MIND, SELF, and SOCIETY FROM THE STANDPOINT OF A SOCIAL BEHAVIORIST GEORGE H. MEAD CHARLES W, MORRIS HE. UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESSISDN: 0226-51669 hoa 0226-51686 (yperinad) Ltr of mre Catalg Ga Naber 55-292 “Twe Uswensiry oF Cncaco Pass, Cresco 0687 “The Univesity of Chisago Pret Ln, Landon pigs 1934 by The Uno of Cay price 1982 by Chere W. Mois AM ribs worse int Impreion 1972 Pind in tbe Ure See 9 Amaia PREPACE Te following pages prosnt she larger outlines of jonge I. Meals sjstem of soil psychology. His fons mare developed frm t900 on ot the Universcy ‘of Chicago inthe widely known and highly inlet course, "Social Psychology.” Year after year students with psyeholoy- ca, sociological, linguistic, educational, pilaneope, and phil- ‘peal teres attended the corse—trequenty foe au be of yeas; and book after book has borne testimony to the impact of Me’ ideas on his sumerous students, The present ‘volume contains much that willbe of vale to hose of sil Interests. For many of his Hsteners Meas point of iew—at ‘nce humanistic and scholay—eame 1 fanetion a8 fous of ‘entation for their ene fntliceteal and valeational ie The ‘nurse in cial pryhalogy awe the foundation of Meas thaght. He was in eer Meat ae scientist as upon tht Foundation the his philsophial clabortion and soil partici pation reste, Ie i hoped thatthe present volume wll be fol lowed by volumes on Mevement of Tong ith Nine Contry. and The Phlapy of tbe de. Together these three ‘volumes would represen he these main fields of Meas work: social psychology and social philosophy, the history of ideas, ‘ystems peagmatsm. They are supplemented by the sendy Published volame, The Phiowpby of be Pree, edived by Anhur E. Murphy, and published in 1932 bythe Open Court Publishing Caan, Chisge “Though he published many papers ia the Fld of social sy- chology (as the bibliography a the end ofthis volume show), Profesor Mead never sptematied his postion an results in Tonger fone The preset vole ais ta dhs sh of sys temataton, arly by the arangement of the material and party theough references a the appropriate paces tothe pab- wlPREFACE ld wring: prvi the ra nine in thf incon werk Guorge I ead. one athe mater ee we as en pros pb ‘The re inthe main compe fe ses of exelent stent noes on he snes ogetber with excep rom other Schwan sclestons fom anpbluhed manor eto Mr, Mend A sori copy ofthe 1927 suse i a porch tn beckon st Tis gether wha tomb iments for ahr our, ow i vin 0 heaton an sho Me Caoge ages, nen he mprtane ofthe moral of Neat ee {ers vay dccred neat se, be fond in Ne Ain Gir arpa llor-orker sho wav ew rove he tans ney employ pers tke down vert he Siro cones complacent a ome Scab br te se boo ttle was very fall The isi by no mown cor ead ur ery ae {hut and bs hls vod a sen et an re ck eriseyeare Ths eral cn be ed house De- furonn’ of Phibsophy athe Univer of Cheng The hoe mice hm hen gry echo by the th fal an fl pte of athe sevre stent Rar age fore esily vale sce hey are or nye the a yer Inch the core argon ns compe Che. Ing he 957 mara fh eernge, rel of pertan ‘eget snd sal conacted) wre ned porto of BE oye foe buh ino thet and forts The Ste done tm eer dpe ith mera fo te Cuan wen ner estas 97 and yee ‘ateil fromm manuscrpe ha bean Hndicard by leering MS Ir the secon Alls fave ben adel by the er Other ei ons are into n racks. Sonne Fs I che gc acl conte ne unubthel maensin Eos TV amp Sim mae Rom 11927 enogapiceof en of oan li) PREFACE tary this course, 1am gratefl eo Me: Anagnos, Me. Carus fl Me. Page for making salable the bulk of the mater ed, Profesor" V Smith and Profesor Herbert Bluner have read and commented om portions ofthe manarrp. Mr. Jobn MM, Brewster and Profesor Alert M, Dunham have given freely oftheir ne and of thr intimate knowledge of Meas views. Students tao numerous to mention have kid put atm ie sal hr cls notes, an wish to expres o them my sinere thanks, The main work on the bibliography was dane By Pro- fesor Dunham, though Mr. Brewster, Mr V, Levis Bas, and Profsor Merit H. Moore have contributed items. Me’ Are thir C. Berghole i responsible forthe final Ibliogrsphy. A _gint hy the Commitee on Humanistic Research of the Uni ‘esi made posible valuable aussance in the preparation of the manure Ms. Rachel WY teveson ba then of n= ing 2 coofision of marks into ordered copy. Profesor James Tule grecinly allel the reading of pool My wife w= sited inthe preparation ofthe nde. At every stage of the work the sf ofthe Universi Pres has genie asian, 1 am well aware that af our combined efor have no een she to produce the volume which we wish George H. Mead night hive writen. But there is no evidence tit even am ale ‘elgrantoflfe would hive sen the material brought o vole form by his hands ‘Th he was not he writer of «system due to the fact that he was alas engaged in building one. His thought as to rch in itera development to allow hin to set down bis Hea in ordered ray lis genio exresed lf best the lecture room. Pechaps volume ke this one—sig the peacng, snp cher noe he {0's wier audience in ine apd space the avenare of des (0 tse Mr. Whitehesd’s phrase) which made notable to smaller ines for over dhiy years Mr. Mead’ ects on soca pvc cow.NTRODUCTION GEORGE Hl. MEAD AS SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGIST AND SOCIAL PHILOSOPHER tins and pilosophers. It wosld be dice to oeremphosize the comtibton to philwony rade by tho whore philoxophy has been nourished in their own scene activites, Mead sested in one of his lectures that "the philosophy of» period is hens an atenpt to interpre is mon secure