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 emergent
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.