Treść książki

Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
youngadultsfromsuchproblemsforever.Eriksoniannotionsofidentity
tendtolookattheindividualascentral,withacknowledgingtheinfluence
ofinternalandexternalconflictsoverhisorherlifespan.Thefocusis,there-
fore,placedonachievingcongruencebetweentheindividualperson’sview
ofhimselforherselfandtheviewthatothersseemtoholdofhimorher.
Interactional
Interactionalthinkingonidentityformationisalsoconnectedwithaperson’s
maturitybutnotwithmaturationalstages.Mead(1934),asymbolicinterac-
tionist,presentedindetailhowtheconceptofidentityisconstructed,main-
tainedandchangedthroughsocialinteractionsorrelationswithothers.Ac-
cordingtohim,peopledefinethemselvesassocialobjectsthankstotheuse
ofsymbolicresources(suchaslanguage)andalsogeneratetheirownidenti-
tiesintheprocessofinteraction.Incommunicatingwithothers,theyassume
others’rolesandmonitortheirownactionsaccordingly.Inotherwords,if
humansinteractinaparticularcontextonadailybasis,theytendtodeal
withmeaningssharedbyothersinthatcontext.Ofcentralimportancein
Mead’smodelarethechangeabilityofidentityandtheconceptofthesocial
actorwhocantakeontheidentitiesofothersordeveloptheirown.Never-
theless,theconnectionbetweenanindividualandsocietyisseenasflawless
andunproblematic.Thereisnoplaceforpersonalneedsanddesireswhich
mightgenerateconflicts.Here,theindividualissimplyaproductofothers,
andsocialcontrolformshisorheridentity.
Itispossibletotracethreeapproacheswithininteractionalidentity
(Kwiatkowska,2005,pp.42-44).Inthefirst,connectedwithKuhn’sIowa
school,identityisviewedastheconceptofselfwhichischaracterizedby
relativelystableattitudesformedwiththehelpofHsignificantothers”.The
secondapproachtointeraction,associatedwiththenameTurner,refersto
relationsoccurringbetweenthepersonalidentity(theuniqueself)which
differentiatesanindividualfromotherpeoplewithinagroupandthesocial
identity(thecollectiveself)whichrelatestowhatanindividualshareswith
othergroupmembersofasocialcategoryincontrastwithothersocialcate-
gories(Turneretal.,1994).Inthethirdapproach,identityisconsideredto
bedynamicand,unlikeinthesecondcase,issubjectedtonegotiationbythe
individual.Identityprojectionandconstruction,evenbeyondtheframe-
worksdefinedbyrolesandstatuses,arepossibleinthislastapproach.Yet,
whateverapproachwithinaninteractionalunderstandingofidentityis
adopted,theselfcanbeformedonlyinasocialsettingthroughsocialand
culturalinteractions.
20