The universal meanings of common discourse

intrasubjective and intersubjective communication in george h. mead

Anna M. Nieddu

A critical and aware return to pragmatism entails a preliminary focus upon the possibility of productive communication and a possible exchange among fields of research often far apart in terms of methods and spheres of application. This difficulty is felt all the more strongly if we refer to the contested intellectual legacy of George H. Mead, one often divided between opposing and conflicting fields of investigation. In this paper, I propose a reinterpretation of his thought that I believe could operate transversally. To do so, I interpret Mead’s idea of human creativity in a more radical way compared with some previous interpretations. This way, it is possible to see the constructive role of the relation between inter-subjective and intra-subjective communication as constitutive moments in an ethical self-construction of human beings. Finally, the peculiarity of human creativity, in all its complexity, shows itself as the starting point for responsible, normatively oriented conduct. Moreover, a new anthropological paradigm, also emerging from Mead’s suggestions, could become a source of inspiration for a renewed pattern of civic life and democratic citizenship.

Publication details

DOI: 10.4000/ejpap.351

Full citation:

Nieddu, A. M. (2015). The universal meanings of common discourse: intrasubjective and intersubjective communication in george h. mead. European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy 7 (1), pp. n/a.

This document is available at an external location. Please follow the link below. Hold the CTRL button to open the link in a new window.