Some of the statements Charles Kadushin makes in his "Introduction to Social Network Theory" are merely obvious. It is almost self-evident that if people live close to you, you are more likely to become acquainted with them because you encounter them frequently. I don’t believe that is a scientific principle, it is merely nature. People vibrate and unite with others in which they see the same or at least similar characteristics. On the other hand, people can form relationships on other aspects that have nothing to do with where they are located.
“In social psychology Charles H Cooley's "looking glass self" (Cooley 1956) begins as Descartes with the individual, but suggests that the self cannot be formed without its reflection from others.” I have to agree with what he states in the excerpt above because I don’t think that people can be fully formed by themselves. If people were to live by themselves they would not be able to survive, so it is absurd to say that people can be fully formed by themselves. People cannot live by themselves; we always need the company of others. By comparing ourselves to others and by interacting with the people around us is how we better ourselves as human beings. (for ex. our flaws or weaknesses)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I agree with your comment, "...but suggests that the self cannot be formed without its reflection from others." At first I thought about all the hermits of the world, and realized that it was true: at some level, there has to be outside intervention. While their social network might be that of one more on the peripherary rather than central, they still have social interaction of some sort. Many psychologists would agree wih the living with others to better ourselves too. I certainly would agree.
Your statement "On the other hand, people can form relationships on other aspects that have nothing to do with where they are located." was basically the point that I was trying to say in one of my blog entries for the week.
It is obvious. Look at your Facebook. Nearly all of your friends or connections will have a link to you through location, where you were physically present. Facebook even divides networks from physical locations such as cities or university campuses.
Also, I thought it's interesting to suggest that people are so depended on the physical relationships they have with people. I also thought about the hermits and shut ins. But does outside contact mean face-to-face? So much today can be done online. For example, an elderly technologically competent, anti-social cat lady could order all her groceries online, and order prescriptions and have them delivered. She can watch TV, exercise on a treadmill, and talk to her cats. This is an extreme - but really one could live and survive with no physical contact or face-to-face interactions.
I also agree with you. We are social creatures who need to be physically close to others and I think that we have let these online tools supplant actually talking to people. I for one get really depressed and lonely when I don't see people face to face on a daily basis. I think that people who spend their time alone and isolated eventually develop some type of psychosis which usually manifests itself in the form of talking to oneself.
I really found the title of your blog compelling and like it a lot.
I agree with what you say. Location is not a factor that affects relationships. Some are forced to stay away from their friends and family for a long time, yet when they go back they find that nothing has changed. Relationships can last a long time with no physical contact as long as they have a strong bond that holds them together.
Post a Comment