This work will be of great interest to anthropologists, cultural theorists, and students of interdisciplinary research.

L'article part du fait qui apparaît de plus en plus clairement dans la psychologie américaine moderne de la personnalité, qu’un certain type de domination de la mère dans la famille exerce une influence fâcheuse sur l’évolution psychique des garçons et des filles. L’auteur étudie les diverses interprétations, qu’on peut donner de ce fait.La première interprétation discutée est celle-ci : pour des raisons biologiques, l’amour naturel serait nécessaire à une évolution saine de l’enfant ; l’égoïsme de la mère exercerait une influence (...) nocive parce qu’elle serait en opposition avec cette nécessité biologique. L’article indique que les rapports naturels de la mère et de l’enfant sont, sous bien des rapports, remplacés par des relations culturelles (en particulier pour l’alimentation), ce qui montre l’incertitude de cette interprétation.La deuxième explication discutée est celle-ci : la tendance à dominer l’enfant, à l’élever en vue de succès conformes aux désirs maternels, serait signe du caractère „névrosé“ de la mère, la nocivité de cette conduite serait imputable à la névrose de la mère. Mais, à l’aide des faits ethnologiques, l’article montre qu’une mère agressive, ambitieuse d’autorité n’exerce pas nécessairement une action nocive sur l’évolution du caractère de l’enfant, mais tout au contraire est susceptible de conduire à l’adaptation la meilleure des enfants aux exigences futures de la société.M. Mead présente une troisième explication possible ; l’influence nocive ne tiendrait pas à la structure du caractère de la mère, mais à la contradiction entre le rôle effectif de la mère dans la famille et son rôle officiel dans la société. En Amérique, la mère a pris effectivement la direction dans la famille, cependant il serait entièrement faux de parler d’un matriarcat, puisque cette domination de fait n’a pas de caractère officiel et n’est pas reconnue par la société. Rien n’a été changé à l’organisation patriarcale de la société américaine, mais les formes patriarcales ont été partiellement privées de leur contenu et sont en contradiction avec les rapports de fait à l’intérieur de la famille. On pourrait dire que la mère exerce son autorité à la manière d’un tyran et non d’un maître légitime. Cette forme de pouvoir maternel non contrôlé par les institutions sociales offre un moyen d’expliquer l’influence nocive de ce pouvoir sur les enfants.Der Aufsatz geht von der in der modernen amerikanischen Persönlichkeitsforschung immer evidenter werdenden Tatsache aus, dass ein gewisser Typ der Vorherrschaft der Mutter in der Familie eine schädliche Wirkung auf die seelische Entwicklung von Knaben und Mädchen hat. Die Verfasserin untersucht, welche verschiedenen Interpretationen für diesen Tatbestand möglich sind.Zunächst wird eine Interpretation besprochen, die davon ausgeht, dass aus biologischen Gründen für die gesunde Entwicklung eines Kindes mütterliche Liebe notwendig ist und dass aus dem Gegensatz zu dieser biologischen Notwendigkeit heraus die egoistische Mutter einen schädlichen Einfluss darstellt. Durch den Hinweis darauf, dass die „natürliche“ Beziehung zwischen Mutter und Kind in vielen anderen Hinsichten durch kulturelle ersetzt werde, speziell in der Ernährung, wird die Fragwürdigkeit dieses Gesichtspunktes begründet.Dann wird die Erklärung diskutiert, nach der die Tendenz, das Kind zu beherrschen und gewaltsam zu im Sinne der Mutter liegenden Erfolgen anzutreiben, ein Symptom des neurotischen Charakters der Mutter und die Schädlichkeit dieses Verhaltens eben in der Neurose der Mutter zu suchen sei. Es wird an ethnologischem Material gezeigt, dass eine aggressive und herrschsüchtige Charakterstruktur der Mutter nicht notwendigerweise schädliche Wirkungen auf die Charakterentwicklung der Kinder hat, sondern ganz im Gegenteil zur optimalen Anpassung der Kinder an die sie später erwartenden gesellschaftlichen Anforderungen führen kann.M. Mead legt eine dritte Erklärungsmöglichkeit vor : dass der schädliche Einfluss nicht in der Charakterstruktur der Mutter an sich zu suchen ist, sondern in dem Widerspruch zwischen der faktischen Rolle der Mutter in der Familie und ihrer „offiziellen“ Rolle in der Gesellschaft. Während die amerikanische Mutter häufig tatsächlich die Herrschaft in der Familie an sich gerissen hat, wäre es doch ganz falsch, von einem Matriarchat in Amerika zu sprechen, da die faktische Herrschaft in der Familie in keiner Weise den Charakter einer offiziellen und gesellschaftlich anerkannten Herrschaft der Frau angenommen hat. Vielmehr hat sich an der patriarchalischen Organisation der amerikanischen Gesellschaft nichts Entscheidendes geändert, aber die patriarchalischen Formen sind zum Teil ihres Inhaltes beraubt worden und stehen im Gegensatz zu den faktischen Verhältnissen in der Familie. Die Mutter übt ihre Herrschaft gleichsam nicht als ein rechtmässiger Herrscher, sondern als ein Tyrann aus. In dieser durch gesellschaftliche Institutionen nicht kontrollierten Form mütterlicher Herrschaft wird eine Erklärungsmöglichkeit für den schädlichen Einfluss dieser Herrschaft auf die Kinder gesehen. (shrink)

