UTS100 - Understanding the Self - Module 1 PDF

MODULE 1: THE SELF IN DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES Module Overview Hello, and welcome to UTS100! To start our journey toward understanding the self, we must first learn what the self is. Since it is a subjective matter, there are a lot of theories explaining what the sel...

MODULE 1: THE SELF IN DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES Module Overview Hello, and welcome to UTS100! To start our journey toward understanding the self, we must first learn what the self is. Since it is a subjective matter, there are a lot of theories explaining what the self is, what its aspects are, and how it is developed. The topics included in this module – the philosophical, sociological, and psychological perspectives of the self – will serve as varying lenses from which we can formulate our interpretation of the self. Module Objectives/Outcomes By the end of this module, you should be able to: - compare and contrast how the self is represented across different disciplines and perspectives; - examine the different influences, factors, and forces that shape the self; and - demonstrate critical and reflective thought in analyzing the development of one’s self and identity by developing a theory of the self. Lessons in the Module This module includes the following topics: 1. What is the Self? 2. The Philosophical Perspective 3. The Sociological Perspective 4. The Psychological Perspective  MODULE 1: THE SELF IN DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES Module Overview Hello, and welcome to UTS100! To start our journey toward understanding the self, we must first learn what the self is. Since it is a subjective matter, there are a lot of theories explaining what the self is, what its aspects are, and how it is developed. The topics included in this module – the philosophical, sociological, and psychological perspectives of the self – will serve as varying lenses from which we can formulate our interpretation of the self. Module Objectives/Outcomes By the end of this module, you should be able to: - compare and contrast how the self is represented across different disciplines and perspectives; - examine the different influences, factors, and forces that shape the self; and - demonstrate critical and reflective thought in analyzing the development of one’s self and identity by developing a theory of the self. Lessons in the Module This module includes the following topics: 1. What is the Self? 2. The Philosophical Perspective 3. The Sociological Perspective 4. The Psychological Perspective UTS100 - Understanding the Self I - What is the Self? Hello everyone, and welcome to the first chapter of this module, which will discuss the idea of the “Self” as a whole. Before diving into the three different perspectives, we should first learn the general idea of what the self is. This will help us better understand and distinguish the uniqueness of the theories included in the later chapters. In this part, we talk about the influences coming from nature and nurture, the difference between identity and self, and the dimensionalities of it. Learning Objectives At the end of the lesson, you should be able to: determine the different factors that influence one’s being; evaluate the impact of such elements through self-awareness; and synthesize the influence of the factors through a group assessment. Pre-Activity Instructions: Write "✓" if you agree with the statement and "✗" if otherwise. _____ 1. We are what we are right now because we want to be like this. _____ 2. We can be whatever or whoever we want to be. _____ 3. Our family can only influence us while we are in our growing years. _____ 4. Our tendencies are entirely controllable. _____ 5. There are still many things that we have not discovered about ourselves. Abstraction The self is a topic that is often talked about but essentially goes unnoticed. Whenever the ‘I’ is mentioned (e.g., I will go to school, I hang out with my friends, I like to eat burgers), the self is highlighted as the “actor.” Further, the pronoun “me” is usually used as the object (e.g., tell me about it, give me something, it makes me feel awesome). Noticeably, the self composes both the I as an actor and the me as the object. The focus on the self is even more evident in the functional word variations of I and me used in everyday language depending on the purpose (e.g., my, mine, myself, etc.). 2 UTS100 - Understanding the Self The consciousness of the existence of the self has been almost automatic or reflexive. Thus, people are almost unaware of it. In our everyday lives, we are constantly acknowledging it. Three Scholars (i.e., theorists, scientists, and philosophers) in different fields have attempted to explain and thoroughly expound on several issues and controversies about the nature, existence, and dimensionality of self. The most prevalent problems with self are nature vs. nurture, identity vs. self, and dimensionalities of the self. NATURE VS. NURTURE Some insist that the self is predominantly a product of natural processes to which people are inherently predisposed. The natural basis of the self is anchored on biology and explains that human traits are passed from one generation to another. These transmitted traits serve as a blueprint of the self and predispose one to certain self-expressions (e.g., attitude, behavior, tendencies, etc.). In this stance, the self is studied structurally and functionally, from