Hello, My Name is Max; Symbolic Interactionist Paradigm: The Sociological Perspective Lesson 4

Please review the lesson from yesterday.  Please explain the answer to one of these questions with the partner at your table or someone near you.  If have trouble explaining the answer, please discuss it with your partner or a neighbor or ask me.

What does Marx's conflict paradigm focus on?

How might the conflict paradigm be used to examine teens?

Max Weber and Symbolic Interaction Paradigm

Max Weber's contribution to the development of sociology during the  Industrial Revolution

Max Weber (pronounced VAY-ber) studied the development of capitalism in European countries.  He found that countries that became more Protestant also became more capitalist.  This is peculiar because religion and economics seem to be separate.  But Protestants held shared meaning with each other about their wealth and finance.  They saw living within their means and investing their money as signs that they were living righteously within their Christian beliefs.  This created an economy that was based on investment.  It led to the creation and expansion of capitalism, investing profit to make even more profit.   It might seem strange for religion to be connected to the economy, but in their interaction with each other, it was real for them.  


The development of the symbolic interactionist paradigm 

Building off of Weber's work, two sociologists created a third paradigm for which sociologists view the world.   Weber showed symbolic meaning in the Protestants' lives and in their everyday interaction with other people.  Stemming from Weber's work, George Mead and other sociologists focused on the shared meaning in everyday life between people.  This paradigm became known as symbolic interaction.  It is more focused on face-to-face interaction, or small groups, as opposed to large scale institutions.  Much of our interaction with each other holds symbolic meaning to us.  The words we chose, our body language, our clothes all hold symbolic meaning for us.  They convey an identity we have to the world. 

Let's add Weber and symbolic interaction to the sociology framework graphic organizer:

How might symbolic interaction paradigm connect to names?

A name isn’t just a random set of syllables.  It has meaning.  

And it can be interpreted by people differently.  Read "Conventional Wisdom Tells Us...What's in a Name? That which we call a Rose by Any Other Name Would Smell as Sweet" from sociologists Cerulo and Ruane.

Here is the Google Form for this lesson.  Please open it in a new window and fill it out as you continue.

1.  According to the authors of Conventional Wisdom Tells Us..., what are some examples of the different meanings that names hold?  

2.  What are some ways that Cerulo and Ruane show these meanings affect people?

For more on names and symbolic meanings, you can listen to the Freakonomics podcast episode by Wells, Katharine.  How Much Does Your Name Matter? Freakonomics Radio Podcast. April 8, 2013.

The episode draws from a Freakonomics chapter called “A Roshanda By Any Other Name”and includes a good bit of new research on the power of names. It opens with a conversation with NYU sociologist Dalton Conley and his two children, E and Yo. Their names are a bit of an experiment.  Indeed, there is some evidence that a name can influence how a child performs in school and even her career opportunities. There’s also the fact that different groups of parents — blacks and whites, for instance — have different naming preferences. Stephen Dubner talks to Harvard professor Latanya Sweeney about a mysterious discrepancy in Google ads for Instant Checkmate, a company that sells public records. Sweeney found that searching for people with distinctively black names was 25% more likely to produce an ad suggesting the person had an arrest record – regardless of whether that person had ever been arrested.  Names do, however, reveal a lot about the people doing the naming. Eric Oliver, a political scientist at the University of Chicago, talks about his new research (with co-authors Thomas Wood and Alexandra Bass) that looks at how children’s names are influenced by their parents’ political ideology.

If names do affect their bearers' chance of success, it may not always be because of the reactions they cause in other people (the "looking-glass self"), they might also be because of "implicit egotism", the positive feelings we each have about ourselves.  Brett Pelham cites the concept in explaining his finding that individuals called Virginia, Mildred, Jack and Philip proliferate in Virginia, Milwaukee, Jacksonville and Philadelphia - he believes they are drawn to live there.  

Another intriguing 2007 paper, entitled Moniker Maladies, found that people's fondness for the initials of their names could get in the way of success. Leif Nelson and Joseph Simmons analysed almost a century of baseball strikeouts and found that hitters with the initial K had a higher strike-out rate ("K" denotes a strike-out in baseball). They also found that graduate students with the initials C and D had a slightly lower grade point average than A and B students, and A and B applicants to law school were more likely to go to better colleges.

Parent-teen conflicts and Weber's symbolic interaction paradigm

Think about the teen-parent conflict reading.  

3.  What are the meanings that the label "teen" might hold for parents?  For society?  

4.  How might the label of "teen" affect the face-to-face interactions between teens and parents, teachers, peers?   How did this meaning come about?


5. Do you understand how the sociologists view the world through a symbolic interaction perspective?  Any questions about that paradigm?