knowledge” ‘While thc remari may eet! qvalifestion in tems ofthe pace that value considerations play n philovphial generation, i provides the elve co Meas own development. and indeed to pragmatism gence Hythe end ofthe lst cencary no item of knowledge seemed ‘more secur than the dati of boll evolution. This doe ‘ne had drama eld attention tothe fctor of develop metal change inthe work, ay physics and mathematic had previously exhibited the clement of structural constancy. ‘The {nliation seemed to be tat at only the man organi but the entre of mind os wel had tobe intereeted within the rolationary development. sharing init quality of change, apd Sesing i the interact of organism at environment. Mind had eo appear within and presumably co ay within, cond Sores thmalves hd o be envisaged as complex loge once and fied ato the evolutionary catogorisy. It ha beenINTRODUCTION ‘he philosophical ask of pragmatism to rencerpret the concepes ‘of ind ad ntlgence in ehebolgtal,psyehologel, aba so- ‘ological terms which pos-Darwinian enrents of thought have ‘mae prominent, and to reconsider the problems and tak of Diilosiphy from this new standpoint. The tsk i by no means Complete, as evidenced hy the fact tha the ste frming period is arly ye in exdcnce, Buc the ous of an empirical ‘atu erected on biologi, peychologcl nd sociological dea and ates are eleaely discerned, 4 natralism which ee thinking man im nate, and which aime to avoid the in tered dali of mind and matter, experience and ature, pilowophy and scenes, teleology and mechanism, theory and practice. It sa philosophy whic, interme usd hy Mead op- poses “the otherwoldinss of the reason -.. of ancient p= osophy, the otherwordincs of soul =~ of Christan doce tring, and the otherwordinss ofthe mind... ofthe Renais- Ses duaiana” Mach, soy hasbeen dane inthe way af rae ing the impliexion ofthe accompanying atades Tor edve- Gio, aeshetio,Togie, thc, religion, sientie metho, and epistemology. The “pragmatic reliance apon the experimental eth, coupled wth the moral and waiseonl raton OF he movement tthe democratic talon, hay rested na con- ception of philosophy a having a double concer with fat tnd vale; anda conception of the contemporary sora rab fem a the redirection and eeformlaion of human goods in terns ofthe ates and rests ofthe experimental method. Darwinism, the experimental method, and democracy are the hendaters ofthe priate stream Tn many ways the mow secre and inposing real of page thin, Such hey is of eure, basic to the whole soc. “The development and lborton ofthis theory defines he i= Jong activ of George H. Meal, The work of Meat and Dewey iyi many reyes imple. al fa a9 Tow eve in sgaicant apportion. They were cose fends fom the years at the University of Michigan, and constantly discussed pyrRODvETION their problems together during the years at the University of ‘Chleag. A atualdvson of labor se 4 common eisk was he res Neither stands tthe other inthe exchive relation of teacher to salen bth, im my opinion, were of egal thou Aire inlet] sare; both shared ina ml gveand take acording to ther own particular genius" Dewey ges range and vision, Mead ge analytical depth and scien pe- ison. If Dewey is at once the rolling rim and many of he ratiting spokes of the contemporary pragmatic wheel, Mead isthe hub, And though in mileage the Fim ofthe wheel travels Fathest i can go mo further a the crow Bos dha it hub can igo. Mess thoughe rests closely spon a fw basi es sich ‘were refined and elaborated over many years. Truc to his om ‘ons, the philosophy upon which he wis more and more en- {Ee in ht Ine yas wat an claboration, 9 "esrpive ane alization ofthe basic ideas which, a8 Siem, represented the most acute relevant nowledge he could abun. Our tack, however, sotto consider ha philosophy354 whole hee, but rather the scientific ass upon which ie fests (a hasis which ‘Meads scientist has dane mich to eit); and something of issn and eth dimensions " Mead ay scicmise was a socal paychologs. Tes commonly recognized tay tht scence walks om to legy—theory snd ‘observation: chat the lgial phase of science (the phase of the belaion and definition ef bate categories, and of ster ld ing) is of equ insportance withthe aetty ofthe fat-fnder an verifier, Mead ads litle or nothing to the corps ofthe Fae ofthe social scenes as detrmined by dstincave methods Ty ints Md he Fa Ply XV i inthe ay 9 Cy ee See, By yey Mee ‘Sin of Dey se bors Fal 9, Eh nl $f “The Pb Dee pie ey ane mt Te Meas wa The Png fy Pw ln. Ma Te ‘iy fe Ae a one bt Che No Nee Tai oe Cy MeINTRODUCTION of imestgton: to the ietional and cone srvtre he ds much TI ve thatthe two specs of Slee ae Ie tmatey inseparable, and that scene ideas cannot be devel ped oF analysed fully without reference wo fc; bat the fbseratons to which Mend appeals ate forthe most par open to ayone—they involve no spec enife technique, Not in igre and cre and insrumens is eonoibution wo be found, bu in insight a 0 the neue of minds and ces and The terms “social” and “prychologi™ have not long ap posted torether, nor in company sth bilopea estore "Tradition hs ieniedprychology with the sa of the indi ‘ida self or mind, Eren the pos Darwinian inflcnce of bio- logical once di not for 3 long sme Break p the inkrited Iniiidale prsupponions (an eideced bythe Aiea {ies ofa Holey to finda plac for moval Behavior in the evo Slonary proce, hough did formate the problem a to how the human mind appeared in the history of animal conde Mead tices inthe following pages the process by which hin logical considerations fred paehology through the sages of sssoiatomin