Commonalities between the philosophical perspectives of Alfred Schatz, a European phenomenologist, and George Herbert Mead, the father of symbolic interactionism, are discussed, and the two men's potential significance in social science research is examined. Both men were concerned with the question of the nature of social action, believing that this question must be addressed before any successful scientific social inquiry can take place. Concern for conceptual and methodological problems is reflected in the works of both. Schutz and Mead share a modernist image of man in the world. This image posits a formulation of man that is not reducible to essence or natural laws. The modernist image of man is man in action; it suggests an action paradigm for the study of men. For the study of political science, this modernist image offers a more complete and complex image of political man, attempting to combine an ontological formulation, images of social reality, empirical observation, and normative and practical concerns. Political scientists should abandon the Newtonian image of man and work toward a more comprehensive modernist image that would unite the social sciences in an investigation of the complete human act. (RM)