Sociologist Charles Cooley presents an interesting theory of how humans understand themselves. It states that there is a looking glass in which we see ourselves and it is made up of how others view us. In addition, there is the "me" aspect which is how one understands themselves through interactions and with the assistance of the outside world. Then there is the "I" aspect which is only includes how our brain perceives us. This was something I had never contemplated before but I knew the perceptions of who we are, are influenced by the people surrounding us. I have also said many times before knowing this theory that the majority of our actions are based on how we believe others perceive us.
Everyone has both ascribed and achieved aspects about them that make them who they are. I think a major question many sociologists desire to know when studying is how much the ascribed traits affect the achieved. In the video I included with my blog, it explores how people see themselves physically. Even though this is only one part of our identity I think it offers good perspective. It shows us that how we see ourselves is not always accurate. It also offers intriguing thoughts as one of the women who went through the experiment states that how we see ourselves can influence the kind of people we hang out with, the jobs we apply for, and the way we raise our children. It starts with an inward reflection that radiates outward to everyone else around.
Looking at self is the basis level for sociology and then we can start to look at social groups, nations, and global interactions. The globe holds so many people but if you think about it, it is about each individual. It is about each individual's choice, action, communication, and relation. Each one of those elements can be affected by how someone views who they are through the looking glass. One part is all decided by only you, yourself, and I but the best part is that the people around us help to build our identity too. Many say we are our worse critics, so maybe we should start thinking of the people around us as our best advocates.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lkZmR1hDNU
I too agree that the individual level of analysis is extremely important in trying to understand the social-world. The way I kind of think about it is that each person is somewhat like an atom. Like atoms it is in the collection and collusion of these separate bodies (individuals) that makes the organism (society). At the same time I do believe that in this analogy the organism is of greater interest than the atoms that make it up, but that is simply what I have a bias towards when it comes to sociology. My question for you would be, what do you consider to be the more interesting part of the equation you laid out in your blog? Is it the atoms or the organism that catches your fancy?
ReplyDelete