This volume collects, for the first time, her writings on the future of humanity and how humans can shape that future through purposeful action.

Margaret Wiley, Women, Wellness, and the Media, Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2008, reviewed by Chris La Barbera and Melissa Meade.

" Reflexivity" is defined as the regular exercise of the mental ability, shared by all normal people, to consider themselves in relation to their contexts and vice versa. In addition to this sociological interest, it allows us to hold idle or trivial internal conversations. Focussing fully on this phenomenon, this book discusses the three main questions associated with this subject in detail. Where does the ability to be "reflexive" comes from? What part do our internal reflexive deliberations play in designing (...) the courses of action we take: subordinate to habitual action or not? Is "reflexivity" a homogeneous practice for all people and invariant over history? In addressing these questions, contributors engage critically with the most relevant studies by luminaries such as G.H Mead, C.S. Pierce, Habermas, Luhmann, Beck, Giddens and Bourdieu. Most contributors are leading Pragmatists or Critical Realists, associated with the "Reflexivity Forum" an informal, international and inter-disciplinary group. This combination of reference to influential writers of the past, and the best of modern theory has produced a fascinating book that is essential reading for all students with a serious interest in social theory or critical realism. (shrink)

FROM the point of view of scientific investigation no two subjects could present a stronger contrast than the two named in the title of this book. Movement is the ultimate fact of physical science. The measurement of the direction and velocity of movements is the most satisfactory achievement of science, and the scientist is contented with his explanation of any natural phenomenon when he has reduced it to movements and expressed their relations in a mathematical formula. On the other hand, (...) nothing could be less attractive to the scientific investigator with such an aim than the domain of mental imagery, the world of imaginary objects. Mental images are not only removed from general observation and open to direct study only by the individual who experiences them, but even he has no satisfactory way of measuring them and reducing them to mathematics. (shrink)

Language does not simply symbolize a situation or object which is already there in advance; it makes possible the existence or the appearance of that situation or object for it is a part of the mechanism whereby that situation or object is created. (Mead 1934, p. 78).

