Title: Methodological and metascientific problems in symbolic interactionism: a report on the opinions of third generation symbolic interactionists
Authors: Verhoeven, Jef
Issue Date: 1995
Publisher: Departement Sociologie
Abstract: This project is not an introduction, nor an inquiry into the relations of H. Blumer
with G.H. Mead and the other pragmatists. I'll rather omit the first period of S.I. and
study the connection between H. Blumer and his students. Blumer was stressing the
main steps a researcher must take to meet the standards of a more critical approach
than positivists were used to. His students were the first generation who tried to
apply these principles. Blumer himself didn't publish a lot of empirical work
(Verhoeven, 1984). He was the master to explain how research was to be done. His
students applied in a certain way what he taught, although it will become clear that
not all of them followed him very faithfully. Some of them even oppose to his
ideas. So, this study deals with the relation between Blumer and his students and the
conception of both about sociology and sociological research. I want to study to
what extent there is a continuity in the work of Blumer and his students (or whether
there is a gap between them). This also includes the question whether the younger
generation of symbolic interactionists still refers to the influential figures as pointed
out by Blumer. Blumer e.g. is very outspoken about it. But it is not certain that his
students accept his standpoint. Has pragmatism really that influence on S.I. as is
often contended by the analysts of S.I. (Meltzer, Petras, and Reynolds, 1975; Stryker,
This book can also be downloaded at
ISBN: 90-6784-120-X
Publication status: published
KU Leuven publication type: ABa
Appears in Collections:Centre for Sociological Research

Files in This Item:
File Status SizeFormat
SymbolicInteractionism.pdf Published 3164KbAdobe PDFView/Open


All items in Lirias are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.