George Simmel, was born in 1858 being the youngest in a family of seven children. His father was a successful Jewish businessman who later became a roman catholic. The mother was also a Jewish and a Lutheran hence influencing his son into her faith. George was later baptized but then dropped out of that church and retained his interest in philosophy of religion. His father’s death at a tender age led him to be adopted by a family friend and later inherited his properties enabling him pursue his studies. He studied philosophy and history at the University of berlin and earned a doctoral degree in 1881. This paper discusses Simmel’s version of social interaction including forms, contents and social types.
Forms
The concept of forms according to Simmel’s are explained in three major steps. First, the importance to comprehend what the term form means. Second, to explain how complex it is to understand its idea. Thirdly, to develop what might be a practical answer (Silver & Brocic, 2019). The audience addressed is also taken into consideration by examining their social and cultural views in historical theory and research. Simmel utilizes the three notions designated as vitalist, transcendent, and geometric. Vitalism shows the difference between living and non-living things and demonstrates the uniqueness of mankind. Therefore, human beings are moral, creative, and have the ability to make critical judgements. This brings about a new perception in sociology when examining the behavior and nature of people. The transcendent notion explains the existence of society in terms of operation in an organized manner. Finally, the geometric conception states that no society exists without individuals. The various units such as church, school and hospital must constitute the element of humanism in it.
Content
Content formulates a basis for the form version in that form itself is expressed in it. As Lizard (2019) suggests, the economic, political, and historical events contain the content in discussion. The daily social interaction follows societal laid out activities such as interaction, schooling, and socialization. Social forms are things created by people as a result of their critical thinking or knowledge obtained in classroom. Such things include vehicles, some machines, and even airplanes. Various economic activities such as trading, farming, distribution and manufacturing aids in providing income to the society, hence bringing about developments. Political leaders are responsible in ruling the citizens and being role models for the young people (Lizardo, 2019). A politically stable nation is preferred to an unstable one governed by conflicts. Contextual analysis displays everything revolving around community, shows its use and available sources of critical thinking and inventions.
Social Types
There are various classes of people in different societies, and these include nobility, strangers, beggars, and the poor. This constitutes the various social types existing in the society (Beer, 2019). The nobles are the rich who dominate the society and known to be living happy lives. Each new day, strangers meet: some may have bad intentions while others can be useful and coordinate in managing various developments. Freedom and equality are fundamental as this enables equality to all. For a peaceful existence, the coordination of all parties involved should be harmonious. Therefore, Simmel’s forms of social version are very crucial in understanding sociology in all perspectives. They form a basis of the existence of a society, its operation and relation among all its individuals. The knowledge also builds a foundation for future development as they form a foundation which became the new norm.
References
Beer, D. (2019). Georg Simmel’s concluding thoughts: Worlds, lives, fragments. Springer.
Lizardo, O. (2019). Simmel’s dialectic of form and content in recent work in cultural sociology. The Germanic Review: Literature, Culture, Theory, 94(2), 93-100. Web.
Silver, D., & Brocic, M. (2019). Three concepts of form in Simmel’s Sociology. The Germanic Review: Literature, Culture, Theory, 94(2), 114-124. Web.