An individual’s exclusion from society enables their social participation

Evidence

This category may be suggested by the proposition that every element of a group is not only a societal part but, in addition, something else. However trivial it may seem, this fact nevertheless operates as a social a priori. For that part of the individual which is, as it were, not turned toward society and is not absorbed by it, does not simply lie beside its socially relevant part without having a relation to it. It is not simply something outside society to which society, willingly or unwillingly, submits. Rather, the fact that in certain respects the individual is not an element of society constitutes the positive condition for the possibility that in other respects he is: the way in which he is sociated is determined or codetermined by the way in which he is not. — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 178

Categorization

• DEFINE: Gives the second social a priori: the extrasocial part of a person positively conditions their social role.
• XREF: Connects to the reader’s essay argument: Lofland’s stranger categorization and Simmel’s later ‘Stranger’ chapter both rest on this extrasocial-defining-social principle. Also grounds Julius’s marginality in both cities. — connects to: Living surrounded by strangers is a peculiar condition requiring explanation; A person can be socially poor yet individually wealthy — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 439; The local community functioned as an individual against the state — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 682 (+6 more)

Related

• What a society excludes socially becomes symbolically central to its fantasy life (similarity 0.82)
• The poor stand outside the group as a form of being inside (similarity 0.81)
• A person can be socially poor yet individually wealthy (similarity 0.79)

Broader Connections

• A set of individuals can be society to varying degrees. #expands (0.50) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 51