the molecular level to the entirety of human physiological systems. Genetics, for example, contributes so much information about the descriptions of the self. This field of biology primarily deals with heredity (transmission of traits and characteristics. from one generation to another) as a process, as well as with the characterizations (similarities and differences) of organisms. The other side, meanwhile, argues that the self should be principally viewed as an outcome of various nurturing factors in one’s life. Social sciences have provided several insights and explanations about the self, both on the micro and macro levels. Different social sciences stress how group life (formal and informal) affects an individual’s behavior and attitude and emphasize the impact of various social institutions on the self. While the issue of the predominance of either nature or nurture is still unresolved, one can safely assume that the self is a product of nature and nurture. IDENTITY VS. SELF Self and identity are topics that remain popular not only among psychologists (even authors of psychology articles) but also among other social scientists like sociologists, cultural anthropologists, and economists. Noticeably, the terms “self” and “identity” have been loosely interchanged in various literatures. Many people believe that there is a very thin conceptual and functional distinction between the two concepts and thus perceive them as synonymous. 3 UTS100 - Understanding the Self Based on lexical definitions, the two concepts are distinct and can be delineated. Consider, for example, the definitions provided in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary of the term identity: (noun, identity \-den-ta-te, a-, -de-no-\) “the qualities, beliefs, etc., that make a particular person or group different from others... or the distinguishing character or personality of an individual.” On the other hand, the term self (noun) refers to “the person that someone normally or truly is.. or the entire person of an individual.” The definitions provided suggest that the distinction that separates the two fall on the social representation of the term (i.e., known to others or only known to oneself). Identity distinguishes or compares one from another, while the self refers to the total characteristics or qualities of a person known and unknown to others (but known to oneself). A comprehensive definition that underscores the distinctions and overlaps between self and identity was given by Oyserman, Elmore, and Smith (2012, p. 69), stating that: “Identities are the traits and characteristics, social relations, roles, and social group memberships that define who one is. Identities can be focused on the past- what used to be true of one, the present---what is true of one now, or the future- the person one expects or wishes to become, the person one feels obligated to try to become, or the person one fears one may become; together, identities make up one’s self. The concept is described as what comes to mind when one thinks of oneself.” DIMENSIONALITIES OF THE SELF/IDENTITY A person’s identity is highlighted by a dominant trait that makes them distinguishable from others. Imagine, for example, a situation where you are trying to describe a person (whose name you cannot recall). You will find yourself thinking of remarkable traits that make others identify or even guess who you are talking about. You may describe that person using physical attributes (e.g., tall, dark, fat, etc.). However, this attempt may be unsuccessful because, in many instances, the physical descriptions you give can also be seen in other people unless the physical description is unique and specific to that person (e.g., the tallest guy in the school, around 7 ft). In most cases, a person’s identity can be best depicted using certain traits that would set them apart from others (e.g., the most arrogant, the most timid, the noisiest, etc.). Unfortunately, describing a person in the “average” category will be difficult. As the term implies, average connotes that one is just like everybody else in the group. In this case, several observable traits should be combined to effectively describe the person (e.g., the tall and dark guy in the class with a regional accent.. and dressed up like...). 4 UTS100 - Understanding the Self References Macayan, J.V., Pinugu, J.N.J., Castilo, J.C.D.C. (2018). Understanding the Self. Outcome-based Module. C&E Publishing, Inc. 5 UTS100 - Understanding the Self II - The Philosophical Perspective Hello everyone, and welcome to the second chapter of this module, which is all about: The Philosophical Perspective on the Self. Out of all the perspectives that will be discussed throughout the prelim grading, this is the one that focused most on the essence of human beings. Some concepts include the self as a mind, body, soul, brain, consciousness, memory, and more. Another concept distinct from this chapter is the dichotomy of worlds – a belief that there is a separate world other than the one we live in now. One by one, we are going to meet the minds behind those ideas. Learning Objectives At the end of the lesson, you should be able to: discuss the different philosophical perspectives about the self; compare and contrast the various philosophical theories; and examine the self through different philosophical views. Pre-Activity Instructions: Write "✓" if you agree with the statement and "✗" if otherwise. _____ 1. Different philosophers