parllisn, funchonatsn, and behaons ‘While Mea’ otn poston is bervorntc, is + sca he- hasiorsm and not am indidvalisie and subcutaneous on; he Aid not fod an anower in any of the sages or schools of ps thology a «0 how mind—ful-edged, receive, crests, Sponable seléconsiows mind—appeared within the nator Ist of candace Another factor had to be Drag int the sccount voce. Te was neverthelesforeunate tha Mead at tthe University of Chiengo when the hes charged pyr “The ertance of the other itor, the soci, ino Me's hema if ee isn ie ae te ex ey angele en Soon hele pyrRODvETION hough 6 less cas to account for, sinc he himself has nor trace this development: Mead agia was fount in elng in emunments in which sociology and soil payeholoy were Beginning to tke the form of scenes. Meal pilopies suchas those of Hegel and Royce srewed the sca nature of the self and moraty—and. Mend had studied onder Royce. Tarde and alin had made many. contibuions toward + social prchology by 1920. Gings hd done his major work, Sul Cooley had begun is sociological earcr atthe Univers ‘of Michigan; Mead was end of Coley and taught for three years in that enwironment. Attention ba gradelly een pid ‘apecilly by the Germans, 0 he soc aspets of ngage, 10 mythology, to rlgion—and Mea had sttied in Germany. Although he was at Belin, and not at Lepsig wih Wank, there en be dubs ut tae she Hence nf Wn mie Be sven ered for helping to lt the concep ofthe gestre by _esing she scl content to which I fanons iota of Seog Simply "expressions of emotions inthe Darwinian sense, go" tures wer well onthe way to eing regard a aly sages of the act of one organi responded to by another a ndctions ‘ofthe later stages ofthe soc ae. Mend spel thins of the gesture in sol terms and fom such gees tries the development of genuine lingua communication In ne en then, Mead ay be sid co follow »yath paralysed by ‘Wnde; and ceranly Wande helped him to correct he inade- quaces ofan indidalsiepychology hy the employment of social extegorien ‘Nevertiless, Mead was no bare follower of Royce of Tarde or Baldwin or Giddings or Coley or Wendt. A the flowing {othe they didnot go the whole way in explain ow Eee ickseanl Aa Sears a ft be camer tm ccy a pals of pclae pees” (003) SSN, net la [|INTRODUCTION ‘minds and sslves arose within conduct This etcsm breaks txo evo pars a) they all in some sease presupposed ame~ cede exent minds or sees vo get the soil process under sey; (2) even in respec the phases of ein the self hi they did attempt to aecoune for socal, they fled to isle ‘he mechaniom involved. The magi hat of the social, oof ‘which mind and the ef were wo he drawn, wasn pre loaded in ‘vance; and forthe rest there was merely 2 pis announce- ‘ment thatthe eck could be done, while the performance ite fever tok place. Meads endeavor show that mind and the self ace without reside socal eaerpent and that Lanpwoe, in ‘he frm ofthe vocal geste, prose the mechanism fr thet Te my belief chat Mead has been suecesfl in these ass, pec in the iolton of dhe Language mechani hy which ‘mind is sacilyconsiuted and through which the slf that fonsious of fal as an objet appear ‘There is question Sehethr in identifying mind with the operation of synbols rust be hel thc such symbols areal Tanguage symbol of 2 socil-ocal origin If this is not so there may be indvial "spect of mind is men and animals tae do not come within ‘he scope of Men's terminology In erent erm, these ‘oni a othe genetic priority of sgn-stations (non lange svete) and symbal-stantons (aaguage smbols). ‘The nse fete is lrgely a8 to the denottion of the word “mind” and “symbol” since Mead in some places amis the fits of rein- eration which Hollingworth stress, and the fae of delayed reaction which Funter emphasizes, but ale these men Fees ‘Har ch process do not come under the elafenion of sige Segeisn must have certain physiological prrequsies for de- ‘eloping language symbols; those who wish to use mind and Symbol in-a wider sense might add tha the individual could ‘ho devo ngage sls wiht xing ew read ‘oa-ngutic and so non-socil,sigs in which one eva leads a some organic center to the expecaton of and reiatgeation pyrRODvETION ‘of some othe event! However this may be, with the sceepance fof Meads se of the terme “mind” and “sl” Ye seme to Me that he has shown that mind apd the self are, without remain- ‘er, generat i 2 soil roges, and that he as for ee Fst time folate the mechisn ofthis genesis Ii andy neces: sry to sy that a mich smaller achievement would be sii ‘ene to serve as «milestone in science and phinophy. Meas ‘work marks an ealy stage inthe acta birth of socal psyehol- ‘ogy a. scene, since his bascidas go back to che early yeas ofthis centry Sole thatthe problem a to ow the human mind and el arise inthe proces of end answered by Mead in bioxoea terms He docs not neglect wth the traditional eychoogit the social proces in which human devlopment takes pce, he os no gles with the ronal sca scents the blog cal lve of the soca process by falling back upon mentalist hd mbjctve conception of society abeing lve in antecedent nin Both extremes are avoided by an appeal co an ongoing socal process of intereing biological organs, within which process, through the internalization of the coneraton of ge. {ures Gn the form ofthe woe gesture), mind and selves ate. Ani third extreme of biol individ x eoided throng the recognition of the soci nature ofthe undersing biologic proces in which inde ace. "The indvidoa at is seen within the socal act psychology 1 thr Ti a eM th RA sholet SSUES TSE tes be ea Shue cheesiest SSScey other “sre eyecare de ce et