In the Spring of 2001 I took a course titled "Self and Society" at the University of North Carolina-Asheville. It was presented by Dr. Karin Peterson, and focused on the sociological theory known as "symbolic interactionism". As the course progressed, I found myself making more and more notes in the margins of my textbooks, largely concerning the relationship - or lack of relationship - between the theories and models being presented and my understanding of the nature of autism. These notes became the basis of an Undergraduate Research Project which continued for several semesters.

I am placing these notes online so that the autism community may make use of them. They are copyrighted, which simply means that I need to be contacted for permission to reproduce them or use them for anything other than "fair use". The material is provided gratis (or, if you will, "free as in beer".)

The course texts used were:

"The Production of Reality" by Jodi O'Brien and Peter Kollock (citations abbreviated as "OK")
"Symbolic Interactionism" by Joel M. Charon (citations abbreviated as "C")
"Social Mindscapes" by Eviatar Zerubavel (citations abbreviated as "Z")

Each of these is available as of this writing - the only bookseller I checked was Amazon but there are no doubt other sources for both new and used copies. I would encourage folks interested in the subject to purchase and read them. Being textbooks, they are not inexpensive but I certainly feel that I've gotten my money's worth. (I have no financial interest in the sale of these textbooks.)

The notes consist of 78 brief excerpts from one of the texts, followed by my thoughts regarding them. They are in no real order, and similar concepts may appear in more than one of them. I had delayed making them available until I organized and condensed them, but finally realized that might never happen.

In keeping with my style/gift/curse of associative thinking, many of the notes refer to other instances of similar concepts. In several cases, I cite one particular film whose scientific basis has been rather harshly criticized. I don't feel this diminishes from the validity of the concept being discussed, and I'll write more soon as to why. In the meantime, please don't let skepticism (or for that matter outrage!) regarding the film keep you from at least considering what I've written.

What follows is a list of the excerpts, with each being a link to the corresponding page of ruminations :-)

"A great deal of human behavior appears unreasonable and illogical if viewed out of context." (OK5)

"Cultural rules dictate what is ‘real’ and what is ‘not real’." (OK5)

"This ability, to distinguish between contexts and to behave in accordance with social expectations, is a defining feature of humanness." (OK5)

"(P)erfect factual knowledge and cognitive ability do not make a human." (OK7)

"What cognitive and emotive capacities are necessary to engage in meaningful social interaction? How is social behavior affected by a disruption of these processes?" (OK8)

“What do different perspectives say about the nature of the world and humans’ place in it?” (OK8)

"(H)umans derive cognitive schemas from cultural patterns..." (OK10)

“(P)eople impose... schemas on the stimuli in their environment... to select... whether to store it in and recall it from memory.” (OK26)

“...person learns to assign culturally specific meanings to particular actions through interactions with others.” (OK29)

“The difference between humans and elephants is that humans do not respond directly to the physical environment.” (OK58)

“Our experience... is anchored in the internal conversation that constitutes our conscious thought.” (OK59)

“...humans must have a larger picture in mind before speaking, otherwise we would not be able to fill in the blanks and sort through the ambiguities with such unconscious ease.” (OK67)

“Nature ‘refuses to conform to our craving for clear lines of demarcation; she loves twilight zones’.” (OK130)

“The logic of classification is something we must learn.” (OK133)

“As real as they may feel to us, boundaries are mere figments of our minds.
Only the socialized can ‘see’ them. To all cultural outsiders they are totally invisible.” (OK135)

“The transcription of thought into language is social interaction.” (OK158)

“It is crucial to remember that impression management is something everyone does in all everyday activities.” (OK162)

“The fact that everyday encounters feel more or less like comfortable routines rather than a madcap scramble of miscues, misunderstandings, and maladjustments is a testament to the existence of shared social scripts.” (OK167)

“The performer must act with expressive responsibility...” (OK212)

“Unmeant gestures, inopportune intrusions, and faux pas are sources of embarrassment and dissonance.” (OK213)

“Perhaps the focus of the dramaturgical discipline is to be found in the management of one’s face and voice.” (OK216)

“The interviewee is likely to feel, and with some justice, that his every action will be taken as highly symbolical...” (OK221)

“The drama, status, and ambivalence in clothing and fashion...” (OK - title of Chapter 21)

The stability of definition of a situational reality (OK248)

“A situation where the definition of reality is relatively precarious has advantages for the analysis proposed here, for processes of sustaining reality should be more obvious where that reality is problematic.” (OK248)

“Sustaining a sense of the solidness of a reality composed of multiple contradictory definitions takes unremitting effort... (B)ecause the most effective balance depends on many unpredictable factors, it is difficult to routinize the balance into formulas that prescribe a specific behavior for given conditions.” (OK257)

“The body does not experience itself as a whole, in the sense in which the self in some way enters into the experience of the self.” (OK298)

“For the individual organism is obviously an essential an important fact or constituent element of the empirical situation in which it acts; and without taking objective account of itself as such, it cannot act intelligently, or rationally.” (OK299)

