G. H. Mead in the history of sociological ideas

Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences

Volumn 42, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 19-39

  Silva, Filipe Carreira D A ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COIMBRA   (Portugal)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORISM; HISTORY; REVIEW; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; SOCIOLOGY; UNITED STATES;

BEHAVIORISM; HISTORY, 20TH CENTURY; PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL; SOCIOLOGY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 32644438443     PISSN: 00225061     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jhbs.20136     Document Type: Review

References (84)

1. Aboulafia, M. (1995). Habermas and Mead: On universality and individuality. Constellations, 2, 94-113.
2. Adorno, T. (1966). Negative dialektik. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
3. Alexander, J. (1982). Theoretical logic in sociology. Vol. 1: Positivism, presuppositions, and current controversies. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
4. Alexander, J. (1993). The centrality of the classics. In A. Giddens & J. Turner (Eds.), Social theory today (pp. 11-57). Cambridge, UK.: Polity Press. (Original work published 1987)
5. Alexander, J., & Sciortino, G. (1996). On choosing one's intellectual predecessors: The reductionism of Camic's treatment of Parsons and the institutionalists. Sociological Theory, 14, 154-171.
6. Antonio, R. (1990). The decline of the grand narrative of emancipatory modernity: Crisis or renewal in neo-Marxian theory? In G. Ritzer (Ed.), Frontiers of social theory: The new syntheses (pp. 88-116). New York: Columbia University Press.
7. Baehr, P., & O'Brien, M. (1994). Founders, classics and the concept of a canon. Current Sociology, 42, 1-148.
8. Baynes, K. (1991). Rational reconstruction and social criticism: Habermas's model of interpretive social science. In M. Kelly (Ed.), Hermeneutics and critical theory in ethics and politics (pp. 122-145). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original work published 1990)
9. Blumer, H. (1937). Social psychology. In E. Schmidt (Ed.), Man and society (pp. 144-198). New York: Prentice-Hall.
10. Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
11. Blumer, H. (1981). George Herbert Mead. In B. Rhea (Ed.), The future of the sociological classics (pp. 136-169). London: George Allen and Unwin.
12. Blumer, H. (1992a). Sociological implications of the thought of G. H. Mead. In P. Hamilton (Ed.), George Herbert Mead: Critical assessments (Vol. 2; pp. 30-46). Lndon: Routledge. (Original work published 1966)
13. Blumer, H. (1992b). Reply to Woelfel, Stone and Farberman. In P. Hamilton (Ed.), George Herbert Mead: Critical assessments (Vol. 2; pp. 51-52). London: Routledge. (Original work published 1967)
14. Boucher, D. (1985). Texts in context. Revisionist methods for studying the history of ideas. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
15. Calhoun, C. (1996). Whose classics? Which readings? Interpretation and cultural difference in the canonization in sociological theory. In S. Turner (Ed.), Social theory and sociology. The classics and beyond (pp. 70-96). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
16. Camic, C. (1981). On the methodology of the history of sociology: A reply to Jones. American Journal of Sociology, 86, 1139-1144.
17. Camic, C. (1987). The making of a method: A historical reinterpretation of the early Parsons. American Sociological Review, 52, 421-439.
18. Camic, C. (1989). Structure after 50 years: The anatomy of a charter. American Journal of Sociology, 95, 38-107.
19. Camic, C. (1992). Reputation and predecessor selection: Parsons and the institutionalists. American Sociological Review, 57, 421-445.
20. Camic, C. (1996). Alexander's antisociology. Sociological Theory, 14, 172-186.
21. Camic, C., & Joas, H. (Eds.). (2003). The dialogical turn. New roles for sociology in the postdisciplinary age: Essays in honor of Donald N. Levine. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
22. Collins, R. (1987). The sociology of philosophies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
23. Connell, R. W. (1997). Why is classic theory classical? American Journal of Sociology, 102, 1511-1557.
