mediastudies.press
The Looking-Glass Self
- Charles Horton Cooley (author)
Chapter of: Social Media & the Self: An Open Reader
Export Metadata
- ONIX 3.0
- ThothCannot generate record: No publications supplied
- Project MUSECannot generate record: No BIC or BISAC subject code
- OAPENCannot generate record: Missing PDF URL
- JSTORCannot generate record: No BISAC subject code
- Google BooksCannot generate record: No BIC, BISAC or LCC subject code
- OverDriveCannot generate record: Missing Language Code(s)
- Thoth
- ONIX 2.1
- EBSCO HostCannot generate record: No PDF or EPUB URL
- ProQuest EbraryCannot generate record: No PDF or EPUB URL
- EBSCO Host
- CSV
- JSON
- OCLC KBART
- BibTeX
- CrossRef DOI depositCannot generate record: This work does not have any ISBNs
- MARC 21 RecordCannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
- MARC 21 MarkupCannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
- MARC 21 XMLCannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
Title | The Looking-Glass Self |
---|---|
Contributor | Charles Horton Cooley (author) |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.32376/3f8575cb.73d69f51 |
Landing page | https://www.mediastudies.press/pub/cooley-looking/ |
License | https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ |
Publisher | mediastudies.press |
Published on | 2021-07-15 |
Short abstract | THAT THE “I” of common speech has a meaning which includes some sort of reference to other persons is involved in the very fact that the word and the ideas it stands for are phenomena of language and the communicative life. |
Long abstract | THAT THE “I” of common speech has a meaning which includes some sort of reference to other persons is involved in the very fact that the word and the ideas it stands for are phenomena of language and the communicative life. It is doubtful whether it is possible to use language at all without thinking more or less distinctly of someone else, and certainly the things to which we give names and which have a large place in reflective thought are almost always those which are impressed upon us by our contact with other people. Where there is no communication there can be no nomenclature and no developed thought. What we call “me,” “mine,” or “myself” is, then, not something separate from the general life, but the most interesting part of it, a part whose interest arises from the very fact that it is both general and individual. That is, we care for it just because it is that phase of the mind that is living and striving in the common life, trying to impress itself upon the minds of others. “I” is a militant social tendency, working to hold and enlarge its place in the general current of tendencies. So far as it can it waxes, as all life does. To think of it as apart from society is a palpable absurdity of which no one could be guilty who really saw it as a fact of life. |