Once upon a time in Comm 211, I had a great interest in Symbolic Interactionism. This Theory started sometime in the 1930s with a gentleman named George Herbert Mead. He believed that symbols were the foundation of both personal and social life. In other words, one can acquire their identity only by interacting with others. By doing so, people learn language and perspectives of our social world. Fast forward to Comm 335, and Symbolic Interactionism is in my life again as an example of a "language" theory.
Symbolic Interactionism essentially comes with three key concepts, the "Mind", the "Self", and the "I and ME" factor. MIND: Because language expresses social meanings, in learning language, individuals also learn from the "meanings of society"; SELF: Self-fulfilling prophecy >> aka, imposing on yourself what others think of you; I and ME: I is the impulsive "devil on the shoulder" of one, ME is the socially conscious "angel on the shoulder" that reflect's on "I's" impulses and actions.
Now that I've reflected on my notes as a Comm 211 student, how does this tie in with Comm 335 and more importantly, my own personal life?
An instance I found relatable was the way a friend of mine reads into text messages and emails from a guy. Guys and girls, in my opinion, speak an entirely different language. Her expectations and readings into these essentially nonverbal messages, sometimes get her into trouble.
I feel "I" and "ME" concepts every day. We are all faced with daily choices; occasionally these choices are between things we do want to do, or do not want to do. For example, nearly every day the devil on my shoulder (my "I" concept) tells me, "Stay in bed all day, you don't need to go to class"; but the "ME" on my shoulder, the socially conscious me, forces me out of bed and into my car. The video below is an example of an "I" and "ME" situation.
So I ask you, in what instances do you find your "I" and "ME" battling it out?
Emily,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your effort here to say something interesting about "symbolic interactionism." There is a noticeable "disconnect," however, between the vocabulary you introduce (mind, self, I, me) and the examples (in the video, and from your own life). Also, did you mean to refer to Comm 370, or 335? Finally: I missed your critical thinking question.
Jonathan, I revamped :)
ReplyDeleteI liked the blog on symbolic interactionism and the whole battle between "I" and "me". I also enjoyed the historical information of the theory. I felt the information was accurate and definitely helped any reader get informed about the origins of the theory. I liked how you wrote that guys and girls speak an entirely diffenrently language. I honestly feel that men and women do speak differently. Overall, this was a great blog.
ReplyDelete