#interactionism

[beyond-mogai-pride-flags]

Identity Interactionist Pride Flag

Identity interactionism: theoretical perspective in which identity derives social processes from human interaction; interactional identity narrative.

Can apply to: alterhumanism (extrapersonhood), gender, orientation, etc.

[dirkvl]

New Article: "Making Friends as Interactional Work: Young Refugees in Germany" by Jessica Schwittek and Alexandra König #sssi #sociology #friendship https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.1207 @WileySociology

We have just published “Making Friends as Interactional Work: Young Refugees in Germany” by Jessica Schwittek and Alexandra König on Early View of Symbolic Interaction.  Members of SSSI can access the review HERE and by clicking the image below. To join SSSI and subscribe to Symbolic Interaction from $35 (£30), please click HERE.

[revisesociology]

Sociological Perspectives on The TikTok Reselling Trend 

Reselling is when people buy cheap goods from one retailer and then sell them on at a higher price for profit. Reselling is one of the latest trends on TikTok.  One such TikToker is a guy named Sam. He started out with buying branded clothing from charity shops and then selling them online for a profit. More recently he has been buying cheap products in bulk from supermarkets and selling them…

[lesewut]

Learning to become an I

"The Self and Its Brain - An Argument for Interactionism" by philosopher Karl R. Popper and brain-physiologist John C. Eccles, originally published in 1977, this edition was published in 1982.

It was an exciting journey to read this illuminating work, which deals with the problem of relation with body and mind and the connection between the structures and processes in the brain and the mental, conscious actions and operations. The liasion of Eccles and Popper is an interdisciplinary research, connecting areas of expertise to underdraw the Theory of Psychophysical Interaction, which means body and mind are interrelationaly collaborated, but the organism is in a constant shaping through the physical world.

Examining different kind of classical epistimologies, to underdraw their Theory of Interactionism, it was traceable why the system of materialism (critisizing the causally completed physical world and the continuity of matter [World 1] according to Popper and Eccles, the material world is influencable as the living organisms have the ability to change the environment (= adoption of new biological and ecological meanings = influencing the pressure of selection = infinity of inherent possibilities and propensity), the system of determinism (often considered under a natural approach, theory of the world as a deliberately construct of God or Goddesses, famous thinkers of this systems are Leucippus and Democritus, formers of the atomism and mechanic materialism - Popper is sharply critisising the methods of science as they are the dominant conception of science till today, using the image of clouds-and-clocks to present the illusion of mechanistic theories [heavy systems evoke the impression that they are working like clocks, but in reality those huge organic molecules are open systems and the deduced physical law can just be observable, because enormous molecular mechanics are influencing each other + the principle of how science is classified is a misunderstanding, monistic systems are denying the dualistic and pluralistic understanding of things and entities !!! As an alternative solution the theory of possibilietes and probalistic preformationism are proclaimed]), the system of panpsychism (the theory of matter, defining that all things and entities have an inner sight, which is of mental and conscious quality, is denying the interaction of genetic and cultural evolution in accordance to the emergence feature of the self-consciousness- All living organisms are active "systems of perception" and not only passive sensually recipients - developments are active processes, the essential nature of the self is continuesly changing and depends on the physical type, the intellectual initiative and ingeniuty) and the system of empirism (where to begin? As mentioned before, we are the products of adaption, what we percieve with our senses is encrypted and every interpretation is the work of many polyvalent operations [as the parts of our brain are highly connected and it is still not possible to verify how recognizing-process is established in total, because eventhough the brain is more or less divided in areas of function, our genes, environment and thought patterns are permanently forming our realisation, therefore are senses are also products of constant adjustment] also it takes more for the self as the empirical memory, we are not only the total sum of our experiences, there are mechanism that guarantee the continuety of our self [Theory of Gene-Identity by Kurt Lewin and Locke's Principle of Individuation] and we have more methods to percieve knowledge rather than only using the senses, according to Hume, who is denying the existence of autonomic consciousness the cosmology is simplified and the ethics, the freedom of human-beings to chose their actions in accordance to humanistic aspiration, undermined) are untenable, because the mind and the self-conscious are coupled with the biologic individual organism and the nature of the self can most likely be captured with the Theory of Navigator and the essential requirement of space-and-time (as we need the orientation to establish our self, cf. Alzheimer-dementia and the fundamentaly difficutly of spatial orientation and loss of memory = Not able to reproduce the Idea of the Self = Unability to prepare for the future = independent life becomes hardly possible).

The senses are considered as tools for our brain to contrive functions of perception. The brain is programed to seize the most fitting model of our environment and the model is subject to steady review and interpretation (after Ernst Gombrich "making comes before matching" Theory of Visual Perception) of the conscience (Inner Enlighment in accordance to Feigl, compatible with this term is an assessment of Einstein:

"Without this inner enlighment, the whole universe would just be a pile of rubble."

The interdepence of thinking, intellect, reason, subjective experiences (....) are shoring up the circles of repetition of the brain (by means of synaptic plasticity), generating dynamic engram and the growing of neoronal synapses (= Theory of Learning = Ability for Remembrance). The Theory of Interactionism is emphasising the intensive brain acitivity, which is the necessary condition for physical and mental processes, that means both processes are influencing and causing.

