The foundation of an interpretative sociology: A critical review of the attempts of George H. Mead and Alfred Schutz [Book Review]
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Human Studies 31 (2):157 - 177 (2008)
George H. Mead and Alfred Schutz proposed foundations for an interpretative sociology from opposite standpoints. Mead accepted the objective meaning structure a priori. His problem became therefore the explanation of the individuality and creativity of human actors in his social behavioristic approach. In contrast, Schutz started from the subjective consciousness of an isolated actor as a result of a phenomenological reduction. He was concerned with the problem of explaining the possibility of this isolated actor’s perceiving other actors in their existence, their concreteness, and the motives for their behavior. I treat these two approaches and their associated problems as equally relevant. My evaluation is based on their success in solving their specific problems. The aim is to decide which of the two approaches provides the more adequate foundation for an interpretative sociology.
|Keywords||Alfred Schutz Edmund Husserl George H. Mead Individuality Interpretative sociology Intersubjectivity Phenomenological reduction|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Timothy M. Costelloe (1996). Between the Subject and Sociology: Alfred Schutz's Phenomenology of the Life-World. Human Studies 19 (3):247 - 266.
Maurice Natanson (1966). The Phenomenology of Alfred Schutz. Inquiry 9 (1-4):147 – 155.
Maurice Natanson (1998). Alfred Schutz: Philosopher and Social Scientist. [REVIEW] Human Studies 21 (1):1-12.
William M. O'Meara (1986). The Social Nature of Self and Morality for Husserl, Schutz, Marx, and Mead. Philosophy Research Archives 12:329-355.
Thomas Eberle (2010). The Phenomenological Life-World Analysis and the Methodology of the Social Sciences. Human Studies 33 (2):123-139.
Alfred Schutz & Kolʹo Koev (eds.) (1990). Phenomenology as a Dialogue: Dedicated to the 90th Anniversary of Alfred Schutz. Critique and Humanism.
David Lewis, Raymond McLain & Andrew Weigert (1993). Vital Realism and Sociology: A Metatheoretical Grounding in Mead, Ortega, and Schutz. Sociological Theory 11 (1):72-95.
George Psathas (2004). Alfred Schutz's Influence on American Sociologists and Sociology. Human Studies 27 (1):1-35.
Risto Heiskala (2011). The Meaning of Meaning in Sociology. The Achievements and Shortcomings of Alfred Schutz's Phenomenological Sociology. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 41 (3):231-246.
Nam-In Lee (2009). Husserl의 현상학과 Schutz의 현상학적 사회학(Husserl's Phenomenology and Schutz's Phenomenological Sociology). Schutzian Research 1:129-147.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads51 ( #32,400 of 1,102,938 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #62,013 of 1,102,938 )
How can I increase my downloads?