ete ordehomarumoreetnne ey SEATSINTRODUCTION and sociology are united upon bogies basis sacl psycho! ‘gy grounded upon a Sot! ehavoesm, eis these terms that Mead endeavored to eary ave a major problem posed by ‘volutonary conceptions: the problem of how to bridge the fp between impulke and rationality, of showing how certain Biological organs acquire the capacity of self consciousness, of thinking, of abstract reasoning, of purposive behavior, of ‘moral devotion; the problem in short of how man, the rational smal, arose. Though not used by Mea the term “social behuvorisn” ty serve to ehuacerze the elation of Meads poston to chat ‘of John B. Wateon, Mead considered Watsons views a over implied a hvingsbrerated the individ’ cegmone ofthe ‘ct Tom the complet or social act. Though Watson tas mich shout language, the erence of language ar found in certain ‘ype of socal interplay has escaped evils, and iden ise tinder the skin. And even there i des in the movements of the voral cons in the responses subtitted fr vol te pomes, and finally lose entirely among impr reson. {i cote, for Mend lengung isan bjetire phinormcacn of interaction within w sci ren compliaton ofthe gostre sitation, and even when fnternalza to coma the laner forum of the indvdoal’s mind, ie remains sogal—a way of arousing inthe individual by bis own gestures che atitudes and ‘les of thers inpliated inv common scaly ‘A second difference lis in the texment of the pete, Ax Kohler has remarked ia his Gotlt Pca, Watson's posi ion is esemaly the preference for an epistemology: i ys In efec dat the private cannot fill within sine even if i could be known to exist; hence we must write with the human !nimal in front of ws, To deseibe wha iss abseeale fs per feely proper, but a human animals we do in fe observe a pects af erates in our aide, our images, ou thoughts, our ‘motions which we do noc observe so completely in thes and pyrRODvETION that fees communicable, Watsons gave the impression of ruling out of cour the very contents tat» ure payhology tase expan. Meal was heey conscious of ths situation, but clearly believed that is own version of bebavorion war ade {quate to the task, Not merely was ito inclide the neglected {hci spets of the act, but aso the fneral apts he set ‘pen mainly bu not ealsvely tothe obseration ofthe act ing individal hinselt Mind wis ot to be reduced to non- mental bchavor, but obs sn a a tp of behavior gently merging out of non-metal types chaviorim accordingly teat for Mead not the denial of the priate nor the neglect of ‘omsiounes, but the approach to all experience in terms of ‘conduct. Some may fel tat this wide we of the ter sin Sav, ha che term is Watson's. However, the presen ve incl let may Be oberved and ane by the ral Behaviors, and where any confision may ees, bhaviogsm In chs wider sense ay be dexingulshed from Wessntan. "The igeent of time wil perhaps egard Watsons a behavior tam methodologically simplified for purposes of iia borax tory investigation. Mead’ (and Dewey’) use ofthe tem “be- havonsn’ co suggest the approach to experence—reective an nomerlective—in terms of conduct simply sigalizes with an appropriate name the direction impli inthe evoltonal Spproach of pragmaten, 4 dection extblihed long Before ‘Wison acre onthe cen and coming ater he has pro fesonally et ' hind diference arises from the fc that Mead, n harmony swith Dewey’ 96 paper on “The Rfles Are Concept in Py holog srenes the covlatvity of stimula and’ responce. tment, become sil only in ao fra Chey effet the farther release of an ongoing impulse” Thus, the sensi and activ iy of the-onginism determine i effective environment 35 ora dem is tin ot meth ee Th nS ge Nad ee ans nn Iva)INTRODUCTION cnincly asthe phyial environment aes the sensi of| {he form, The resting view dos more fstiee tothe dame and aggressive aspects of beavior than does Watsons, which fre the inprenion of regarding the onpunian os» pppet ‘those wires ae pled by the physi enronment. ‘Ths in the cise of reflective thinking, which Wataon erste quite om 3 par with the conditioning of the rat, Med is able to give a pene {cng nals of sch refeton in terms ofthe sl-condon- ing ofthe orgenis wo fare simul in rire of being able to ince to tel through symbole the consequences of eetin ‘oper of response to such stn This sccm se to Dini the Behavior of Watson in conditioning the rat, an not Inert the resting behavior ofthe condoned rat. Finally, hase iference refed inthe iteumstanes that ‘Wttninm has seemed to many not only eo deny private c= perience, but to empry “experience” fuel of any meaning not Ponesed by crsponce” Cerin of the dal behaves fave fankly identied “tse =” with “my ocular muscles have consti; and have as frankly adnied that thi denies ion Fads nto a behaviors form of sips, Such 3 situa- {on simply te appearance in pspehology ofthe logs and tmethodlogcal scandal which has Tong” harssed scenic ‘houston the one hand science has prided fel upon being {empiric on bringing its mont subtle theories to the ts of ob Servation, on the other and science has tended to accep 4 metaphysis which regards che data af observation a subjective §nd mental and which denies thatthe objects sted have the characters which as experienced they appear to hae, The Dragmatse of Meats type canot agree ith the attempt of ‘aise holds he word, a conceived by science, found Sitin the wider and richer wold that Is exerenedsiastead Of teing the "el" world in tems of which 0 depreiate the ‘orld 3 eperened; the won of science suething nine Crign tobe traced in eperenia tro. Ths, Mend eld {hat he physi thing, though