George Herbert Mead Düşüncesinde Kendilik: Sosyo-Ontolojik Bir Analiz

Öz: Bir ahlak ontolojisinden ve değer alanından söz etmenin gerekliliği olan kendilik, insanın kendi dışındaki âlemi nasıl anladığı ve bilinçli davranışlar üzerinden onunla nasıl bir ilişki kurması gerektiği hususunu yakından ilgilendirir. George Herbert Mead, sosyal kendilik kuramında birey ile alem arasında kurulacak ilişkinin bu hususlardan birini göz ardı etmeyecek bir zemine sahip olması gerektiğini savunur. Bu zemin aynı zamanda kendiliğin oluşumu için hem organizmayı hem de zihni gerekli kılar. Mead, organizma-dış dünya ilişkisinde organizmanın salt edilgen olmayıp her ikisi arasında bir etkileşim söz konusu olduğunu savunur. Mead, kendiliğin organizmayı aşan bir husus olduğuna işaret ederek indirgemeci materyalist kendilik anlayışlarına; kendiliğin oluşması için organizmanın zorunlu koşul olduğunu savunarak da rasyonalist kendilik anlayışlarına; kendiliğin gerçeklik zemini olarak “orada var olan dünya” kavramı ile idealist kendilik anlayışlarına karşı çıkmıştır. Bu çerçevede sosyal kendilik, özne kendilik (I) ve nesne kendilik (me) olmak üzere Mead açısından iki işlevsel aşamada ele alınır. Özne kendilik, bireyin dışsal bir uyartıya karşı ilk tepkisinin mahallini oluştururken, nesne kendilik bu tepkinin imgelem içerisinde görüldüğü, fark edildiği, sorgulandığı, anlamlandırıldığı aşamayı temsil eder. Özne kendilik ile nesne kendilik, tam bir sosyal kendiliğin oluşumu açısından eş derecede zorunludur.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

çağdaş felsefe, pragmatizm, George Herbert Mead, sosyal kendilik, sosyal zihin

The Self in George Herbert Mead’s Thought: A Socio-Ontological Analysis

Abstract: The self, which grounds moral ontology and moral values, is closely related to how one understands what is outside of oneself and how one relates oneself to it through conscious behaviors. George Herbert Mead, in his social self-theory, argues that the relationship between the individual and the world develops the self which provides a ground for these vital issues. At the same time this ground makes both the organism and the mind necessary for the formation of the self. Mead argues that the organism is not passive in the relation of the external world, rather there is an interaction between the two. Mead argues firstly against reductive materialistic conception of the self by pointing to the fact that the self is a matter that transcends the organism; secondly against the rationalist self-understandings by suggesting that the organism is a necessary condition for the formation of the self; and lastly idealistic self-understandings by his conception of “the world that is there” as the base of the reality for the self. In this framework, the social self is discussed, Mead argues, in terms of two functional stages as the subject self (I) and the object self (me). The subject self represents the stage of the first reaction of individual to an external stimulus, while the object self represents the stage in which this reaction is seen, recognized, questioned and interpreted in the imagination. The subject self and the object self are equally obligatory for the formation of a complete/whole social self.

Keywords:

contemporary philosophy, pragmatism, George Herbert Mead, the social self, the social mind,

