(2008) Human Studies 31 (2).

The foundation of an interpretative sociology

a critical review of the attempts of George H. Mead and alfred Schutz

Christian Etzrodt

pp. 157-177

George H. Mead and Alfred Schutz proposed foundations for an interpretative sociology from opposite standpoints. Mead accepted the objective meaning structure a priori. His problem became therefore the explanation of the individuality and creativity of human actors in his social behavioristic approach. In contrast, Schutz started from the subjective consciousness of an isolated actor as a result of a phenomenological reduction. He was concerned with the problem of explaining the possibility of this isolated actor's perceiving other actors in their existence, their concreteness, and the motives for their behavior. I treat these two approaches and their associated problems as equally relevant. My evaluation is based on their success in solving their specific problems. The aim is to decide which of the two approaches provides the more adequate foundation for an interpretative sociology.

Publication details

DOI: 10.1007/s10746-008-9082-0

Full citation:

Etzrodt, C. (2008). The foundation of an interpretative sociology: a critical review of the attempts of George H. Mead and alfred Schutz. Human Studies 31 (2), pp. 157-177.

This document is unfortunately not available for download at the moment.