hold the same views about the self. _____ 2. Philosophers used empirical and rational lenses in explaining the self. _____ 3. As modern philosophers describe, the philosophy of the self is more relevant than that of ancient philosophers. _____ 4. Philosophical views of the self are a helpful guide to having a better life. _____ 5. Philosophy of the self should only be studied by older individuals and not by younger generations. Abstraction Philosophy has always sought to answer life’s difficult questions and has relentlessly pursued answers to these, no matter how seemingly futile the quest may be. This chapter presents various philosophers offering multiple perspectives on the self. In Philosophy, discussion of the self is a basic search for meaning and purpose in life. Determination, rationalization, and identification of the self set the direction from which an individual travels to fulfill their purpose in life. The inability to define oneself leads to many contradictions within the 8 UTS100 - Understanding the Self self later on; hence, it is one of the many imperatives in life to know oneself and lead a life charted by oneself. The philosophical quest aims to unravel who man is and his nature by looking not just at the everyday goals of man but to determine what ultimately is man, his dreams, and his essence. To help us understand ourselves a bit clearer and ease the pressure of coming up with a definite answer to who we are, let us look into some of the theories and concepts in philosophy regarding the self. SOCRATES (469-399 BC) “Know thyself.” Known as the market philosopher because of his penchant for engaging youths in philosophizing in public markets, Socrates directed philosophy’s attention from the universe to examining our existence in the universe. He reminds us to “know thyself,” which posits that if a person knows who they are, all fundamental issues and difficulties in life will vanish, and everything will be clearer and simpler. One could now act according to their definition of the self without doubt and contradiction. Socrates held the question of who a man is in such high esteem that he also said, “An unexamined life is not worth living”. Here, there is an urgent call to examine one’s life, for it is in the examination that we can know ourselves. Socrates is a dualist. He believed that man has a soul – which is divine, immortal, intelligible, uniform, indissoluble, and ever self-consistent and invariable – and a body – which is human, mortal, multiform, unintelligible, dissoluble, and inconsistent. He added that some mental states can be attributed to the soul while others are linked to the body. The body is vulnerable to basic emotions and actions; the soul controls these emotions and actions through proper judgment and reason. This differential establishes the superiority of the soul over the body. For him, there was a soul first before man’s body. Man’s existence was first in the realm of ideas and exists as a soul or pure mind. This soul has knowledge by direct intuition, which is stored in his mind. However, once he came to the material world or the world of senses, he needed to remember most of what he knew. This resulted in a lack of knowledge or ignorance, which caused problems for man. But, knowledge can be restored through the process of the dialectic method, also known as the Socratic method – a sort of intellectual midwifery trying 9 UTS100 - Understanding the Self to coax knowledge out of man. This process is an exchange of questions and answers that ultimately aims to make the person remember all the knowledge they have forgotten, including their former omniscient self. Answers will always be subjective, and there is no right or wrong answer to the questions posited by Socrates. The quality and quantity of answers depend on the person answering these basic inquiries, and one’s subsequent actions are best understood on how one defines oneself, thus the constant reminder to “know thyself.” Self-knowledge, for Socrates, means knowing one’s degree of understanding about the world and one’s capabilities and potentials. It is only through self-knowledge that one’s self emerges. Therefore, the self is achieved and not just discovered, something to work on and not a product of a mere realization. For him, possession of knowledge is a virtue, and ignorance is a vice. He argued that a person’s acceptance of ignorance is a springboard for the acquisition of knowledge later on. So, one must first have the humility to acknowledge ignorance to acquire knowledge. PLATO (427-347 BCE) “Thinking – the talking of the soul with itself.” An ancient Greek philosopher who was a student of Socrates and a teacher of Aristotle, Plato produced a substantial body of work that became the basis for Western thought. Regarding the concept of the self, Plato was one of the first philosophers who believed in an enduring self that the soul represents. He argued that the soul is eternal and constitutes the enduring self because the soul continues to exist even after death. An important part of his philosophy is the dichotomy of the ideal world or the world of forms – the permanent, unchanging reality – and the material world - the constantly changing representation. The material world is what we see around us; for Plato, this is just a replica of the real world found in the world of Forms. Plato’s insisted that the 10 UTS100 - Understanding the Self empirical reality we experience in the material world is