prior forsee, is expeientally wil) pyrRODvETION 8 deivatve from social objects, i in the order of experi- fence sotaly dered. On Meas ow the world of Slence I ‘composed of dat whichis common to atd re fr various ob {Serers—the world of common or social experience ax symbuli= «ally formulated. Meads suggestion for the solution of the rid {lees nan instence that the basic dati fr servation i 3 world in which other sees and objects have the same diet sccessibiity (Chough the completeness of the acesbity may ary) asthe observer has of himself The experienced world i Ccnecive by Mead ay 4 ren of natural event emergent throu the acest of organ. evento snore «propery ‘oF the organism thin ofthe things observed. Philosophical the postion i here an objective relia: qualities of the ob- ince may yer be relative to 4 condoning organism. A certain Portion ofthe worl, as experienced, x private, buts porn i {cil or common, and science formulces i, Private experience ‘od common experince are polar concepey the priate an only Ie defined over agains that which comes. Tis mot pul here tog into the implications for episte= mology and philosophy of scence of ths concept of social ex- perience Tes mentioned here to show thie Meads behavior fhm dees not reduce che experienced wor to movements of nerves and miscles, ven though insist that the charsters of this world are fantom of inpuser seeing expen. This view doesnot make experience mental nor individual es be- ‘nase experince is socal dimension, becase the self or or- vison given in Field with other thet Mead is cpinclly ‘ntl to sar with the social act and to ground his sor] Frchology upon a social behavior. The seslng cher and dr asvatesonrpsion nt hehavin ‘ental importance in dhe dvelopmene of psychology, while presenting Yor the Hest time a bbavigism hat can lah to be ‘Alaquate tothe problems of philosophy.” ‘inal conceding. Se Te ply ea Mel pte ian ena lg we [we]INTRODUCTION “The transformation ofthe biologie individual to the minded congas o self ees place, on Men's account, trough the agency of langage, while language in ten presupposes the ex fence of «certsn kind of society and certsn phological ‘apes in che individ organs "Th inna ocey muse be cones of blogic nds paripating in asocll act av wrng the early sages ofeach tthe’ actions a gestures tha ia guides tothe completion fof the act. Inthe "conversation of genre” of the do fight ‘hog i Heginning to do; and the same holds for the bower, the fencer, ar? he cick which run tothe hen a the en's luck. Such ston i type of commnicatons in one see the ger tres are bai since they Indie tnd fr, an css ‘on sppropmate tothe ltr stages ofthe at of which they ate tly Hage ad sexily Wo dhe objets inet in ch act” Inthe same sense, he gestrer maybe said to have meaning, namely, dey mean the ler stages of the oncoming ct and, secondarily, the objects implicated the clenched Fist ‘eam the blow, the outstretched hand means the objet being te mi ea fe ts Kral cpt Sn SIRMSLay ami iucinetonn SeScoaea ote lia ipa i nee SSeS eer es eee ohinsntccmincerdaapecine agp ei Siuy vac nape ae SSRIVE poeatret Section aes Finnapegalttaceth apc nahn meee ea [eter someriemens avlethce “imeem og oe ns ce fo ‘ne arf Ugg na ethene ae Hh pyrRODvETION reached for. Such meanings ae not subjective nox privat, not mena, bt are obetvly therein he seal sua. ‘Neverthelos, th type of communion is not language proper the meaning ae not ye in mindy the bilgi nde ‘tls reno ye consoaly conmonieing eke For these results to ranspire the symbols or gestures inst become gy hime symbol or geres. The invieal muse know what he is aout he himself and not merely those who respond to him, mate able o interpret the meaning of his own gexare. Behavioral, his isto say that the biologic indies] must be able vo cll in himself he response hi eure elle ont in the other and then tlie this reponse ofthe eher forthe conta of hs own farther conduct. Such getues are signa SymbThrough their use the inidal i taking the ee Fhe ater” inthe regulation of Ks own condact. Man Senvally the rlesaking anima. The eng out of the same ‘pose in bath te sf andthe other gives the exminon eon ten aces fr community of meaning. Avan example of the sigan symbol Mead wes the tend- and me.” The “I” the ping of ‘sion and of impulse; and in i action i changes the soca Sucre, As Mead 373 of Dewey's views, “the indir no thrall of society. He consities society a geninely a society ‘omsittes the individ” Inde, every ton of the ind vial a ether ce nonlingusi oF linguist levels of commu iciiom changes the soil strocture eo some degre, sgh for the mos part, greatly inthe ease ofthe genius and the lade. Not merely tthe self seal Beng developed onthe bass ‘ofthe biologi ora, but society el yan organic whole ‘oF 1 compler order, cannot be pt into oppniion witht di Tinguishale and recognizable componente—bilogc individuals atthe simpler social lve, selves a the higher. This point is Growth inking since some Poesy have gained the impestion that pragmatm has lst the individual in sociey. Certain phrecr af Med may sugges this at nes, but she ceca’ ion of the biologic indvuual (he “T” over against the “me") And the fcr chat while sles presuppose por social proces they in turn make possible the arganination ofa distinctively human society, shoul sence all doubt. Any other interpret tion i incompatible with the ses which Meat intomental- ium and ethic theory pot upon thought a 4 reconstructive c- tivigy and pon the inva! thinker arto ase Deweys Dhrase' reconstructive ceme of soi" Through + sci proces, then, the biologie individual of proper