- Sociologists, Charles Cooley and George Herbert Mead
both thought that other people
could play a significant role in how we view ourselves.
However, they differed in how
they thought this might happen.
Whereas Cooley thought that everyone
that a person interacts with
during their entire lifespan
could influence our self-identity in some way or another,
Mead thought that the process was somewhat more restricted.
He thought that only certain people
could influence our perception of self
and only during certain periods of life.
He also thought that the way that others influence us
changes across the lifespan.
For example, Mead believed that infants
and other very young children,
were not actually influenced by others in any way.
Instead he believed that young children see themselves
as being the focus of their own world
and, consequently, they don't really care
about what other people think of them.
At the same time, they also lack the ability
to even take the perspective of another person.
For those of you who are familiar with psychology
and with developmental psychology,
you might realize that this is very similar
to Piaget's concept of egocentrism.
But Mead also believed that as we grow up
our beliefs about how other people perceive us
start to become more important.
Mead thought that this happened
through three distinct stages:
the preparatory stage, the play stage and the game stage.
During the preparatory stage,
children interact with others through imitation.
They might play with pots and pans when a person is cooking,
or use a broom or a toy vacuum
when their parents are trying to clean,
which, of course, usually winds up making more of a mess,
but these aren't really true interactions.
As these children grow older
they start to focus more on communication with others
as opposed to simple imitation of them.
They get practice using symbols,
things like gestures and words
and other forms of communication
that they will later have to master as they grow up.
During the play stage, children become more aware
of the importance of social relationships.
Mead believed that this was reflected
in children's tendency to pretend play as other people.
They play as mommies or daddies
or doctors of firefighters, etcetera.
And, whereas before they were really incapable
of taking on the perspectives of others,
now they're really focused on them.
Now they're really focused on role-taking
or mentally assuming the perspectives of another person
and acting based on their perceived point of view.
Even though this might seem like imitation,
the kind we saw in the preparatory stage,
this actually goes way beyond it,
because the children are able to respond.
They're not simply capable of mimicking social interactions,
they're capable of creating them.
During the last stage, the game stage,
children's understanding of social interactions
become even more developed.
During the play stage children become able
to consider the attitudes, beliefs and behaviors
of the individuals who are closest to them.
During the game stage they start
to understand the attitudes, beliefs and behaviors
of what Mead referred to as the "generalized other,"
or society as a whole.
With this comes a whole new understanding of society.
For example, children start to realize
that people not only perform in ways
based on what they, personally believe,
but also based on what society
more broadly expects of them.
They also start to understand
that someone can take multiple roles,
that people aren't simply moms or doctors of teachers,
that they can be multiple things at once.
This is something that I actually recall
from when I was a kid.
I remember that as a really young child
I really believed that all my teachers did was teach.
I thought that that was really the sum total
of their existence.
I actually remember it being really confusing
when I saw them in a supermarket
or learned that they had children of their own.
As all of this is happening,
as children start to acknowledge the generalized other
and they start to realize that people have multiple rolls,
they also start to understand that other people
must have opinions about them
and that those perceptions are influenced
by how they act and what they say.
In response, they themselves begin
to be influenced by these perceptions
and they start to be concerned
about the reactions of others to what they do.
But they don't really care about the perceptions
of everyone they come across.
They're mainly focused on the perceptions
of the significant others in their life.
By that I don't mean a girlfriend or a boyfriend,
at least not exclusively,
but by all the people who have important relationships
to that individual, parents, teachers, close peers.
Mead believed that this understanding
lead to the development of the "I" and the "me,"
where the "me" is our social self
and the "I" is our response to the "me."
The "me" is how we believe the generalized other sees us.
It is what we learn through interactions with others.
The "I" thinks about what those things mean.
As an example, the "me" might understand
that people in the US typically
go from high school directly to college,
but the "I" might wonder if that is best,
if maybe it would be best if some people traveled first
or if they maybe worked for a few years.
I actually always found these terms
to be somewhat confusing.
The way that I think about it
is to think about the "me" as society's view
and then the "I" is the individual indentity
stepping in, or our personal responses
to what society thinks.
Even though we have these two parts
and they might seem like they're conflicting,
Mead would say that who we are,
our actual self, is the balance
of both the "I" and the "me."