fundamentally unreal and is only a shadow or a mere appearance. In contrast, the ultimate reality in the ideal world is real as it is eternal and constitutes abstract universal essences of things. Therefore, all things in the material world are unreal as they are all concrete objects. At the same time, the universal essences are authentic as they are immaterial blueprints of objects in the physical world. The tangible objects in this world are mere copies of these abstract universal essences. This dichotomy is reflected in his idea of the nature of man. He believed that human beings are composed of a body and a soul. The soul is the true self -the permanent, unchanging self. The changing body, however, is not the real self but a replica of our true self. This is why it constantly changes- getting older, changing shape, etc. The body is seen as some prison. We can free ourselves from the imprisonment of our bodily senses through contemplation. Contemplation entails communion of the mind with universal and eternal ideas. We continue to exist even in the absence of our bodies because we are Souls only. RENE DESCARTES (1596) “I think; therefore I am” This Frenchman was considered the Father of Modern Philosophy and a brilliant mathematician (Cartesian Geometry). “I think, therefore, I am,” also known as “Cogito ergo sum”, emphasizes the consciousness of his mind, which leads to evidence of his existence even though he doubts the existence of everything. In other words, the existence of anything that you register from your senses can be questioned. One can always challenge the certainty of things, but the very fact that one doubts cannot be doubted. This is what “I think; therefore, I am” means. In Descartes’ methodic doubt, you can say, “I think I am strong; therefore, I am strong.” If you think you are strong, then you are strong. Whichever thought a person chooses is the one that is carried over into their “I am.” Only humans have the hubris (excessive pride) of musing such irreverent questions on the existence and purpose of life. And only humans have satisfied themselves with their answers to their musings. For Descartes, the mind and the body are separate and very distinct from one another, but he also believes that the mind is conjoined with the body in such an intimate way that they causally act upon each other. The self, for Descartes, is nothing else but a mind-body 11 UTS100 - Understanding the Self dichotomy. Thought (mind) always precedes action (body). Humans think first about doing something and then do it. The thought sets the direction for human actions, but humans are always free to choose. Descartes believed the self is “a thinking thing or a substance whose whole essence or nature is merely thinking.” He also reassured that the self is different from the body. Hence, self and body exist but differ in existence and reality. The self is a feature not of the body but of the mind and, thus, a mental substance rather than a physical substance. JOHN LOCKE (1632-1704) “What worries you, masters you.” Unlike the first few philosophers discussed, this English philosopher thinks our identity is not only locked in the mind, soul, or body. Locke included the concept of a person’s memory in the definition of the self. He subscribes to the memory theory that holds that we are the same person as we were in the past for as long as we can remember something from that past. The idea is that as long as we have overlapping memories, we are the same person. That memory makes you aware of your existence. You are connected to that past for as long as you and another person can remember that and still be mindful of the present. Also, if we want to know if the person is the same one we knew ten years ago, we only have to ask and test their memory to verify their identity. For Locke, consciousness is the perception of what passes in a man’s mind. He rejected that the brain has something to do with consciousness as the brain and the body may change while consciousness remains the same. He concluded that personal identity is not in the brain but in one’s consciousness. He supports that consciousness can be transferred from one substance (body and soul) to another. For instance, while the soul is changed, consciousness remains the same, thereby maintaining the personal identity through the change. On the other hand, consciousness may be lost involuntarily through forgetfulness while the soul stays the same. With this, he claimed that there is the same soul but a different person. 12 UTS100 - Understanding the Self Thus, the same soul is unnecessary or insufficient in forming one’s identity over time when consciousness is lost. The other remarkable contribution of Locke was the notion of tabula rasa – a concept that posits everyone started as a blank slate, and the content is provided by one’s experiences over time. DAVID HUME (1711-1776) “There is no self.” For the Scottish philosopher David Hume, there is no stable thing called the self, for the self is a complex set of successive impressions or perceptions. Hume views the soul as a product of the imagination. No primordial substance houses the self, and any concept of the self is simply memory and imagination. What you think and what you feel constitute what you are at this very moment. So if at this moment, you are happy, then you are happy. If you are hungry, then you are hungry. That is what you are; that is who you are. For Hume, the existence of the mind and what’s inside the