[Dan Miller (930413.1200)]
(Bruce Nevin 930412.1357)
Bruce,
You say
<So learning to conform to norms involved learning to control
<perceptions of one's speech such that adults and other children
<assented (in various ways) that one's behavioral outputs were in
<conformity to the norms. In other words, they let one know that
<in their perceptions (different from the perceptions one was
<controlling) one was perceived as " a person like us."
I have always considered the insistence that behavior
is not important as having an unstated escape clause -
except when it is important. That is, it is true that
outcomes can be achieved through variable methods, but
there are many times that those behavioral methods are a
source of error - embarrassment, humiliation, deviance.
Some attention to behavior is common with reference signals
of group conformity, obedience, rule-following, accomodation,
or of not being embarrassed/humiliated a la Goffman. Here, we
anticipate how others may perceive and interpret our actions,
and, in face-to-face interactions our perceptions of our actions
and their actions have a simultaneous, mutual reference.
Increasing error signals would indicate troubled interaction -
conflict, misunderstanding, disinterest, offense, and so on.
Norms could be understood as initial guiding referents.
Commonly, these would be modified and negotiated within
interactions and recombinant social relationships.
Later,
Dan Miller