In 1983, Harvard University Press published Derek Freeman's Margaret Mead And Samoa: The Making and Unmaking of an Anthropological Myth. Many anthropologists judged the book to be an unwarranted attack on the late Margaret Mead for the field work she did in 1925-26 for Coming of Age in Samoa, published in 1928. The implications from this now famous book served as evidence for a general liberal view of culture in America, resonated with the work of John (...) Dewey as it became popular in the 1920's, and established Mead as an intellectual icon until her death in 1978. Freeman's first critique…. (shrink)

Peter Mandler’s Return from the Natives examines Margaret Mead mid-career when she devoted much energy to promoting anthropology and anthropologists to government and industry and positioned herself as a prominent social commentator. By the time she returned to the field after an interlude of 14 years, something had happened to her professionally: she was treated as a bit of an embarrassment, no longer a scientific heavyweight, and much of this stems from the rather hare-brained “culture cracking” she engaged (...) in during the war. So while honors and kudos enhanced her official image, behind the scenes, she complained of being neglected and shunted aside. Her discipline became radicalized, and her balanced and accommodating approach was rejected. (shrink)

In the Mead–Freeman controversy, Ian Jarvie has supported much of Derek Freeman’s critique of Margaret Mead’s Coming of Age in Samoa, arguing that Samoan society was sexually repressive rather than sexually permissive, that Mead was “hoaxed” about Samoan sexual conduct, that Mead was an “absolute” cultural determinist, that Samoa was a definitive case refuting Mead’s “absolute” cultural determinism, that Mead’s book changed the direction of cultural anthropology, and that Freeman’s personal conduct during the (...) controversy was thoroughly professional. This article calls into question these empirical and theoretical arguments, often using Freeman’s own field research and publications. (shrink)

Shankman holds that Derek Freeman “trashed” Margaret Mead’s reputation as a public intellectual by portraying her as a naïve and gullible anthropologist who perpetrated a serious error about adolescence in American Samoa. Shankman concedes that Mead’s Coming of Age in Samoa was factually in error but argues that her reputation in anthropology did not rest on it but rather on her extensive works on other societies. Ostensibly about Samoa, her book was rather a critique of American society (...) and should be judged as such. It is unjust that its factual errors undermine her status as a public intellectual. Fieldwork method and the lingering influence of inductivism are shown to underlie the controversy. (shrink)

This article focuses on the pragmatist feminist theories of social reformer Charlotte Perkins Gilman and cultural anthropologist Margaret Mead. It begins by delineating Gilman's understanding of how the material-cultural environment affects the lives of women. Believing the American way of life to be too individualistic, Gilman developed a theory of social change aimed at generating more collectivist ways of living and promoting the economic independence of women. To achieve these ends, Gilman advocated for the reconstruction of the Victorian (...) nursery, which she believed would afford women the choice to pursue a professional career outside of the home, and promote the health of the community. Gilman's social theory is contrasted with that of Margaret Mead, who believed that plans for social reform are best left to readers. Rather than advocate for the adoption of an entirely new cultural practice, Mead sought to acquaint her culturally diverse American readership with the Samoan way of life, so that they might collectively decide how to best address the problem of choice facing young women in the 1920s. (shrink)

This book introduces social scientists to the ideas of George Herbert Mead - one of the most original yet neglected thinkers of early twentieth century sociology. Mead is an exceptional case amongst sociological classics in that, until now, there has been no comprehensive reader of his work. As the first one-volume, comprehensive edited collection of Meadâes published and unpublished writing, this book fills this gap. It is the first to critically assess all of Mead's writings and draw (...) out the aspects that are central to his system of thought. The book is divided into three parts, comprising a total of 30 chapters - a third of which are published here for the first time. G.H. Mead: A Reader provides a unique and timely contribution to the understanding of this key theorist. It is essential reading for both undergraduate and postgraduate students in the fields of sociology, social psychology, philosophy of social science, social and cultural anthropology, and social and political theory. (shrink)

Mead is an exceptional case amongst sociological classics in that, until now, there has been no comprehensive reader of his work. As the first one-volume, comprehensive edited collection of Mead’s published and unpublished writing, this book fills this gap. It is the first to critically assess all of Mead's writings and draw out the aspects that are central to his system of thought. The book is divided into three parts (social psychology, science and epistemology, and democratic politics), (...) comprising a total of 30 chapters - a third of which are published here for the first time. (shrink)