organi suf gts ind sd + self Through society the lope onal beste etal eval on” In <1. Som tl Maso de et hw oan ts as "Te Sol ‘a de beng Su Sa ar uc as Ma gp Cn Cp tes gy Tenino ta item em plane no [|INTRODUCTION ‘uc ofthe internalization or importation ofthe soil process of fommunication, the India galas the tmechanitn of Fel te thought (de aby co det his action a tes uf he fore seen consequences of alternative cures of ator; acres the ily t0 make himself an abject to himself and to lve in 2 common moral an sient word becomes a moral individ ‘vith impulsive ends transformed into the conscious pursitof| cnvinsien Because of the emergence of such an individual society isin cum trnsormed. I receives through the reflective soc sel the organization ditnctie of uma soeey: stead of lay ‘ng his soetl part throwgh physolgiealdiferentiaion (asin the cise ofthe nse) or through the bare nflence of gstres ‘pom others he umn indvidval regulates his pat in the so act chrough having within hime the oes of he oeer in pleted in the common sty. In aang 2 new principle [fc axpuiotiny society hes gained a new sesigue of onto, sac it has now implanted self within ts component arts, and so regulates othe degree tha this saccessfilly hone, the Beharior ofthe individ! in terms of the effet on ‘thes of his contemplated acto. And fly in the process, Society has provided technique forts own transformation I ‘rationally wish todo mo more than present o cach of is ‘members trough the "ee," the weil seting within which ‘conduct i 10 take place, and to make each responsible forthe social values affected through this setion. Under the penalty of| agnatio, sity cannot tbe grt forthe change hich {he mon! et ofthe creative "introduces upoo he soci ge “This s not the pce to take up the mui of insights shih Mead weaves ino bis general framework; noe the ipl rie nln he a ce de | ‘nt brian tec et ‘se nie ct ly. pyrRODvETION ‘ation for edueation, pxchopatology, scilogy, psychology, St Moguls, nor the way fn wich his pilonophydovetl with his soca payholog. Bu yan illusion of the feriy (This bse idem anne avoid mentioning ow related pnts =the theory of univers and the concept ofthe generlined ‘ther. The lve here isnot narowly philosophic but con ‘ems the posi of ding jamice on prgmatie,reaiiic, Sl empiri point of view othe fictions of struct, stability, Stal univer, Tis suc factors tha the maheratia ad Dhysiel slenees have brought into prominence, whl the pos Darwinian bloga and social sinces have made prominent the egos of change and proces Te would bea sign of the inadeqcacy of modern empiricism ik should mercy agtn seta Philosophy of Becoming alongside ofthe philosophic of Being, Auplicating the impune wbich besce Cel hough ris frequently stated thar the pragmatist mst be 3 nomioal- ta and cannot do sie to the fat of univer. Un eal, Pragati is nearest a this point vo medical conceals. Teisonly when the symbol is. bare parcel, sanding indi ferety for 3 number of over parol, that nomial isthe tele Ava fet however, the sghifane symbol a 4 iestre, isnot arbitrary, uo always 8 phase of a act, al 50 ‘shares in whatever universality the ct porseses. Av Charles Pearce saw-—and Octham long before—tnverality closely connected with habit An ac uivenal in tat many objec for specs of objects ean serve a6 appropriate stm any ob ject one can stom seat any bjt that dies the ai is hamier. Now the words “seat” and chummer” 4 over sal are chmslves segments of the involved snes 5d nt Tike» apeie at of siting or hansmerng ar tstances (ep «sin Pie's tems) ofthe universality ofthe atu. Tn the aide shat the fea or concept asa univer fe. The mes ie weve et al dhe reine of Ue Se tha i any objects that have the characterises suitable 0 Serve as simul for the ongoing act. Universality is thus not an [xe]INTRODUCTION cov ba incon elton of symbian berms = Ss ese a of objet he nia membrs of wAh ne inances” ofthe wxveal “This potion, labored veh beyond Men's bie ef rence esenilly an objective reat in regard to on- Serle Just as objeas hine for Mea! colors and sae in Certain itacon involving oneaniss, 50 objects have the che Serer of univer in rcaton ton ac capable of being fr Cheted by various objets or aspects of objers. The abjcs have universality in relation eo the at which they indiferenty senor heat fas ninety a the character of bene ported indfreniy by rane of ebjers In sch a sitation the actor segment ofthe at that the geste may be rege fs the univer under which fll on which para the ims objec a pardculaty while che snivenaliy of the objec isthe character which they poses in common of r= Sng sol othe sy tang sively tle So the Acts ought within the Seope of a empiri since and Dhiloophy All ha it denied on this teament isthe meter Sty of hypostsngsoch unser thereby ering the an Shes of Being and Booming which has pore tl fom Pla to Whiten. ‘Avecond dement nthe treatment of university isthe social factor The generale cies in eso he asta jot co may be eeardc asthe uiscratzaton of the process of etaking: the generalized other is ay and all others that andor cold snd ss parclas over nginst the attide of ‘Blea nth o-opertve proce st hed. Locked ot om ‘he wandpoin of the sc, she gencied ber ie the ae of In no fora wha the inva does or sy ude ate by, accepted by, or tae for any eer india ii Gated th 3 common sey Cand. without common ati {hte wun be eomenity waning, den wha is oe dor sid his anew type of usitesality—socl university, Such “vei is none sense ofthe erm synonyn fret. (sii) pyrRODvETION ity. Tis forthe posi the mose important ype of objecti= Ity—ome would sy the only possible