This is my first blog post for the class,
so it is only fair that I introduce myself. My name is Gabriella Rocha, I am 20
years old, a Sophomore at Texas Lutheran University and am currently majoring
in Sociology.
For
this post I am going to be writing about Mead, his ‘Me and I’ theory along with
an example that I feel would best relate back to the topic. I am very new at this
kind of thing, as are most of my peers in this class so with that being said I hope
I am able to get the point across and if not… we all learn from our mistakes.
George Herbert Mead was an American Philosopher and Social Theorist. He lived
from 1863-1931, during his time he contributed greatly earning the title of the father of symbolic interactionism in sociology and social psychology.
Mead came up with the ‘Me and I’ theory
which was central to social psychology. What is the I and Me theory you may
ask? Well let me explain. Mead came up with a concept that every individual has
two sides to them ‘me’ and ‘I’. The ‘me’ side of an individual is represented
by how others may view you; and the ‘I’ side represents how you see yourself. What
is most interesting about Meads theory is that the topic is so controversial. Many
individuals believe that a person can’t just have either or and others believe
that every individual has both. As I said before I am new to this type of thing
and opening my mind up so broadly sure does give me a headache when I think
about topics that can be dug into so deep.
With that being said I hope by now
you have an idea of who I am, who Mead is, and the idea behind the ‘Me and I’
theory. I will now give you my example of Meads theory and later tie it back to
how it may relate; so, let’s begin. I chose to go with the idea of are
criminals born or made? In the industrial psychiatry journal, there is an article
called personality correlates of criminals: a comparative study between normal
controls and criminals. Throughout this article there are several ideas on what
makes a criminal a criminal; to go into more depth here are a few listed
throughout:
·
Criminals
have a disregard to others’ rights.
·
Criminal
behavior begins in the early childhood/ teen years.
·
Criminality
is predicted on the factors of one’s individual’s personality.
·
The
behavior of a criminal is a result of the way a person thinks.
The list could
go on forever, but the point of these few examples is to show that these individuals
are being studied for what they are rather than who they are. I relate to this
topic on a personal level. A family member of mine has constantly been in and
out of prison his whole life starting from the age of 12; although this is no
way to live, I have firsthand heard his side of the story on how the system and
society work from his perspective and would like to elaborate on it. Although
he has done some bad things throughout his lifetime it all started as a simple
mistake he made when he was a child. He grew up with bad influences and as a
result followed in those footsteps, that being the only thing he knew. His
title of being a “criminal” started when he made a mistake as a young child, he
knew no better and handled the situation as he saw fit (by that I mean
responding to the situation the only way he knew how) because of this mistake
he was labeled as a bad kid and continued to be seen as that throughout his
teenager years. At the time he was just a child and could have easily been taught
right from wrong but with no one to show him the difference he thought he was correct.
These behaviors were learned traits that he picked up from bad influences as a result
like I mentioned before he then got labeled as the bad kid and when people look
at you a certain way you soon embrace it. That’s where Meads idea of ‘me’ comes
to play. The individual learned a certain behavior from bad influences, was
then looked down upon as a bad individual although he was only a child and as
the years went on since his past always went with him, he soon embraced the
title of being “bad” and played out the role causing him to spiral more down
the tunnel of mistakes.
The ‘I’ in meads theory and this
example is that the individual at the time didn’t realize what he had did was
wrong. He saw himself as a child doing what he was taught and as the years went
on, he tried to change his ways, he tried to be the person that he saw himself
as or at least envisioned himself to be but since he had already earned the label
there was not much, he could do that would change the way society looked at him.
Although him, myself, and many other relatives know his true intentions and who
he is as a person many people still do not nor ever will. They will always see
him as a tattooed gangster. It took him 40 years to become the person who he
see’s himself as. To rid his brain of holding on to the label of the bad kid
and just accept himself for who he truly is; a smart man who holds a lot of
skill and potential who was just raised very wrong. With using this example, I hope
that you were able to understand and see how Meads theory could be applied to a
criminal and, if the point didn’t make it across there’s always room for improvements.
No comments:
Post a Comment