The introduction explains the motivations, background, tools, and materials of the study. George Herbert Mead occupies a problematic position, because he is known primarily in a discipline in which he did not teach, for a book he did not write. In order to investigate the production of knowledge by and about Mead, the study makes the case for treating knowledge as social action. The implications of this formulation are examined, and this theory serves to integrate the parts of the study into a single, processual account. The major types of archival and primary document research utilized in the study are enumerated and considered. Finally, the basic progression of the substantive chapters and conclusion is outlined, as a way of cuing the reader in to the overall structure of the study and of its key arguments.
Chicago Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.