The publication of these previously unpublished papers (in their complete version) (2) by George Herbert Mead unveils a very interesting aspect of his thought, and should attract attention because of their deep and original sociological foundations. Whereas Mead is widely known for his theoretical contribution to the development of social psychology (mainly through his posthumous book Mind, Self and Society)? which has had a considerable influence in sociology, his own sociological conceptions have remained somewhat less known. For a number of reasons, ranging from the fact that he scattered his articles in philosophical, psychological, and sociological journals without ever assembling them into a book, to the somehow problematic legacy of his thought in the Chicago School of sociology, as well as the almost exclusive--if partial--appropriation of his views by the symbolic interactionist school, Mead's wider sociological reflections have remained virtually unexplored until recently. (4) And even though the last part of Mind, Self and Society is devoted to "society," amounting to almost one-fourth of the total volume and pointing to many fertile developments in sociology, Mead's conceptions of society and sociological analysis per se still remain much neglected by contemporary sociology. While the "return to Mead" movement initiated by Hans Joas in the 1980s has been a fruitful and decisive attempt to revive the originality of this thinker, much work remains to be done if we want a more complete and clearer picture of Mead's legacy for sociological theory and sociological analysis. (5) For one thing, Mead's ideas on the development of an international society, which accompanied the unparalleled development of US society during the 20th century, strike us today as acutely relevant in these times where a unilateral "globalization" has imposed itself as the new catchword to describe our world--albeit more often than not deprived, because of the strictly positive (if not positivistic) content of that notion, of its internal dialectical dynamics concerning the individual's self-consciousness and social movements which were so crucial for Mead's sociological understanding. Also, Mead's historical reflections, which shun historicism while nevertheless embracing the requirements of a scientific view of society and an historicity inspired by the logic of experimentation, can still teach us some lessons about the possible contributions a Meadian sociological analysis can provide regarding the present state of contemporary society. Mead's concept of society, in other words, still demands further attention, and much can be gained in contemporary sociological analysis from his reflections on social larger dynamics, particularly when coupled with his ideas about social reform and an "experimental path" for social action. At any rate, and as the reader will see, the papers that follow presents Mead's main analytical claim about the relationship between individuals and society, the idea that "mind" always appears as the mediation between self-consciousness and the historical development of a specific society. For example, in addressing the development of Greek society with respect to its philosophy, Mead pays attention to the different movements that composed social relations of the times, as well as to the different spiritual and philosophical expressions that reflect them, making possible the reconstruction of highly complex social situations. The first paper situates a very important step in Mead's reflections, since it locates the origins of the scientific mind together with the social reforms that took place in ancient Greece, roughly between the 7th and 4th centuries BCE, which also witnessed the emergence of democracy as a political concept and practice. What interested Mead in this paper, then, is the demonstration of the social processes that form the basis of self-reflection, both on the part of the formation of individual consciousnesses and society as a whole, in terms of its reorganization. …