Two Sides of Self: Me & I

[Audio] Previously, we discussed the stages of social development according to Mead. Today, we will continue with his theory particularly on the two sides of self. During the game stage when children start to understand the attitudes, beliefs and behaviors of what Mead referred to as the " generalized other," or society comes a whole new understanding. 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 considered the socialized aspect of the individual. The "me" is how we believe the generalized other sees us. It is what we learn through interactions with others. The 'me' represents learned behaviors, attitudes, and expectations of others and of society. This is sometimes referred to as the generalized other. The 'me' is considered a phase of the self that is in the past. It has been developed by the knowledge of society and social interactions that the individual has gained..

[Audio] The 'I', therefore, can be considered the present and future phase of the self. The 'I' represents the individual's identity based on response to the 'me.' The 'I' says, 'Okay. Society says I should behave and socially interact one way, and I think I should act the same (or perhaps different),' and that notion becomes self. I is the part of the self that is spontaneous, unpredictable and creative. As an example, the "me" might understand that a Filipino student 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. These terms may be somewhat confusing. However, you can simply think about the "me" as society's view and then the "I" is the individual identity stepping in, or our personal responses to what society thinks..

[Audio] The 'me' and the 'I' have a didactic relationship, like a system of checks and balances. The 'me' exercises societal control over one's self. The 'me' is what prevents someone from breaking the rules or boundaries of societal expectations. The 'I' allows the individual to still express creativity and individualism and understand when to possibly bend and stretch the rules that govern social interactions. 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.".

[Audio] Mead made significant contribution to the development of concept of social self and in many ways show us how 'I' can be seen as our self-awareness and 'Me' as our self-image. These stages allow your 'self' and your notion of who you are, what you like, what your personality is, etc., become constructed through your experience of being in the world, through interaction, and through reflection on those interactions. The self is developed as you age and grow — it is not something biological. Through our experiences and interactions, our personalities are developed, and reflecting on that interaction, and then thinking about how others are perceiving us, allow us to generate an image of ourselves. In order for us to understand the 'self', we must be able to view ourselves through the eyes of others. Through socialization we learn to put ourselves in someone else's shoes and look at the world through their perspective. This allows us to become self-aware, as we look at ourselves from the perspective of the "other.".

[Audio] Our next topic is the looking glass self. Socialization describes the process by which people learn the attitudes, values, and behaviors that are appropriate and expected by their culture and community. And it typically occurs through the observation of and interaction with the people we are surrounded by. And this can include those who are close to us, like our family, friends, and teachers, but it can also include everyone else that we come across in our daily lives. Our doctors, nurses, celebrities that we see on TV and in the movies, even the people standing in line next to us at the supermarket. They all have something to teach us about how we should act within our community. But socialization also shapes our self image, or how we view ourselves. And sociologist, Charles Cooley used the term looking glass self in order to describe this process. And he theorized that our view of ourselves comes not only from our direct contemplation of our personal qualities, but also from our perceptions about how we are being perceived by others. And Cooley thought this happened through three steps: imagining, interpreting, and developing self-concept..

[Audio] First, we imagine how we must appear to others, to our families or friends or just people on the street. Imagining occurs when an individual judges the way they act and appear through the views of family and friends. For example, my mom sees me this way. My friends see me this way. My teachers see me this way. Initially, these views make up a person's self-concept. This can be seen as the 'this is how I must appear to others' stage..

[Audio] Interpreting is the second stage of the looking-glass self and is a learned ability. When we imagine how they must evaluate us, based on their observations of us. Do we come across as intelligent, or funny, or shy, or maybe just awkward? Interpreting occurs as the individual draws conclusions from past experiences and from what others think and then reacts to the judgment of those other views..

[Audio] The final stage, developing self-concept, occurs as the individual synthesizes all the information they have based on past experiences and others up to that point and develops a sense of self-image. We develop feelings about ourselves based on our impressions of their evaluations and their observations. This can be seen as the 'this is who I am' stage..

[Audio] Cooley illustrated the concept of looking glass self with the following statement: I am not what I think I am and I am not what you think I am; I am what I think you think I am. This means that we as individuals define how we perceive ourselves by how we think others perceive us. And one critical aspect of this theory that I want to point out, is that Cooley believed that we are not actually being influenced by the opinions of others, but instead we are being influenced by what we imagine the opinions of other people to be. So according to this theory, we might develop our self identities based on both correct and incorrect perceptions of how others see us..

[Audio] To put this component of the theory in perspective, consider this: So let's say that we have this teacher and they're grading a paper very harshly. They're grading it very critically. And they're doing this because they think that the student who wrote this paper actually had a lot of potential. And so they're grading that student's paper harshly in order to help them reach it. So let's say our student gets their paper back and notices that it's full of red ink marks and corrections from the teacher. How might that student interpret this? And how might that influence their self image? First they might observe that the teacher criticized them harshly on this paper. Second, they think that teacher probably did so, because they see the student as not being very intelligent. And then finally, our student comes to the conclusion that, based on this, they're probably not very good at literary analysis. So here the student is acting on an incorrect perception of what they think the teacher believes. And because our attitudes can often influence our behaviors, this might result in the student putting less effort into the class, instead of more effort like the teacher originally wanted..

[Audio] So let's say that this student talks to the teacher after class about why they graded so harshly. At that point the teacher might explain that they think the student is on the right track, but that they need to put in a little more effort. And so because of this additional interaction, the student was able to revise his or her incorrect perceptions and this could lead the student to developing a different self perspective..

