Symbolic Interctionism Theory
Regards the communication
At this opportunity, the author will discuss three important points in the theory of symbolic interactionism. One of interpersonal communication theory by George Herbert Mead. I also elaborated with a few sample cases to facilitate the reader to understand. However, I apologize for any shortcomings in the writing of this blog.
Scott Plunkett argued that this theory is a way for us to learn to interpret and give meaning to the worldwide through interaction with others. This theory states that humans developed a complex set of symbols that coined meaning within the framework of their perspective. Meaning that formed from the interaction with the community. And this interaction is subjectively interpreted by them in accordance with the meaning of the symbols that exist. It can be said that if we need to understand the patterns of people's behavior, we need to understand the symbol. Interaction shaped symbol is also creating a social structure. Moreover, symbolic interactionism also articulates that people build a sense of identity through this interaction with the community.
Blummer, one of the students who pass on Mead's theory. Expressed three main principles contained in the symbolic interaction.
1. Meaning: Construction of social reality
Blummer starts with a premise that people act against another person or things based on the meaning of their allotment to others. Meaning, in theory, is vital and became the center of the theory. Therefore, it is explored in relation to a discharge of symbols none other than the meaning behind these symbols.
Example: when we imagine someone that is turned away when communicating, illustration to respond to that person will be lodged in our minds. We have assumed, and our next move was based on that assumption.
2. Language: The source of meaning
Blummer second premise the meanings arises from social interaction. In other words, the meaning is not inherent of the object and not pre-existent in her nature. So, how meaning is constructed? Meaning built on negotiations and agreements together through the use of language.
As human beings, we have the ability to give names to things, people, phenomena, objects, animals, and other forms. One example, who started that the red color on the traffic light signaling stop? It is the result of those talks and it was agreed so. We can not choose our own meaning, although it can only extend to our own. And if we could live alone with meanings that are not recognized by others?
Further, since the symbol is a learned stimulus meaning and value to others. It's good to learn also interpret the symbols in each of the association that we assemble through various perspectives. From the above analogy, imagine if you give attitude equally indifferent? Will a relationship take place effectively? The author sense, not of necessity it happens.
Example: when you tell your girlfriend to go out for some fresh air. She would think that you ask her after fatigue with various activities. However, she might interpret it merely ordinary sightseeing.
3. Thought: The process of taking the role of other
Blummer the third premise that the interpretation of symbols modified by the person himself through various processes. These theorists call 'inner conversation' and Mead call 'inner dialogue minding'.
You may have to talk and then paused to think though few seconds. That's what we do because we do not need encouragement to translate the symbols that appear. Naturally, you will discuss with the relevant yourself. However, we still need a language. Before think, we have to make sure to interact symbolically.
This thought process will also determine expropriation important role in the communication that took place. The stronger we think, then we will get stronger mentally to another person.
Self-reflection: i and me
This self-reflection is 'I as subject' and 'me as an object'. Clearly different. This means that reflections ourselves against what if like this or what if that. It also became one of the ways of introspection of self with my portrayal is there in the position of others who communicate with us. What if the position we are in the position of others at this time? So what happens next?
References:
Em Griffin, Chapter 4 Symbolic Interactionism of George Herbert Mead, A First Look at Communication Theory 6th Ed., (New York: McGraw Hill, 2006), pp. 55-63.
Susan Harter, The Self as a social construction: Symbolic interactionism revisited: Potential Liabilities for the Self Constructed in the Crucible of Interpersonal Relationships.
Jika Anda menyukai Artikel di blog ini, Silahkan
klik disini untuk berlangganan gratis via email, Anda akan mendapat kiriman artikel setiap ada artikel yang terbit di Momovdesk
0 komentar:
Post a Comment