What is this Self exactly? Where can our I be located? In which context does cosmic-evolutionary stages bring the consciousness forth?

What seems trivial for the indolent, is a deep ocean of mysteries and wonders for the continous learner. Experiencing the self - is learning to become the self, as we all have the Idea of a Life-Plan (Rawl "Theorie der Gerechtigkeit"). We percieving the world and take action under the leadership of theory impregnated patterns. The personal task for the differentaited grades of conscience is to expand over our sure-thought-being and achieve goals that stand above instinctive longings and inclinations. Maybe the human-being is not the centre of the creation nor is the state of mind the product of the central nervous system (Central State Theory).

The universe is an open and creative system, just as the stars govern our conditions, we as dust particles have also the potentiality to influence in downward causations (never underestimate macroscopic structures).

It made a lot of fun to read this spectacular work and it animated me to draw more attention in actions and thinking-patterns, as taking the opportunity to crystallize sparkling diamonds to make my percieved world not only more worthy to live in, but to motivate other souls in lightening up the beauty of live, which we all carry in us, sometimes it is just hidding, because we used to negate the Good in conditions of uncertainity. If we are forced to live this earthly live, we should live it with love and inner peace, if everyone would train to become more and more self-sufficient, I believe, that there would be piece and harmony, because reason means a positive affirmation of life, the creation of a self, that is happy to improve itself, to evolve and take part for a better world, the product of domesticated and therefore enhanced awareness.

[babygirltangerine]

i often think about how the environment plays such a big role in the storytelling of the bullet train movie while also shaping the story itself, and all of the characters have such a unique way of interacting with their surroundings, with their belongings, and with objects in general. i'm also interested in the meanings they ascribe to these objects, so of course i have to make a post about it.

for the wolf, objects remind him of where he's been, what he's been through and what he's accomplished: we see his identity tied to the wolf pendant he'd been given as a boy, and he takes clothing articles from the people he kills (like the sunglasses, shoes, and hat) as he rises through the ranks of el saguaro's organization. it's also very meaningful that he wears his wedding suit to the train (and part of that is a belt that says mexico on it).

objects for tangerine signify who he wants to be - a lot of his identity management is wrapped up in portraying himself as polished, as wealthy, and as in control, and again, clothing and jewelry is a big part of this. also important to mention is his kleptomania and his compulsive need to accumulate as much as possible (which i interpret as a symptom of his growing up in poverty) and this is just one way the story clarifies that his image is an expression of desire and a crafted self rather than an authentic one. tangerine is constantly grappling for control and objects play a large part in establishing this theme, but objects are mostly in control of him, not the other way around.

objects for ladybug are tied to survival, not only for himself but for those around him. they're distractions and decoys, they buy time and disarm his opponents in intentionally non-lethal ways. he doesn't like guns. he doesn't like to kill, and he is incredibly resourceful in his pursuit of nonviolence. ladybug is in a constant state of damage control and the objects he chooses to discard or keep in his possession give him some sense of control over his bad luck.

objects for lemon provide a means of communication and a lens for understanding the world and the people around him. the sticker book objectifies the role thomas the tank engine plays in his life, and acts not only a reference for him to categorize personalities but also as a way to express his beliefs to those around him. percy sticker, diesel sticker, thomas sticker. i also like that objects for lemon tend to have protective qualities - the bulletproof vest saved him from the gunshots and tangerine's medallion saved him from drowning. when i rewatch the movie, i appreciate how this makes me feel like he's never in any real danger despite the massive target on his back as a black man ("i don't bleed").

objects for prince provide a way to get what she wants. she uses weapons - taser, rigged gun, explosives in the briefcase - and disguises to achieve her goals. she uses objects to manipulate people and paint a picture of herself as innocent and harmless. at the same time objects reveal her true nature, such as the shibumi novel she reads and the dangerous scissors-inspired hair clip. the hornet uses objects similarly. for her it's also all about stealth and weapons and disguises.

objects for shigeru relate to his past, the knowledge he's gained from it, his goals and his beliefs. thinking of the cane with the sword inside, how he fights with both, and the flowers - how he went into hiding and became a florist. we see him with flowers at various stages in his goal to get revenge on the white death (in the hospital room with wataru, as he boards the train, and when the white death has finally been defeated). when i think of shigeru and flowers, i also think of his trust in fate, the natural world and the forces of the universe.

for the white death, objects signify beginnings and endings. i associate the white death with his mask (again, identity management, the mask signals the birth of a new criminal empire and the emergence of its new leader) as well as the car he was meant to be in, and his robe and slippers. the beginning of his reign and the end of it, how objects symbolize his rise to power and the consequences he's now facing.

the importance of objects in the story can also be seen through the prominence of the briefcase, the water bottle, the rigged gun, the wolf's knife, and the tangerine and lemon truck, all of which serve a narrative purpose and have a presence in the story from the beginning to the end.