“We realize in everyday conduct and experience that an individual does not mean a great deal of what he is doing and saying.” (OK301)

“The self is constructed from the materials of the culture.” (OK306)

“Self is a personal interpsychic structure and is only knowable by the person to whom it belongs.” (OK306)

“Identity... requires no private commitment on the part of the (figurative) actor or audience to its being a valid reflection of the ‘true’ self.” (OK307)

“Individuals’ ubiquitous motive to seek role-support...” (OK307)

“Interpersonal competence” (OK311)

“Collective meanings may accrue that one partner feels unable to modify.” (OK311)

“The responsibility for our most basic knowledge of ‘reality’ (as defined by the ‘language of the day’ in a particular culture) we call common sense. Common sense is a set of shared cultural rules for making sense of the world.” (OK370)

The five features of reality (OK379-395)

“The less able a person is to take (boundary-defining positions) for granted, the more likely he or she is to be aware of the boundaries and transgressions...” (OK469)

“The self undergoes constant revision as it encounters friction, contradiction, and conflict among the various boundaries that give the self meaning." (OK473)

Eccentricity vs. mental illness (OK475-6)

“To measure physical behavior alone without trying to understand thinking was to ignore the central qualities of the human being...” (C33)

“Because we live in a world of social objects we are now able to ‘understand’ our environment... (W)e are able to take what we learn in one situation and apply it to a very different situation.” (C45)

Hierarchy of meaning (C49-50)

“(P)erhaps it is the ambiguity of symbols which makes them so useful in human society.” (C51)

Symbols vs. signs (C56)

“We act in our worlds according to interpretations of objects in a context rather than through specific responses to specific stimuli, cues, or signs.” (C57)

“We share with others a definition of the world and its objects.” (C60)

“We do not learn how to act in relation to others simply through imitation or experience.” (C62)

“Human society is based on symbols.” (C62)

“Thinking is constant; deliberation occurs often; serious deliberation occurs occasionally.” (C66)

“Role taking is imagining the world from the perspective of another.. (it is) central to the development of selfhood; probably the most important mind activity.” (C109)

“This ability to take the role of the other is a central quality of the human being...” (C110)

“As we act symbolically toward others, we imagine the reaction of those to whom we communicate.” (C113)

“We exercise self-control and self-direction by understanding ‘the other’.” (C116)

“It is impossible to be fully aware of our own role-taking, for that would demand too much from the human being.” (C118)

“...manipulation demands knowing how to deal with someone effectively, and that begins with understanding the situation from his or her perspective.” (C119)

“The self must be produced anew on each and every occasion of social interaction.” (C188)

(discussion of “impression management”, depending on others’ “fronts” to define a situation) (C188)

“For Goffman, then , a self is not something an individual owns but something others temporarily lend him or her.” (C192)

“Goffman once suggested that the purpose of studying social life is to ‘cause others to see what they hadn’t seen or connect what they hadn’t put together’.” (C200)

“...the seemingly universal process of our cognitive development.” (Z3)

“...most cognitive scientists today assume a universal, human mind.” (Z3)

“...cognitive universalism... prevents them from addressing the unmistakably non-universal mental ‘software’ we use when we think.” (Z3)

“Strictly speaking it is incorrect to say that the single individual thinks. Rather it is more correct to insist that he participates in thinking further what other men (sic) have thought before him.” (Z8)

“...the more we can gain access to social worlds that are different from the one we have come to regard as a given the more we will be able to recognize the social nature of both.” (Z10)

“Mental acts such as perceiving, attending, and remembering are not just physiologically constrained human acts but also unmistakably social acts bound by specific normative constraints.” (Z13)

“...there is always more than one cognitive ‘standpoint’ from which something can be mentally approached.” (Z29)

“Our thinking is inherently limited. There are numerous things about which we could conceivably think yet which nevertheless do not even ‘cross’ our minds. That is true of our purely sensory experience as well. There are many things around us which we could technically perceive through our senses yet which nevertheless remain ‘outside’ our consciousness.” (Z35)

“(M)ental horizons... protect us from the cognitive predicament of being constantly bombarded by an undifferentiated stream of stimuli... they basically ‘close’ our minds by helping delineate what we consider relevant. After all, there is much more that could ‘enter’ out consciousness yet is nevertheless excluded as irrelevant because it basically lies ‘beyond’ our mental horizons... social situations are typically surrounded by mental fences...” (Z36-7)

“Reality is inherently boundless...” (Z41)

(Mental focusing, and a “rigid vs. fluid” delineation) (Z43-4)

“...specifically socialized to disattend certain things...” (and attend others) (Z47)

(discussion of boundaries) (Z57)

“Reifying the meaning of symbols... means a terrible waste of our distinctively human capacity to think creatively.” (Z80)

(social memories) (Z87)

“...society’s ubiquitous cognitive role as a mediator between individuals and their own experience...” (Z89)

“...the dreadful prospect of ‘mental exile’ from the social world...” due to losing track of the passage of time while isolated (Z103)

“...we by and large ignore the same things that others do.” (Z112)

Last revised: June 23, 2007
(back to main page)