mind is divided into two: impressions and ideas. Impressions are those things we perceive through our senses as we experience them, while ideas are those we create in our minds even though we are no longer experiencing them. Whenever we think of simple ideas, they must have as a basis a simple impression. Complex ideas happen when we combine simple ideas by arranging and rearranging them. Because of this, I can make an entirely new creation. His concept of the self follows this philosophical pattern. Hume argues that he finds a stream of impressions and ideas when he looks into his mind, but no impression corresponding to a self that endures through time. The self keeps changing, like how one looks, feels, and thinks – they constantly change. He concludes that the self is nothing over and above the perceptions we enjoy. An “enduring self” is just a fiction produced by our imagination. “I” will constantly change because the different experiences one has for every constant change will affect and reshape that person. Thus, we cannot observe any permanent self because we continuously change. In conclusion, there is no self. 13 UTS100 - Understanding the Self IMMANUEL KANT (1724-1804) “Dare to know!” German philosopher Immanuel Kant theorized that consciousness is formed by one's inner and outer sense. The inner sense is comprised of one's psychological state and intellect. The outer sense consists of one's senses and the physical world. Consciousness of oneself and of one's psychological state was referred to by Kant as empirical self-consciousness. All representational states are in the inner sense such as moods, feelings, and sensations including pleasure and pain. One must be phenomenally conscious to be aware of something in the inner sense. On the other hand, consciousness of oneself and of one's state via acts of apperception is called transcendental apperception. This comes from the outer sense, and allows one to synthesize or make sense of a unified object. It makes experience possible and allows the self and the world to come together. Consciousness being unified, Kant argued, is the central feature of the mind. The mind should perform both the unity of consciousness and apperception. It is the self that organizes sensations and thoughts into a picture that makes sense to a person. The self is not an object located in one's consciousness with other subjects. The self itself is a subject. It is an organizing principle that makes a coherent experience possible by using the faculties of the mind to synthesize sensations into a unified whole. The ability of the mind to regulate those experiences into one experience makes the self a product of reason. In refuting Hume’s idea about an enduring self not existing, Kant stressed that self is something real, yet it is neither an appearance nor a thing in itself since it belongs to a different metaphysical class. He believed in the existence of God and soul and emphasized that it is only through experience that humans can acquire knowledge. However, there are questions that humans have no answers to in the aspect of metaphysics. For his idea of the self, Kant believes that man is a free agent, capable of making a decision for himself. His philosophy centers and revolves around the inherent dignity of a human being. As a free agent, man is gifted with reason and free will. He also said that since man is gifted with reason and free will, man can organize the data gathered by the senses. From these data, and the way we organize the data, we can now have a good idea of a man. 14 UTS100 - Understanding the Self SIGMUND FREUD (1856-1939) “The ego is not the master in its own house.” This Austrian neurologist’s contribution to psychology, the Psychoanalytic Theory, led to another understanding of the philosophy of the mind. One of his famous ideas was the tripartite division of man’s mind – the id, ego, and superego. Id has existed since birth, pertaining to instinct. It operates on the hedonistic or pleasure principle seeking immediate gratification and avoiding pain. It serves as a storeroom of wishes and obsessions related to sexual and aggressive desires. It ignores reality, harmony, common sense, and reason. This structure does not recognize good or evil, laws or rules, morality or beliefs. An egoistic, coarse, and barbaric brute emerges if it is dominant. Ego operates according to the reality principle. This structure’s role is to maintain equilibrium between the demands of the id and superego in accordance with what is best and practical in reality. It is developed by the individual’s experiences and adheres to the principles of reason and logic. The ego ensures the continuous existence and protection of the individual. If the ego is successful, it produces a brilliant, creative, and emotionally-balanced individual. Superego is the last layer to develop. It operates according to the morality principle. Superego is the reservoir of moral standards. It ensures compliance with society’s norms, values, and standards. It is developed through socialization in various agents like home, school, church, and others. If the superego is dominant, a law-abiding, morally upright, god-fearing, and socially acceptable individual appears. In a man’s stages of development, the id and the superego will find themselves clashing against each other, with the superego trying to control the Id’s impulses and the Id trying to satisfy its urges. The winner of this inner battle will be manifested in the ego, which is the self. Things are not in control of the ego, but the ego only manifests the winner between the two. If the ego behaves, then the superego wins. If ego misbehaves, then Id won. This battle occurs in the subconscious, and the realm of the ego is found in the conscious. GILBERT RYLE (1900-1976) “I act; therefore I am.” Gilbert Ryle, a British philosopher, supported the basic notions of behavioristic psychology. His theory is called logical behaviorism or analytical behaviorism – a theory of mind that states that mental concepts can be understood through observable events. 