ype. The indvidal transcends what given to him lone when through comm ‘om he Bs that Bis experiences bared yonkers that, Ut his enperence and the experenes of other ill under the fame universal Gin the is see ofthat term). Where the per cular or stances of his universal fl within diferent exper- il perpetvs, universality his taken onthe soci dimen sion The inividal has, ay were goten ouside of is imited ‘orld by taking the roles of ober, being ested rough com Srunition empiiellypromded and teed that in all these ‘nes the word presen the same appearance, Where this i Attained, eserene is oil, common, shared ii ony gna. this common world tie the inva dsnguishes his own Arte minimum, cence fhe recordin verbalize form ofthe snore univer pets af such « cmt word ain an independence of the prtialar perspective of the ders by finding tha which common to many, and ely co all abe servers, Mead shows in his penetrating anasis ofthe soca Povehology of physi relay (which hs becomes an ne feance of his general theory of rletaking) thatthe ivan sought and presumably found Hes in the lation ofa forma that is tye of the world batever the point of observation. “Independence of experience” an “unvesal tut may mean snore than independent of any parclar experience” and “Troe for al oberon” bu they cannot mean se. There ae varying deqres of sich social university, While sot aent in tory ad aestheiy, xwier in scene, and ‘sional rte of the world chat revel the grea ai ‘eral, mathematics and loge are simply the eres of the search for suc invariance As the lowest common de- wnninatnofde wal ana 9 atin ad he wor ed abou, they ae, it were, common tal tonal Brings. Wile Mead himself gives no elaboration of his ocea- sx)INTRODUCTION sional references to loi, his azoane contin in impli form {he germs of theory of loge and a phllosophy of maternal, ‘When itis elled that social universal potentially ex- ene co the past and ftur, it en be relied that Meads spprach is compatible with the resogition tht relatively ta the most general co-operative ate there are highly ineriant features of the word. The emergent and temporal aspees ofthe pragmase position are not a odds with whatever con stancy the world as experienced docs in fet reveal, nor with tthatver formals logic and mathematics are able to tain, Peapoatin eral wishes to aod fanatic im these mater Ir counsels canigy toward the motel principles of bing snd becoming, by pointing ot thit empirically university is 2 character of things over agains the act, whether inva 0 festa And ay sch feb mutter of more oF ka, aot ofall oF Dil space permit ie would be interesting to discuss other queries raised bythe conception ofthe generalized othe. How far, for instance, e the diference between Platonist snd elatee ‘st dependent pon the degree to which one rakes the rl ofthe fenetlized otter? Can the eatenson of the proces of Ue faking toward physica hinge permit one to rancend human fbserer altogether, s0thit one can meaning pss fom the tocil posts, mhich at times Mead seems to ropend asthe limit of meaningfal metaphysics,” co a plosopicl realism? ‘What nthe bearing of Meads doctrine, when coupled withthe concept of sal perience, pon the nature of trth aid Knowledge? How far dows the generalized other provide the pychologialequtalent ofthe Rstorial concep of God, and fay and Appearance? Tes only possible o raise such questions Sarde af nie Meera tno “secopety yt be Ie ay of ree EM he ae" en Paya pyrRODvETION here, and peshaps this digression and expansion of Meads thug hat been uni eo ceri readers, his been entered into in onder to show the power of Mead’ socal pyeoogy for the approach to problems which pragmatism has not sufisenty iced, nd where i ve Bsn mo it in ing vit “Mead, in common wth all pragmatiss since James, eld an inteest theory of values tha is good which sais am interest ‘or impulse” But once again Men's satement ofthis sin ob jostverlesvinic term vl f the character of an bjs in is capacity of satisying an interest—it resides neither In the ‘object alone nor in an emotional sae of the subject. Inert ‘or impulses clash, however, and so aries the problem of the The acthaic abject Brings the emotionally toned impues nwo a harmoniows wholes the objet expabie of so simulating atl intgraog the impuler hes esthetic charcer or valor Through an object of such a character ane enjoys the recor ‘xy ofthe sense of the final outcome in pata achievement.” ‘varing the end that he is fishionog.”" The arti plays upon ates, arousing in himself by the use of is median, he “motional aspects of an atte which his workin varying de rece communicates ro others fy cling et i them thie tude. In so fara this is don, the seuheticealtation isthe fasion of the °T and the *me” made posible by the obec. ‘Mead believed, without elaborating hs Wews in del. chat his ‘ersion of behaviorsticpsjehology ives fil basis for esthetic theory esthetic vale ina it were « common if offted to the nlf by nate or by the ani the task of the al fe ‘eta tie a (iii St psn hand or ys, acetate re titi, [eeeINTRODUCTION to create through refleesve efor similar integration of in ple ate evel of ineracing sees Tn its essen, Mead’ ethical theory the same as Dewey's tut the approach chrough the soci pychology of the self throws the conception int ne fle, Heng social, there 0 phological problem asso how the self can take other inca coun i es flcive etry, jus a there pvblen of ‘urmaunting hedonism on aviow which tales an ac directed tion abet eit hase unit, The self as cone By is impulses is secking the abjects which allow the consummation fof the