Thursday, March 9, 2017

Mead's social behaviorism

Continuing the last post, I'm also reminded of Mead, a significant influence on Habermas, to which the latter devoted a chapter in Postmetaphysical Thinking. A brief excerpt from this link:

“The essence of Mead's so-called ‘social behaviorism’ is his view that mind is an emer
gent out of the interaction of organic individuals in a social matrix. Mind is not a substance located in some transcendent realm, nor is it merely a series of events that takes place within the human physiological structure. Mead therefore rejects the traditional view of the mind as a substance separate from the body as well as the behavioristic attempt to account for mind solely in terms of physiology or neurology. Mead agrees with the behaviorists that we can explain mind behaviorally if we deny its existence as a substantial entity and view it instead as a natural function of human organisms. But it is neither possible nor desirable to deny the existence of mind altogether. The physiological organism is a necessary but not sufficient condition of mental behavior (Mind, Self and Society 139). Without the peculiar character of the human central nervous system, internalization by the individual of the process of significant communication would not be possible; but without the social process of conversational behavior, there would be no significant symbols for the individual to internalize.”

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.