24. Cook, G. A. (1993). George Herbert Mead: The making of a social pragmatist. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
25. Dunn, J. (1968). The identity of the history of ideas. Philosophy, 43, 85-116.
26. Feffer, A. (1990). Sociability and social conflict in George Herbert Mead's interactionism, 1900-1919. Journal of the History of Ideas, 51, 233-254.
27. Feffer, A. (1993). The Chicago pragmatists and American progressivism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
28. Fine, G. (1990). Symbolic interactionism in the post-Blumerian age. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), Frontiers of social theory: The new syntheses (pp. 117-157). New York: Columbia University Press.
29. Fine, G. (1993). The sad demise, mysterious disappearance, and glorious triumph of symbolic interactionism. Annual Review of Sociology, 19, 61-87.
30. Fine, G., & Kleinman, S. (1992). Interpreting the sociological classics: Can there be a "true" meaning of Mead? In P. Hamilton (Ed.), George Herbert Mead: Critical assessments (Vol. 1; pp. 214-232). London: Routledge. (Original work published 1986)
31. Gerstein, D. (1983). Durkheim's paradigm: Reconstructing a social theory. In R. Collins (Ed.), Sociological theory (pp. 234-258). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
32. Habermas, J. (1970). Towards a theory of communicative competence. Inquiry, 13, 360-376.
33. Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action: Reason and the rationalization of society (Vol. 1). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. (Original work published 1981)
34. Habermas, J. (1986). Autonomy and solidarity. London: Verso.
35. Habermas, J. (1987). The theory of communicative action: Lifeworld and system: the critique of functionalist reason (Vol. 2). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. (Original work published 1981)
36. Habermas, J. (1988). Postmetaphysical thinking: Philosophical essays. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
37. Habermas, J. (1991). Communication and the evolution of society. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. (Original work published 1976)
38. Habermas, J. (1996). On the logic of social sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original work published 1967)
39. Habermas, J. (1998). Knowledge and human interests. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. (Original work published 1972)
40. Joas, H. (1993a). Symbolic interactionism. In A. Giddens & J. Turner (Eds.), Social theory today (pp. 82-115). Cambridge. UK: Polity Press.
41. Joas, H. (1993b). Pragmatism and social theory. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
42. Joas, H. (1996). The creativity of action. Cambridge. UK: Polity Press. (Original work published 1992)
43. Joas, H. (1997). G. H. Mead. A contemporary re-examination of his thought. Cambridge. MA: MIT Press. (Original work published 1980)
44. Jones, R. (1977). On understanding a sociological classic. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 279-319.
45. Jones, R. (1981). On Quentin Skinner. American Journal of Sociology, 87, 453-467.
46. Jones, R. (1983). On Merton's "history" and "systematics" of sociological theory. In Loren Graham et al. (Eds.), Functions and uses of disciplinary histories (Vol. 7: pp. 121-142). Dordrecht: Reidel Publishing Company.
47. Jones, R. (1984). Demythologizing Durkheim: A reply to Gerstein. Knowledge and Society, 5, 63-83.
48. Jones, R. (1986). Emile Durkheim. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
49. Jones, R. (1997). The other Durkheim: History and theory in the treatment of classical sociological thought. In C. Camic (Ed.), Reclaiming the sociological classics (pp. 142-172). London: Blackwell.
50. Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
51. Lepenies, W. (1988). Between literature and science: The rise of sociology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
52. Levine, D. (1995). Visions of the sociological tradition. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
53. Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power (T. Burns & G. Poggi, Eds.). Chichester, UK: Wiley. (Original work published 1973)
54. MacIntyre, A. (1981). After virtue: A study in moral theory. Notre Dame, IN: Notre Dame Press.
