectivation and self-interaction; the definition of the situation; the self and personality; self development; and society and social structure. The coherence and uniformity of symbolic interactionism, however, remains relative, both conceptually and methodologically. This is illustrated in the internal split and underlying differences within symbolic interactionism, as manifested by the Chicago and the Iowa Schools, which link the respective versions of Herbert Blumer and Manford Kuhn to symbolic interactionism. S. Afr. J. Sociol. 1984, 15(1): 46–55

Additional information

Notes on contributors

H.C.J. van Rensburg

Aan wie korrespondensie gerig moet word