15 UTS100 - Understanding the Self For Ryle, the properties of a person are better understood as adjectives modifying a body than as nouns (objects) parallel to it. Kindness, for example, is not a thing that exists apart from and parallel to the body but rather a collection of properties a body has. Kindness includes properties such as being generous, humble, courteous, loyal, and honest. Someone who never exhibited these traits would not be called kind, and anyone considered kind exhibits some of these traits. The only proof of the mind’s operation is evident in activities like singing, running, walking, and the like. The self is the way people behave. Knowing and believing are just dispositions but these influence people’s actions. Therefore, the tendency to learn, think, feel, and act is called the mind. For Descartes, the mind is a non-physical entity within the body, producing human behavior. This, to Ryle, is the error because a talk about the mind is simply a talk about behavior. The mind is not distinct from the body but refers to certain aspects of our bodies. The separation of mind/soul and body could be possible, but this is hardly the case in practice. The only way we can know how the mind works is through the person’s behavior; hence we can only know a person through how one behaves, tendencies, and reactions in certain circumstances. PAUL & PATRICIA CHURCHLAND (1942/1943) “The self is the brain.” American neuroscientists Paul Churchland and Patricia Churchland introduced eliminative materialism – a radical claim that ordinary, common sense understanding of the mind is deeply wrong and that some or all of the mental states posited by common sense do not exist. For them, it is false to claim that folk psychology, or common sense psychology, is the capacity to explain people’s mental states. Most people think we have a stream of consciousness that contains images and conceptions of things about which we have beliefs and attitudes. Our thoughts and attitudes are supported by our feelings, which include mental states like joy and sorrow or anxiety and relief. It is also a folk belief that our sense of the world and ourselves 16 UTS100 - Understanding the Self directly represents how the world is formed, thus making our bodies reflect or adapt to how the world is. With the advent of science and learning more about the nuances of the brain, it becomes clear to Churchland that the term “mind”, our moods, emotions, actions, and consciousness, are deeply affected by the state of our brain. Our feelings, actions, and physical state are successfully altered by manipulating certain parts of our brains. It is only a matter of time before we can fully comprehend how the brain works for us to understand how it creates the self. He proposes that a new conceptual framework should be made which is based on neuroscience. MAURICE MERLEAU-PONTY (1908-1961) “I am my body.” A French phenomenological philosopher, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, distinguished the body into two types: the subjective body, as lived and experienced, and the objective body, as observed and scientifically investigated. For him, these two are not different bodies. The former is the body as-it-is-lived. He regarded the self as embodied subjectivity. It sees human beings neither as disembodied minds (existing without body) nor as complex machines but as living creatures whose subjectivity (consciousness) is actualized in the forms of their physical involvement with the world. The body is the general medium for having a world; we know through intellect and experience. The latter is the body as observed and scientifically investigated. It is the body that is known to others. For him, a person is defined by movement and expression. To be a self is to be more than one’s body. It includes everything I will do with my body, how I will act on it, and how I will make it work with other human beings. I am the sum of all that I make my body do. This includes the interpretation of the past and how I make decisions in the present. The self is grounded on the experiences from the past, the possibilities for the future, and the present cognition. He approaches the idea of self as a continuous flow of movement and expression from infancy to adulthood. Our perception of who we are is strictly tied to our bodily development. The self is a product of our conscious human experience. The definition of self is all about one’s perception of one’s experience and the interpretation of those experiences. Merleau-Ponty opposed the dualist account of subjectivity. Mind and body are essentially correlated, and it is only possible to understand subjectivity by considering this essential 17 UTS100 - Understanding the Self correlation. He also opposed the Cartesian cogito. For him, consciousness is both perceiving and engaging. 