[popcorn-plots]

what if I don't want to analyze the sociological aspects of thneedville. what then

[iksydk]

hold on. children picturing like lord of the rings when adults say ‘custody battle’ and the imagery in revelation about armageddon. like taking evocative language literally.

[shamemp3]

need to find a theory to close-read mrs. dalloway through the perspective of for my paper due tmrw... but suddenly i dont know a single theory in mind. In fact what is a theory

[transkholins]

my bookmarks are a disaster why is this mgsv playthrough bookmarked under readings for my major. i mean if you wanted to you could argue that playing mgs is roughly the same experience as reading about symbolic interactionism. but i'm not sure that i do

[dirkvl]

New Book Review: Jason Turowetz on "Spaces on the Spectrum: How Autism Movements Resist Experts and Create Knowledge" by Catherine Tan (@Catherineoscopy) #sssi #sociology #autism #socialmovements #experts https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.1208 @WileySociology @ei_schwartz

We have just published Jason Turowetz’s review of Catherine Tan‘s book “Spaces on the Spectrum: How Autism Movements Resist Experts and Create Knowledge” on Early View of Symbolic Interaction. Members of SSSI can access the article HERE and by clicking the image below. To join SSSI and subscribe to Symbolic Interaction from $35 (£30), please click HERE. A related book “Autistic Intelligence:…

[rainbow-arrow]

the fact that i’m in grad school and it’s not the most unbarable part of my life is just. disrespectful 

[whereserpentswalk]

Reminder that you should not be comparing two groups to see whose "more oppressed". I don't care how obvious you think the difference is. It inherently involves saying a certain group's struggles "aren't that bad" when you make arguments in those debates. It's a race to the bottom. Interactionality is about how everyone's experience with oppression under capitalism is different, it's not a linear scale.

Every single argument about who has it worse involves dismissing the oppression of the group you think had it better. You ultimately end up defending one side's oppression the momment you engage in one of these debates.

[popcorn-plots]

can anyone give me examples of symbolic interactionism in the lorax movie? I'm dying, I don't understand the deeper meaning, I suck at analyzing aaahhha 😭

[funeral]

Decades of psychological wisdom have equated mental health with contact with reality and mental illness with deficits in commonsense renderings of reality. Counter to this perspective, recent research indicates that being normal involves a good deal of illusory thinking. These studies suggest that depressed individuals are more likely to process information in a relatively realistic fashion, whereas normal people appear to "view the world through rose-colored glasses." Yet these studies continue to rely on the assumption that there is one reality that is apprehended by some (depressed persons) and distorted by the rest.

This assumption ignores centuries of philosophical discussion of the relationship between reality and a person's subjective awareness of objects in the world. It also overlooks insights from sociologists and anthropologists who posit that common sense is cultural in character, fashioned historically and interactionally. Common sense is neither universal nor objective.

Lisa Capps and Elinor Ochs, Constructing Panic: The Discourse of Agoraphobia

[roxannepolice]

I think I finally put my finger on why I think "the Doctor and Ruby are trapped in a TV show" theory doesn't entirely work for me, though I don't hate it and definitely like it better than "the Doctor is a god actually" approach. First off, and that's subjective, but I just can't agree the writing is dramatically worse and more expository than before? Yes, after 6 regenerations which wouldn't talk much about themselves 15 just offhandedly informing Ruby his whole people are gone feels weird, but... look, pet peeve of mine, 12 giving a very beautiful but also incoherent speech about morality to the Masters to get them into a plan that didn't even involve them in any meaningful way and Missy having to hide from him that she has to kill Saxon for... reasons, is usually hailed as peak character work. All of this would make infinitely more sense to me if they were all aware that they are actually in a medieval morality play...

But no, what really worries me here is that if the reveal is that the Doctor is trapped in a TV show and aware of it... then we'll kind of finish the season not knowing 15? Like, we won't know which parts were a performance for the audience and which performance for Ruby, and which like... spontaneous expression of self? It would be kind of assuming we all know Michael Sheen and David Tennant because we've seen them performing themselves in Staged? Or, as if everyone that's seen A Hard Day's Night knows the Beatles because they played themselves? Yes, of course, whole world's a stage, and my alignment with symbolic interactionism has me acknowledge that even completely alone we engage in intrapersonal performance and there is no truer core self than the enacted one, but...

Like, if our existence is reality and fictional shows are reality(1), then shows within shows are kind of reality(2)? And if by then end of a season we remove reality(2), then we won't really know what's true in reality(1), anymore than reality(1) tells us much about our lived existences? Like, I LOOVE play with a medium, but it would just feel a bit wrong to do that in 15's first season? Other instances where this is done, say WandaVision, have a point of reference to what those characters are like in their "reality", which wouldn't be the case for 15? Am I making any sense anymore or am I floating off into higher regions now?

[shamemp3]

i dont even know if i want to pursue sociology or anthropology in my masters...it will probably be anthro but i love socio...and even WITHIN anthro there's so many options i cant pick btwn like social justice & inequality, economy work & development, critical health studies/medical anthropology, linguistics & semiotic anthropology, and sociocultural anthropology