“Who am I?”- 4
PIN jc19265
understand the development of self as socially constructed through relationships (Gergen, 1991,
1999), it will be useful to review the work of Mead (1934), Goffman (1959, 1967), and the
literature on narrative, paying particular attention to the relevance for communication
scholarship.
Symbolic Self
Mead (1934) proposed that self is understood only in relation to social experience and
activity, so that self is understood as a part of the larger whole, and the two are mutually
dependent. Self is not something one has, but rather it is something that is in progress.
Individuals are only able to understand themselves through their ability to see self as an object,
as the “generalized other.” By this, Mead proposes that only through the perspective of the
generalized other, the social processes and groups of which we are a part, are we able to
understand who we are as individuals. Thus, communication becomes a central concern because
it is only through the use of significant symbols and their communal and continual interpretation
that individuals are able to take on the perspective of the generalized other, which is essential for
the development of self.
Through his work, Mead (1934) addresses generally unquestioned assumptions about
biological and individualistic behaviorism by stating that even the process of thinking is an
inherently social process, and the structure of self is internalized within this social structure.
“The very process of thinking is, of course, an inner conversation that goes on, but it is a
conversation of gestures which in its completion implies the expression of that which one thinks
to an audience” (Mead, 1934, p. 141). From Mead’s perspective, mind is inseparable from social
processes.
Convention