18 UTS100 - Understanding the Self III - The Sociological Perspective Hello everyone, and welcome to the third chapter of this module, which is all about: The Sociological Perspective on the Self. Out of all the perspectives that will be discussed throughout the prelim grading, this focused mostly on the influence of the environment, such as our family, friends, peers, society, and culture, on the formation of the self. Some of the concepts include social interaction, social categorization, and social group. One by one, we are going to meet the minds behind those ideas. Learning Objectives At the end of the lesson, you should be able to: explain how cultural factors affect or shape one’s perception of self; compare and contrast the impact of social groups on your personality; and evaluate the influence of individualism and collectivism on one’s identity. Pre-Activity Instructions: Write "✓" if you agree with the statement and "✗" if otherwise. _____ 1. Culture is essential in the development of one’s social self. _____ 2. People you do not know do not affect your social self. _____ 3. One’s behavior is affected by the people around them. _____ 4. Social institutions have an influence on people’s lives. _____ 5. People don’t need other people to survive. Abstraction Knowing the self requires understanding our society and its culture and how it provokes us to make decisions that are culturally influenced and socially constructed.No one could live by themselves alone. By extension, man will always look for someone to commune with. The human person is a social animal; they will always seek others for commercial or personal reasons. In the realm of sociology, the self interacts with the social world. Initially, the self is self-absorbed and is just concerned with its own. Progressively, however, the self expands and is now concerned with other constellations of selves, known as others. The self, as a social being, is influenced by his culture. As products of it, we mirror the values, traditions, and beliefs 23 UTS100 - Understanding the Self that our society holds dear. These concepts are embedded in the culture of our people- the impact of which permeates the very soul of the social self. To help us understand ourselves a bit clearer and ease the pressure of coming up with a definite answer to who we are, let us look into some of the theories and concepts in sociology and anthropology regarding the self. SOCIAL SELF by George Herbert Mead (1863-1931) Sociologist George Mead argued that the self is developed as one grows and ages and is constructed by directly engaging in the world through interaction and reflections on those interactions. For the interaction to prosper, each person involved must correctly interpret the meanings of symbols and the intentions of others. It can only succeed by the existence of common symbols but is accomplished through role-playing. Role-playing is the process in which one takes on the role of another by putting oneself in the position of the person with whom they interact. One’s response to the action of another comes after putting oneself in the place of another person. Through role-playing, the individual develops a concept of self. By putting oneself in the position of others, one can reflect upon oneself. The idea of self can only be created if the individual can get outside in such a way that they can become an object to oneself. To accomplish this, one must be conscious of oneself from the standpoint of others. Therefore, developing the concept of “self” lies in the ability “to wear other people’s shoes.” Developmental Stages of the Self For Mead, the self is not inborn. Babies cannot interpret the meaning of other people’s behavior. It is usually learned during childhood, which comes in the developmental stages of the self: 1. Imitation, or the preparatory stage, is where a child imitates their parents’ behavior. 2. The play stage involves the child playing the role of others. In doing these, they become aware that there is a difference between themself and the role that they are playing. 24 UTS100 - Understanding the Self 3. The game stage is where the child comes to see themselves from the perspective of other people. To play the game, the child must be aware of their relationship with others and place themselves in their roles to appreciate their particular role. In doing this, they see themselves in terms of the collective viewpoint of other people and the attitude of generalized others. I and Me For Mead, the self is a social process between the I and Me. The “I” is the phase of the self that is unsocialized and spontaneous. It is the subjective and acting part of the self, an immediate response to others. It allows the individual to express creativity and individualism still and understand when to bend and stretch the rules that govern social interactions possibly. It represents the self that is free and unique. The “Me”, on the other hand, represents the conventional and objective part of the self, which results from the progressive stages of role-playing or role-taking and the perspective one assumes to view and analyze one’s behaviors. It is the organization of the internalized attitude of others. It represents learned behaviors, attitudes, and expectations of others and society from the social interactions that the individual has experienced. Generalized Other One of Mead’s best-known concepts is the generalized other. He described it as an organized community or social group which gives the individual