Revision summary
Yes: I and Me are central in Mead. Me is the organised attitudes of others, the self as object. I is the unpredictable response that allows novelty. Play, game, and generalised other form the Me. Blumer’s interactionism inherits the pair.
Model answer
Introduction
Yes. George Herbert Mead’s ‘I’ and ‘Me’ are central because they name how the self is both a social object and a spontaneous actor. Without them, his social behaviourism collapses into a one-way mirror of society.
Body
The Me
- The Me is the organised set of attitudes of others that the individual assumes.
- It is the self as object, formed in play, the game, and the generalised other.
- Charles Horton Cooley’s looking-glass is a cousin, but Mead stresses taking the role of the other in interaction.
The I
- The I is the response of the organism to the Me, never fully predictable.
- It is the source of novelty, impulse, and moral innovation.
Why they are central
- Mind, self, and society are one process. Language is the medium.
- Herbert Blumer’s symbolic interactionism rests on this duality: structure in the Me, agency in the I.
Limit
- The pair underplays material class and unconscious desire. It remains central for interactionist sociology.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD GO[Generalised other] --> ME[Me social object] ME --> I[I novel response] I --> ACT[Interaction] ACT --> GO
Conclusion
‘I’ and ‘Me’ are central terms. They explain how society enters the self and how the self can still surprise. Mead’s work is unintelligible without that pair.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
What is the difference between natural and social inequality examples from caste and class dimensions
Next question in the 2018 paper (Q1). View answer →
-
Is the Me just conformity?
It is social organisation of the self. The I can still break a routine.
-
Did Mead ignore society beyond talk?
He underplayed class. Institutions still appear as the generalised other.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2018 · Q1(a) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
The focal point of sociology rests on interaction. How do you distinguish it from common sense? -
2018 · Q3(a) · Sociology GS 1 · 20 marks
Does the collapse of functionalism and bankruptcy of Marxism coincide with the rupture of modernity? Discuss. -
2018 · Q3(b) · Sociology GS 1 · 15 marks
Define patriarchy. How does patriarchy manifest in interpersonal relations? -
2018 · Q4(a) · Sociology GS 1 · 20 marks
According to Marx, how are human beings alienated from their human potential and what does he suggest to change this? -
2018 · Q5(a) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Is the theory of cultural lag valid in present times? Discuss -
2018 · Q6(c) · Sociology GS 1 · 15 marks
Explain with examples, the explanatory and exploratory designs of social research. -
2018 · Q7(c) · Sociology GS 1 · 15 marks
What, according to Pareto, are the basic characteristics of elites? Discuss. -
2017 · Q1(a) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Explain how sociology has emerged as a distinct discipline based on rationality and scientific tamper
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2018 · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
The focal point of sociology rests on interaction. How do you distinguish it from common sense?
Sociology
Sociology focuses on interaction as action oriented to others. Weber, Mead, and Goffman named that object. Common sense is Schutz’s unexamined stock of typifications. Durkheim’s rates and caste studies show why everyday talk is not enough. Sociology uses common-sense language and then tests it.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2018 · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Distinguish between fact and value in Weber's Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism
Sociological Thinkers: Karl Marx
Weber split value-relevance of the problem from value-discipline in proof. The question of modern capitalism is culturally selected. The claimed fact is elective affinity with inner-worldly asceticism. Ideal types organise the comparison. The book does not preach Calvinism as a duty.
Q1(d) · UPSC Mains 2018 · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
What is the difference between natural and social inequality examples from caste and class dimensions
Stratification and Mobility: Concepts
Natural inequality is physical difference; social inequality is instituted rank. Rousseau drew the classic cut. Caste rank is endogamy and occupation, not nature. Class is property and market chance, not a talent queue. Davis-Moore naturalises class; Tumin and Marx refuse that.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.