impulses. Associ tothe depre thatthe sl has taken {he audes of others into tel through the language process, ‘eh Become the others, and dhe vats of thers ae is owas to he derce chat She self assumes thereof the gencralizd ther, fn alts are the salvo of tho osalposate all The opine” ‘ological escape from the egocentric predicament by genng an ‘go hich ineadee the sandpoigs of thre fe anagene fn Sale theory to the geting of a sel whch neues wichin felt {he sues of ethers Thi free constriction ofthe implistons ‘of Mend’ actual statment shows the feeity ofthe approach fo the fed of values Certain ii hati gives a move pecse ‘ta of formulating the breakdown ofthe alternatives of eosin tnd strain, ofsele-ssenion and sel-scrifie, than the ps ‘hological equipment of thst wally makes posible Stated im eth terms, Mead tv msating thom the moral act the motive for actin is he impulse itl? a dete 0 4 feck ead A sca of es celiac hat dened expec: lon as inperaively a any ose impulses, For Mead orl feds are social ends been inthe Gt plce the only standard for impulse chat impulse makes posible resides in the answer ‘sto whether the impke in question fees or dies om to Sstsfeton, and whether ie expands and harmonizes, oF ar- rows and defeats, other impulses; and second, besa the self 2s gt se re “The ier ston pn Erde ts py Tn ee pyrRODvETION sites sc ii ol ih ih Seti elena Sie eR Shee ele Sion ai ite ptr fam ce Tisai ies pope, Sa end ee ase ancy tele ae et cee LNG Sat eg rei anneal he eo ore att a eng ion ceaieimers mais [sexuINTRODUCTION Septic tna tase tte cae Me Se et ee rs seg gt ese, coment ee ee es See eer gate naman ney teas Sarthe nme ete the perenne ae ee cae a ae mean onnauenten Sere apne avs movetg w ese rey nad i Shovel diac tlt ng) Oday othe kos tall nea mere pyrRODvETION constantly refers tothe League of Nations as a tentative reach- Ing by ations for the wider socixy chy feel themseles a pat ‘of but which they are nor yee able wo enter in tens of a Fune- ional wle—and so they are forced stl co assert themselves in terms of power. Nations have not yet learned to cake the ele ‘of the other, and to pantcipatecomcusly and morally in the Wider socal proceses which they are infact engaged in. In Snag to the indivi, nitions are still a the level of he Ihologe individ; they have not yet attained moral selfhood; theie “Tr dacs not yer aceon a age att by an international “me Justa withia each social aroup 4 premium is put upon the contribution ofthe functionally diferentated sell, s0 this internationals calls for no obliteration of mations, but rather their selt-fimation athe moral evel of sci sees. Meat’ acwoune dos juice to both the fetory of individual inv and social concern Te organically unites within the raion wn horace naan het the pineipes of niles nd socialism, the aude of the pioneer andthe note of the Irotherhood of man, which together characterize democracy Foreglow or aferglow? If the democratic ideal moves toward seaiation Gaange He Men wgetie with Jul Dewey, ill Ise licen ane ofits mane philosophies! mouthpicns, » Walt Whitman in the resin of though Forces o the leo right rake imposible this realization, Mead will have helped to swt its epitaph ‘Whatever be the feof the democratic ideal, Geonge H. Meads exrontinany fertile eas have ot merely given ith 4 secure place among the creator of socal prcholoy, led 0 {cl and ethical theories of itisic intrest, and provided nats fr significant expansion of pragmatism in the for of “he philesopy ofthe act" but hey ive every ladieation of having within themselves che power to eich the concepts of the social selences, to suggest new avenues of empiri invest ston, and eo open ew horizons for phlowophical inerpreta Gnas W, Mo [see]‘TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Soil Ppeolgy al Behari 4 Rie of Pls i aeology Iii nd he Org of Lanse The Vaal Grea Sigieres Sp 15. Thug, Communician ade Sgolan Syl 1 lions ad Poehler ts Mind te Ste 1 The elation of Mid Response ahd Easonsent 1S Aes the Phys Wor 25 The and he Me" op Pes he Sl asi]“TABLE OF CONTENTS 21. Th Contbton oh Man he 49. A Conte Indie nd Sxl Theo the Sl Coenen el avs PARTY THE POINT OF VIEW OF SOCIAL REHAVIORISM Sx prychology has, as 4 rule det with various phases of soil experience fom the pepeologil stand poi of individual experience. ‘The, pint of appronch the wandpoin of sce at lat Fm the stindpint of come Imuniation av esenial to the socal onder. Soil pychology. ‘on this view, prespposs an approach to esperene from the Sandpoint ofthe Ind, but undertakes to deterine in Paricular that which belongs to this experience because the {ial inset belongs toa socal structure, a soc ode. ‘No very sharp ine can be dawn between soda paychoogy aint individual paychology. Soca pychoogy especialy in Terese inthe effet wich the sora group has nthe deter Inination of dhe expetienee and conduct of the individ! mem Ber. If we abandon the conception of substantive soul et owed th the self ofthe individ at irc, chem we may sega de develope ae adv ela el consciousness within the field of his experienc, a8 the soca tryst ape Inet, Thee te hen, crn ples of psychology which ae interested in studying the relation of the inivdal organism the social group to which it Blones, an thee phases conse socal pychology ab branch of fcveral prychology. Thu in the study of the experience and Behavior ofthe individeal organism or sel in fs dependence upon the soil group to which i elngs, we find defntion ‘ofthe ist of ol pacha ‘While ings and selves are esently social products, prod vets oF phenomena ofthe social sid of human experince the in