[Audio] George Herbert Mead developed the concept of self, which explains that one's identity emerges out of external social interactions and internal feelings of oneself. Self is not evident at birth but emerges over time through language, play, and games. The self consists of 'me' and 'I'. The 'me' represents learned societal behaviors and expectations, and the 'I' represents the individual's identity based on the response to those social behaviors and expectations. The 'me' and the 'I' act to balance the self out. The looking-glass self concept, developed by Charles Cooley and based on the work of Mead, explains that self develops over time and the process is continuous throughout one's life (or until social experiences cease). There are three stages of the looking-glass self: imagining, interpreting, and developing self-concept. The first stage can be summarized as the 'this is how I must appear to others' stage. The second stage occurs as an individual begins to react to others' opinions and views. The final stage synthesizes these reactions and feelings and becomes the 'this is who I am' stage..

[Audio] Lastly, let us talk about symbolic interactionism by Bluemer. Herbert Blumer was actually a student of Mead, and he expanded on Mead's discussion of the self in relation to social behavior. Despite much of the groundwork being established by Mead, Blumer is traditionally known for being the brains behind the theory of symbolic interactionism. In fact, it was his work Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method that synthesized his contributions with those of Mead and Cooley and coined the term symbolic interaction..

[Audio] Blumer argued that people's behavior is based on the meaning those behaviors have to them. Those meanings are based on and derived from interactions an individual has with others. It's important to note that these meanings are subject to change based on an individual's interpretation. This argument varies from others that preceded it because it's based on an individual's interpretation of something, as opposed to a structural or functional perspective on how behaviors or actions are given meaning by humans..

[Audio] He proposed three tenets to explain symbolic interactionism. For example, If I had sat under the shade of trees all my life, and I was on a long walk today and spotted a big tree, I might want to sit under it. The tree means shade on a hot day to me. Let's say I do decide to sit under that tree on my long walk today. I step off the path and sit down and lean back against the trunk..

[Audio] Blumer's first tenet was that we act based on the meaning we have given something. I consider the tree as a place to rest, so I'll go lean against it. As I'm sitting there, another person stops to warn me that all trees are infested with ants..

[Audio] Blumer's second tenet was that we give meaning to things based on our social interactions. The same thing that we can have different meaning for different people. For the person talking to me, the tree is a breeding ground for creepy crawlies, and they are going to avoid it. But I'm quite happy with my seat in the shade, and I haven't been bothered by any ants. So I'm content just to sit. We have different views of the tree, and so we act differently. As I'm sitting there talking to this lovely person, I feel something tickle my shoulder. And suddenly, I jump up as something bites my back. Turns out the tree was infested with ants. Now that I've been bitten under a tree, I might not sit under the next one I find because it might also be infested with ants..

[Audio] Blumer's third tenet was that the meaning we give something is not permanent. It can change due to everyday life. The meaning I give to trees has changed after my interaction with the infested tree. A big tree now means shade on a hot day with potential for getting bit. So let us sum up the three central ideas of symbolic interactionism. They are that action depends on meaning, that different people assign different meanings of things, and that meaning of something can change..

[Audio] Here is another example where you can apply the symbolic interactionism theory. You are entering an office to interview for a job. When you arrive, the man interviewing you greets you at the door of his office with a handshake and a warm smile as he looks you straight in the eye, offers you a seat and a glass of water, and sits down behind his desk. You feel confident, right? But why? According to symbolic interactionism, you feel confident in this scenario (at least in that moment) because his smile was warm and genuine, he looked you in the eye, and you felt that his response to you was accepting. You interpreted his response to you as agreeable, because in the past when others have responded to you in the same way, the interactions were positive. So you, in turn, defined yourself in a positive way in this moment..

[Audio] Let's start this interview entrance over. You walk in the room, only this time the man interviewing you barely looks up from his computer and tells you to have a seat on the opposite side of his desk. His quick glance at you in the doorway of his office seems full of annoyance. He types furiously, not saying a word as he finishes composing an email. You fumble with your portfolio and quietly fidget, hoping your clothes aren't wrinkled or your breath doesn't reek of Cheetos. He takes all of two minutes to finish the email, but it feels like hours to you. He stops typing, turns his chair to face you, and remarks, 'Okay, I've got a conference call in fifteen minutes so we'll have to make this quick.' Still feeling confident? Probably not. Why? Well, according to symbolic interactionism, nothing in his behavior indicated that he had a positive response to you, which in turn made you define yourself, in that moment, negatively..

[Audio] In this lesson, we talked about symbolic interaction theory (also known as symbolic interactionism), a theory regarding social interaction and behavior that explains how people navigate their interactions with others and assign meanings based on their interpretation of those interactions. We learned that this is a micro-level theory because it deals with individuals and their relations to groups. We discussed George Herbert Mead's concept of self as a dynamic organism that is organized into two phases: I (the unorganized response of the self to the attitudes of others) and me (a set of organized attitudes of others that the individual assumes in response). We connected this discussion to Charles H. Cooley's concept of the ' looking glass self,' which reiterates how our definition of self is constructed based on what we think others think of us. Lastly, we discussed Herbert Blumer's contribution to symbolic interactionism, which is a culmination of these two elements and adds a clarification of how individuals assign meaning to behavior based on interactions with others..