PDF

___

Aboulafia, Mitchell (2010). Transcendence On Self-Determination and Cosmopolitanism. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.
Alston, William P. (1967). “Language.” Paul Edwards (Der.), The Encyclopedia of Philosophy içinde (Vol. 4, s. 384-386). New York: Collier-Macmillan Publishing.
Arıcı, Murat (2014). “Materyalizm, Fenomenal Özne ve Ontolojik Statüsü.” Beytulhikme an International Journal of Philosophy, 4(2): 1-13.
Berger, P. L. ve Luckmann, T. (1991). The Social Construction of Reality. Britain: Penguin Books.
Betz, John (2013). “George Herbert Mead On Social and Economic Human Rights.” F. Thomas Burke and Krzysztof Piotr Skowronski (Der.), George Herbert Mead in the Twenty-first Century içinde (s. 175-188). New York, Toronto, Polymouth, UK: Lexington books.
Blau, Joseph L. (1952). Men and Movements in American Philosophy. New York: Prentice-Hall Inc.
Cook, Gary A. (2013). “Resolving Two Key Problems In Mead's Mind, Self, and Society.” F. Thomas Burke ve Krzysztof Piotr Skowronski (Der.), George Herbert Mead in the Twenty-first Century içinde (s. 95-105). New York, Toronto, Polymouth, UK: Lexington Books.
Cuzzort, R. P. ve King, E. W. (1980). 20th Century Social Thougth. New York: Holt Rinehart & Winston Publishing.
Danzinger, Kurt (2001). “Wundt and the Temptations of Psychology.” Robert W. Rieber ve David K. Robinson (Der.), Wilhelm Wundt in History: The Making of a Scientific Psychology içinde (s. 69-94). New York: Springer Science & Bussiness Media.
Geyer, Hans F. (1973). “One Dimensional Mind and Mind Self and Society.” Walter Robert Corti (Der.), The Philosophy of George Herbert Mead içinde (s. 225-234). Switzerland: Amriswiler Bücherei.
Gillespie, Alex (2005). “G. H. Mead: Theorist of Social Act.” Journal for the Social Behaviour, 35(1): 19-39.
Habermas, Jürgen (1992). Postmetaphysical Thinking: Philosophical Essays. Çev. William M. Hohengarten. Cambridge, MA ve London: The Mit Press.
James, William (1918). The Principles of Psychology: Vol. I. New York: Dover Publications Inc.
Joas, Hans (1997). George Herbert Mead: A Contemporary Re-Examination of His Thought. Çev. Raymond Meyer. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Levelt, Willem J. W. (2004). “Speech, Gesture and the Origins of Language.” European Review, 12(4): 543-549.
Lewontin, Richard C. (1991). “Foreword.” Alfred I. Tauber (Der.), Organism and the Origins of the Self içinde (129: xii-xix). Dortrech, Boston ve London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Mead, George H. (1934). Mind Self and Society from the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. Der. Charles W. Morris. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mead, George H. (1936). Movements of Thought in the Nineteenth Century. Der. Merritt H. Moore. Illinois: The University of Chicago Press.
Mead, George H. (1964). “The Social Self.” Andrew J. Reck (Der.), Selected Writings: George Herbert Mead içinde (s. 142-149). Chicago ve London: The University of Chicago Press.
Mead, George H. (1964). “What Social Objects Must Psychology Presuppose.” Andrew J. Reck (Der.), Selected Writings: George Herbert Mead içinde (s. 105-113). Chicago ve London: The University of Chicago Press.
Miller, David L. (1973). George Herbert Mead Self Language and the World. Austin ve London: University of Texas Press.
Reck, Andrew J. (1968). “Introduction.” Andrew J. Reck (Der.), Selected Writings: George Herbert Mead içinde (s. xiii-lxii). Chicago ve London: The University of Chicago Press.
Santarelli, Matteo (2013). “From Others to the Other: A Psychoanalytical Reading of Mead.” Thomas Burke ve Krzysztof Piotr Skowronski (Der.), George Herbert Mead in the Twenty-first Century içinde (s. 159-171). New York, Toronto, Polymouth: Lexington Books.
Souter, A., Wyllie, J. M., Brink, C. O. vd. (1968). Oxford Latin Dictionary. London: Oxford University Press.
Thayer, H. S. (1968). Meaning and Action A Critical History of American Pragmatism. Indianapolis: Bobs-Merrill.
Wellek, Albert (1967). “Wundt, Wilhelm.” Çev. Tessa Byck. Paul Edwards (Der.), The Encyclopedia of Philosophy içinde (Vol. 8, s. 349-351). Collier-Macmillan Publishing.
Wundt, Wilhelm (1897). Outlines of Psychology. Çev. Charles Hubbard Judd. London ve New York: William Engelmann Publishing.