Invited comment: Framing, Actions and Feedback

Welcome:
Guest

Studies in Symbolic Interaction

ISSN: 0163-2396
Series editor(s): Professor Norman Denzin

Subject Area: Sociology and Public Policy

Content: Series Volumes | Current Volume RSS

Options: To add Favourites and Table of Contents Alerts please take a Emerald profile

Document Information:
Title:	Invited comment: Framing, Actions and Feedback
Author(s):	Clark McPhail
Volume:	30 Editor(s): Norman K. Denzin ISBN: 978-1-84663-930-2 eISBN: 978-1-84663-931-9
Citation:	Clark McPhail (2008), Invited comment: Framing, Actions and Feedback, in Norman K. Denzin (ed.) 30 (Studies in Symbolic Interaction, Volume 30), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp.29-34
DOI:	10.1016/S0163-2396(08)30002-7 (Permanent URL)
Publisher:	Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Article type:	Chapter Item
Extract:	As a longstanding fellow-traveler and occasional critic of symbolic interaction, I read Dave Snow's paper with the following five basic Scientific Interest (S.I.) assumptions in mind: (1) there are no immaculate perceptions; (2) no object, actor, action, or situation has intrinsic stimulus properties; (3) therefore there are no inherent meanings for any object, actor, action, or situation; (4) the meaning of any object, actor, action, or situation is the response made to it; (5) therefore, there are as many meanings for any object, actor, action, or situation as there are responses made to it. In other words, meanings are constructed. Hence the different responses – the different meanings for or meanings of – the Fall 2005 Paris Riots and the current Spring 2006 Paris protests. I am also mindful of William I. and Dorothy Swaine Thomas's (1928) statement of what has come to be known as the Thomas theorem: “Whatever men [sic] define to be real is real in its consequences.”