55. MacIntyre, A. (1998). The relationship of philosophy to its past. In R. Rorty et al. (Eds.), Philosophy in history (pp. 31-48). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1984)
56. Mead G. H. (1912). The mechanism of social consciousness. Journal of Philosophy, Psychology, and Scientific Methods. 9, 401-406.
57. Mead, G. H. (1938). The philosophy of the act (C. Morris et al., Eds.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
58. Mead G. H. (1972). Movements of thought of nineteenth century (M. H. Moore, Ed.). Chicago: Chicago University Press. (Original work published 1936)
59. Mead G. H. (1997). Mind self and society from the standpoint of a social behaviorist (C. Morris, Ed.). Chicago: Chicago University Press. (Original work published 1934)
60. Mead G. H. (2002). The philosophy of the present (A. E. Murphy. Ed.). Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. (Original work published 1932)
61. Merton, R. (1949). Social theory and social structure. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
62. Merton, R. (1967). On the history and systematics of sociological theory. In R. Merton (Ed.), On theoretical sociology (pp. 1-37). New York: Free Press. (Original work published 1949)
63. Merton, R. (1975). Structural analysis in sociology. In P. Blau (Ed.), Approaches to the study of social structure (pp. 21-52). New York: Free Press.
64. Merton, R. (1980). On the oral transmission of knowledge. In R. Merton & M. Riley (Eds.), Sociological traditions from generation to generation (pp. 1-35). Norwood NJ: Ablex.
65. Mills, C. W. (1959). The social imagination. New York: Oxford University Press.
66. Parsons, T. (1968). The structure of the social action: A study in social theory with special reference to a group of recent European writers (Vol. 1). New York: The Free Press. (Original work published 1937)
67. Pocock, J. (1971). Politics, language and time. New York: Atheneum.
68. Pocock, J. (1985). Virtue, commerce, and history. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
69. Poggi, G. (1996). Lego quia inutile: An alternative justification for the classics. In S. Turner (Ed.), Social theory and sociology. The classics and beyond (pp. 39-47). Oxford UK: Blackwell Publishers.
70. Pope, W. (1973). Classic on classic: Parsons' interpretation of Durkheim. American Sociological Review, 38, 399-415.
71. Rhea, B. (1981). Introduction. In B. Rhea (Ed.), The future of the sociological classics (pp. ix-xi). London: George Allen and Unwin.
72. Rorty, R. (1998). The historiography of philosophy: Four genres. In R. Rorty et al. (Eds.), Philosophy in history (pp. 49-75). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1984)
73. Rorty, R. (2000). Intellectual historians and pragmatist philosophy. In J. Pettegrew (Ed.), A pragmatist's progress? Richard Rorty and American intellectual history (pp. 207-211). Lanham, UK: Rowman and Littlefield.
74. Skinner, Q. (1969). Meaning and understanding in the history of ideas. History and Theory, 8, 3-53.
75. Skinner, Q. (1970). Conventions and the understanding of speech acts. Philosophical Quarterly, 20, 118-138.
76. Skinner, Q. (1971). On performing and explaining linguistic actions. Philosophical Quarterly, 21, 1-21.
77. Skinner, Q. (1972). Motives, intentions and the interpretations of texts. New Literary History, 3, 398-408.
78. Skinner, Q. (1988). A reply to my critics. In J. Tully (Ed.), Meaning and context: Quentin Skinner and his critics (pp. 231-288). Cambridge. UK: Polity Press.
79. Stinchcombe, A. (1982). Should sociologists forget their fathers and mothers? American Sociologist, 17, 2-11.
80. Stocking, G. (1965). On the limits of "presentism" and "historicism" in the historiography of the behavioral sciences. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 1, 211-218.
81. Timasheff, N. (1955). Sociological theory: Its nature and growth. New York: Random House.
82. Tucker, C. (1988). Herbert Blumer: A pilgrimage with pragmatism. Symbolic Interaction, 11, 99-124.
83. Turner, S. (1983). "Contextualism" and the interpretation of the classic sociological texts. Knowledge and Society, 4, 273-291.
84. Woelfel, J. (1992). Comment on the Blumer-Bales dialogue concerning the interpretation of Mead's thought. In P. Hamilton (Ed.), George Herbert Mead: Critical assessments (Vol. 2; pp. 47-48). London: Routledge. (Original work published 1967)