their unity of self. The attitude of the generalized other is the attitude of the community as a whole. At the macro-level, it is considered that the self then becomes aware at this stage of the cultural values, norms, traditions, and beliefs, acting in consideration of everything that the society holds dear. Hence, the focus of the individual’s actions has now shifted from the ‘self’ to the generalized other or the prominent people around him. Since an individual sees themself as a member of the group, their actions and decisions tend to be carefully analyzed so that it would mirror societal goals and values. LOOKING-GLASS SELF by Charles Horton Cooley (1864-1929) Social psychologist Charles Coole introduced the view that the self is developed as a result of one’s perceptions of other people’s opinions. People are the way they are, at least partly because of other people’s reactions to them and what they do. They constantly pick up feedback and incorporate it into their sense of self. It is a social construction and personal 25 UTS100 - Understanding the Self reality, showing how others influence people’s image of themselves. For Cooley, the self, an individual’s awareness of one’s social or personal identity, is a social development. The self is built through social interaction, which involves three steps: first, people imagine how they must appear to others; second, they imagine the judgment on that appearance; and finally, they develop themselves by assessing others. People imagine not only how others see them and their actions but also how others judge what they see, whether with approval, doubt, or hostility. As a result, the looking-glass self is made up of feelings about other people’s judgments of one’s behavior. The self consists of the individual’s more or less accurate assessments of other people’s judgment about one’s self. The concept of the looking-glass self provides an idea of how the self develops in relation to the perception of others. It should serve only as a guide for reflection and should be taken to avoid ending up living following other people’s expectations. PRIVATE, PUBLIC, AND COLLECTIVE SELF by Harry Triandis (1926-2019) Private self, or individual self, is the cognition that involves traits, states, and behaviors. It is an assessment of the self by the self. It shows one’s knowledge of attributes that differentiate them from others. Public self is the cognition concerning the generalized other’s view of the self. It corresponds to an assessment of the self by the generalized other. It shows one’s relationship with others and the role one assumes in that relationship. Collective self is the cognition concerning a view of the self found in memberships in social groups (e.g., family, co-workers, tribe, professional organizations). For instance, a person may be identified as a feminist. Attributes of being a feminist similar to other feminists are emphasized, forming the collective self. 26 UTS100 - Understanding the Self SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY by Henri Tajfel & William Sumner (1919-1982) Social identity has been defined as the person’s sense of who they are according to their membership in a particular group. According to the social identity theory, group membership is an essential source of pride and self-esteem. It gives a sense of social identity--a sense of belongingness to the social world. In this view, the world is divided into “us” and “them” through the process of social categorization and forming social groups. These social groups developed by William Graham Sumner are further divided into the in-group and out-group. An in-group is an esteemed social group commanding a member’s loyalty. It is a group to which a person belongs. On the other hand, an out-group is a scorned social group to which one feels competition or opposition. It is a group to which a person does not belong. Social identity theory states that the in-group will discriminate against the out-group to enhance its self-image. Tajfel and Turner identified three mental processes involved in evaluating others as “us” or “them” (i.e., in-group and out-group). The first process is called social categorization. People also categorize other people to identify and understand the social environment. With this, people learn things about themselves by knowing their category. The second process is called social identification. After learning their category, people adopt the identity of the group they have categorized themselves with. The last process is social comparison. After classifying themselves as part of the group and identifying with it, they tend to compare that group with others. Here they might begin to discriminate and criticize the other groups. ANTHROPOLOGY OF THE SELF by Brian Morris (1936-present) Brian Morris reiterated that the self is not an entity but a process orchestrating an individual’s experience. As a result, a person becomes self-aware and self-reflective about their place in the surrounding world. For him, “self” is defined as an individual’s mental representation of their person as self-representation. On the other hand, the concept of “other” refers to how one perceives the mental representations of others. A clear separation between self and others is universal, but the meaning of this distinction varies from person to person. At the same time, the relationship between the self and others is also a function of culture. Morris stated that the most crucial form 27