The everyday concept of a social group is approached by examining the concept of going for a walk together, an example of doing something together, or "shared action". Two analyses requiring shared personal goals are rejected, since they fail to explain how people walking together have obligations and rights to appropriate behavior, and corresponding rights of rebuke. An alternative account is proposed: those who walk together must constitute the "plural subject" of a goal. The nature of plural subjecthood, the thesis (...) that social groups are plural subjects, and the relation of these ideas to Rousseau's and Hobbes 's, are briefly explored. (shrink)

Seneca stands apart from other philosophers of Greece and Rome not only for his interest in practical ethics, but also for the beauty and liveliness of his writing. These twelve in-depth essays take up a series of interrelated topics in his works, from his relation to Stoicism, Epicureanism, and other schools of thought; to the psychology of emotion and action and the management of anger and grief; to letter-writing, gift-giving, friendship, and kindness; to Seneca's innovative use of genre, style, and (...) humor. Recalling Socrates's critique of philosophical writing in Plato's Phaedrus, this volume gives particular attention to Seneca's ideas about the techniques of reading, writing, and study that make philosophy beneficial to the individual and to society. Clear explanations and careful translations make the volume accessible to a wide range of readers. (shrink)

Addressing central questions in the debate about Foucault's usefulness for politics, including his rejection of universal norms, his conception of power and power-knowledge, his seemingly contradictory position on subjectivity and his ...

George Herbert Mead had a powerful influence on the development of American pragmatism in the twentieth century. He also had a strong impact on the social sciences. This classic book represents Mead's philosophy of experience, so central to his outlook. The present as unique experience is the focus of this deep analysis of the basic structure of temporality and consciousness. Mead emphasizes the novel character of both the present and the past. Though science is predicated on the (...) assumption that the present is predictable based on a thorough knowledge of the past, the experience of the present, says Mead, is an utterly unique moment comparable to no other, and when it is past the novel character of that unique experience is irrevocable. The emergence of novelty within the perceived rational order of reality is the crux of the problem that Mead explores. The present, in his words, is "the emergent event... something which is more than the processes that have led up to it and which by its change, continuance, or disappearance, adds to later passages a content they would not otherwise have possessed." The present as "the seat of reality" heavily conditions our retrospective view of the past as much as it helps to shape the future. The novelty of every present experience causes us to reconstruct our preceding experiences to make sense of the past, which is naturally assumed to be the main cause of what we presently experience. Our perspective on reality is thus relative to the conditioning of each new event and it changes continuously as the effects of the present shift our view of the past and future. This emphasis on the integrative, holistic nature of reality, in which everything past, present, and future is a condition of everything else, makes Mead's philosophy highly relevant to today's scientific picture of a quantum universe, where chance and probability play a role in the emergence of reality. Also of great interest is the way in which he extends his basic analysis of temporal-spatial reality to the emergence of mind and consciousness as a natural development of the evolutionary process. This stimulating and provocative work attests to John Dewey's praise of Mead as "the most original mind in philosophy in America" of his generation. (shrink)

This book, the last volume in the Social Morphogenesis series, examines whether or not a Morphogenic society can foster new modes of human relations that could exercise a form of 'relational steering', protecting and promoting a nuanced version of the good life for all. It analyses the way in which the intensification of morphogenesis and the diminishing of morphostasis impact upon human flourishing. The book links intensified morphogenesis to promoting human flourishing based on the assumption that new opportunities open up (...) novel experiences, skills, and modes of communication that appeal to talents previously lacking any outlet or recognition. It proposes that equality of opportunity would increase as ascribed characteristics diminished in importance, and it could be maintained as the notion of achievement continued to diversify. Digitalization has opened the cultural 'archive' for more to explore and, as it expands exponentially, so do new complementary compatibilities whose development foster yet further opportunities. If more people can do more of what they do best, these represent stepping stones towards the 'good life' for more of them. (shrink)