Theories Of Symbolic Interactionism Exchange Theory And

Free Articles

Theories Of Symbolic Interactionism, Exchange Theory And Rational Choice Theory Essay, Research Paper

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

This essay will turn to actions of persons and the part single actions make to the societal construction, how society flows to the histrion via the? Me? and is constructed or reconstructed by the? I, ? giving the? I? a topographic point in making society. I will further analyse the theories and research the impact of norms and values on the determinations by the histrions.

This analysis will include the constructs and theories of symbolic interactionism, exchange theory and rational pick theory, through the plants of Mead, Blau, Homans, and Ritzer.

Mead was a pragmatist, and felt that world does non be but is created through actions ; this demonstrates the demand for interactions between the histrion and the universe. Peoples, base their actions on what they remember being utile to them, and eventually people have the ability to construe the societal universe and act based upon the significance of events to them instead than straight to events. ( Ritzer 2000 ) .

The theory of symbolic interactionism grew from the understanding the head was non a thing or construction, but was a procedure of thought ( Ritzer, 2000 ) . This procedure comprised of three phases, which includes specifying objects in the societal universe, sketching possible manners of behavior and seeing the effects of alternate actions and riddance of improbable possibilities leting a focal point on choosing the most optimum class of action ( Ritzer, 2000 ) , this procedure allows the? ego? the ability to set with interactions with others. ( Ritzer, 2000 )

Mead used the term society to intend the on-going procedure that precedes both the head and ego ( Ritzer, 2000 ) Clearly defined by Mead, society represents an organized set of responses accepted by the person, giving the signifier of me. ( Ritzer, 2000 ) Society is invariably altering based upon the reading and actions or responses of the histrion. I feel that Mead failed to take a macro attack to this, by non analyzing in deepness the factors that may act upon the reading of the event by the histrion.

To better understand Mead, it is of import to look at the? Act, ? in which Mead boundary lines on the behaviourist attack on stimulation and response. Mead said, we conceive of the stimulation as an juncture or chance for the act, non as a irresistible impulse or a authorization? ( Ritzer, 2000 ) . This is where I feel he needed a more focussed attack on the stimulation, and that the person can be influenced or respond to the stimulations in a preset manner. If you agree the response is based upon the significance or reading of the act, under Mead? s doctrine you would so hold that society is unstable and invariably unfastened to alter. To farther understand this one may look at Mead? s four- phase dialectical theoretical account used to specify the act. The theoretical account comprised of impulse, perceptual experience, use, and consummation, action or reaction is based on the reading of one individual or histrion ( Ritzer, 2000 ) .

Mead moved further in the account of interaction through gestures, symbols and communicating, and that through single readings of these that the ego becomes a portion of society, instead than a separate entity ( Ritzer, 2000 ) .

R / & gt ;

The basic rules of symbolic interactionism are based upon the premiss that worlds have the capacity for idea, and that this capacity is shaped through societal interaction. Through societal interaction, people learn the significances and symbols that allow originative idea and the ability to change this idea and reactions based upon the reading of the state of affairs. This ability to interact with the ego gives the human the ability to entree which action or reaction is the most appropriate ( Ritzer, 2000 ) . When these forms interact, you have groups and groups form society. While, I agree the person plays a function in determining society, some type of wages influences the bulk of determinations. In this illustration, I would utilize the wages as adjustment? within a group, ? this is better described through the rational pick theory.

A different attack to societal theory is rational pick, as in symbolic interactionism the focal point is on the development of the society because of the actions of the histrion. The histrion in rational pick theory has a focal point of their actions being purposeful or holding purpose. The histrions are seeking a wages or working toward a end with their actions ( Ritzer, 2000 ) . There can be restraints for the histrion in run intoing the ends. The first being the scarceness of resources, the 2nd is institutional restraints ( Ritzer, 2000 ) . These restraints could impede the histrion? s ability to move independently from society ; hence, society would act upon the histrion instead than the histrion making society. I would besides determine that these restraints could besides function as a foundation for struggle or disintegration of a friendly relationship due to inequality. As Jeong ( 2001 ) describes, economic or societal inequality is a major factor in struggle.

Peter Blau through his extension of the exchange theory looked to present norms to the theoretical account, this conveying the theory to a macro degree. Blau argued that relationships are formed for assorted grounds, but for the relationship to go on or be enhanced wagess must be exchanged. If one party is unable to supply equal wagess, a difference of power will emerge in the relationship ( Ritzer, 2000 ) . Peoples look to assorted groups because of the award associated with the group. It would look that Blau looks at the single working toward the macro degree or being influenced by the macro degree. He fails to look in item at the influence that the person or the micro has on the macro.

Ritzer? s Major Levels of Social Analysis ( 2000 ) does a fantastic occupation of depicting the American society. In looking at the theoretical account, country one of the macro would embrace the US authorities ; country two is present civilizations and norms. The micros would follow the theoretical account of Mead in leting the single the ability to do determinations and signifier or alteration society. The macros can act upon or be influenced by the micros in an unfastened society ; this besides would let alteration to happen from a macro- to- macro or a micro-to-micro interaction.

Bibliography

Mentions

Jeong, Ho-Won. 2000? Peace and Conflict Studies An debut, ? Burlington

United statess: Ashgate.

Ritzer, George 2000? Sociological Theory, ? Fifth Edition, New York, NY:

McGraw Hill.

3a4

Post a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

x

Hi!
I'm Katy

Would you like to get such a paper? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out