▁trivial ized ▁the ▁t ensions ▁of ▁individual ▁interests ▁and ▁society ' s ▁interests ▁by ▁reducing ▁them ▁to ▁" cap ital ism "; ▁B ella h , ▁in ▁his ▁character ization ▁of ▁the ▁negative ▁aspects ▁of ▁American ▁society , ▁was ▁comp elled ▁by ▁a ▁char ism atic - based ▁optimal ism ▁moral ▁absol ut ism . ▁ ▁Symbol ic ▁interaction ism ▁In ▁ 1 9 7 5 , ▁Par s ons ▁respond ed ▁to ▁an ▁article ▁by ▁Jonathan ▁H . ▁Turner , ▁" P ars ons ▁as ▁a ▁Symbol ic ▁Inter action ist : ▁A ▁Com parison ▁of ▁Action ▁and ▁Inter action ▁Theory ". ▁Par s ons ▁acknowled ged ▁that ▁action ▁theory ▁and ▁symbol ic ▁interaction ism ▁should ▁not ▁be ▁regarded ▁as ▁two ▁separate , ▁ant agon istic ▁positions ▁but ▁have ▁over la pping ▁structures ▁of ▁concept ual ization . ▁Par s ons ▁regarded ▁symbol ic ▁interaction ism ▁and ▁the ▁theory ▁of ▁George ▁Herbert ▁M ead ▁as ▁valuable ▁contributions ▁to ▁action ▁theory ▁that ▁specify ▁certain ▁aspects ▁of ▁the ▁theory ▁of ▁the ▁person ality ▁of ▁the ▁individual . ▁Par s ons , ▁however , ▁critic ized ▁the ▁symbol ic ▁interaction ism ▁of ▁Herbert ▁Bl umer ▁since ▁Bl umer ' s ▁theory ▁had ▁no ▁end ▁to ▁the ▁open ness ▁of ▁action . ▁Par s ons ▁regarded ▁Bl umer ▁as ▁the ▁mirror ▁image ▁of ▁Claude ▁Lé vi - St ra uss , ▁who ▁t ended ▁to ▁stress ▁the ▁quasi - det erm ined ▁nature ▁of ▁macro - struct ural ▁systems . ▁Action ▁theory , ▁Par s ons