Self

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Self (sociology))
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Self (disambiguation).

The self is the subject of one's own experience of phenomena: perception, emotions, thoughts. In phenomenology, it is conceived as what experiences, and there isn't any experiencing without an experiencer, the self. The self is therefore an "immediate given", an intrinsic dimension of the fact of experiencing phenomena. In some other trends of philosophy, the self is instead seen as requiring a reflexive perception of oneself, the individual person, meaning the self in such a view is an object of consciousness.

The self has been studied extensively by philosophers and psychologists and is central to many world religions. With the recent rise in technology, the self has been discussed under various new emerging fields, such as Technoself Studies.

Philosophy[edit]

Main article: Philosophy of self

The philosophy of self seeks to describe essential qualities that constitute a person's uniqueness or essential being. There have been various approaches to defining these qualities. The self can be considered that being which is the source of consciousness; the agent responsible for an individual's thoughts and actions; and/or the substantial nature of a person which endures and unifies consciousness over time.

Psychology[edit]

Main article: Psychology of self

The psychology of self is the study of either the cognitive and affective representation of one's identity or the subject of experience. The earliest formulation of the self in modern psychology forms the distinction between the self as I, the subjective knower, and the self as Me, the object that is known.[1] Current views of the self in psychology position the self as playing an integral part in human motivation, cognition, affect, and social identity.[2] Self following from John Locke has been seen as a product of episodic memory[3] but research upon those with amnesia find they have a coherent sense of self based upon preserved conceptual autobiographical knowledge.[4] It is increasingly possible to correlate cognitive and affective experience of self with neural processes. A goal of this ongoing research is to provide grounding and insight into the elements of which the complex multiply situated selves of human identity are composed. The 'Disorders of the Self' have also been extensively studied by psychiatrists.[5]

For example, facial and pattern recognition take large amounts of brain processing capacity but pareidolia cannot explain many constructs of self for cases of disorder, such as schizophrenia or schizo-affective disorder.

One’s sense of self can be changed if they become part of a group that they consider stigmatized. According to Cox, Abramson, Devine, and Hollon (2012), if an individual has prejudice against a certain group, like the elderly and then later becomes part of this group this prejudice can be turned inward causing depression (i.e. deprejudice).[6]

The philosophy of a disordered self, such as in schizophrenia, is described in terms of what the psychiatrist understands are actual events in terms of neuron excitation but are delusions nonetheless, and the schizo-affective or schizophrenic person also believes are actual events in terms of essential being. PET scans have shown that auditory stimulation is processed in certain areas of the brain, and imagined similar events are processed in adjacent areas, but hallucinations are processed in the same areas as actual stimulation. In such cases, external influences may be the source of consciousness and the person may or may not be responsible for "sharing" in the mind's process; and/or the events which occur, such as visions and auditory stimuli, may endure and be repeated often over hours, days, months or years—and the afflicted person may believe themselves to be in a state of rapture and/or possession.

Religion[edit]

Religious views on the self vary widely. The self is a complex and core subject in many forms of spirituality. Two types of self are commonly considered - the self that is the ego, also called the learned, superficial self of mind and body, an egoic creation, and the Self which is sometimes called the "True Self", the "Observing Self", or the "Witness".[7]

Human beings have a self—that is, they are able to look back on themselves as both subjects and objects in the universe. Ultimately, this brings questions about who we are and the nature of our own importance.[8] Traditions such as Buddhism see the attachment to self is an illusion that serves as the main cause of suffering and unhappiness.[9] Christianity makes a distinction between the true self and the false self, and sees the false self negatively, distorted through sin: 'The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?' (Jeremiah 17:9)

According to Marcia Cavell,[citation needed] identity comes from both political and religious views. He also identified exploration and commitment as interactive parts of identity formation, which includes religious identity. Erik Erikson compared faith with doubt and found that healthy adults take heed to their spiritual side.[10]

One description of spirituality is the self's search for "ultimate meaning" through an independent comprehension of the sacred. Spiritual identity appears when the symbolic religious and spiritual value of a culture is found by individuals in the setting of their own life. There can be different types of spiritual self because it is determined on one's life and experiences. Another definition of spiritual identity is " a persistent sense of self that addresses ultimate questions about the nature, purpose, and meaning of life, resulting in behaviors that are consonant with the individual’s core values." [10]

Culture[edit]

The self is constantly evolving due to the complexities of cultures and societies. Researchers have shown that the self is dependent on the culture that the self has been situated around. Several comparisons between western cultures versus eastern cultures show that their are cultural differences among the self and self-concept.The self can be redefined as a dynamic, responsive process that structures neural pathways according to past and present environments including material, social, and spiritual aspects (Self, Culture, & Society Class, 2015). Self-concept can be referred to as a product instead of a process like the self is represented as. Self-concept is a concept or belief that an individual has upon him/herself as a emotion, spiritual, and social being (Aronson,2002 ). Therefore, the self-concept is the idea of who I am, kind of like a self-reflection of one’s well being. For example the self-concept is anything you say about yourself. A society is a group of people who share a common belief or aspect of Self interacting toward the maintenance or betterment of the collective (Self, Culture, & Society Class, 2015). Culture consists of explicit and implicit patterns of historically derived and selected ideas and their embodiment in institutions, cognitive & social practices, and artifacts. Cultural systems may, on one hand, be considered as products of action, and on the other, as conditioning elements of further action (Kroeber & Kluckholn, 1963, p. 357). Therefore, the following sections will explore how the self and self-concept can be changed due to different cultures.

As children, teenagers, and young adults grow up society tells these individuals to “Be yourself”. But this may mean something completely different for individuals who live in different cultures. The way an individual construct themselves may be different due to their culture (Kanagawa, 2001). a western culture self is usually seen as abstract, private, individual, sand separates themselves from the rest of the group. Where as an eastern culture self might be presented as open and flexible (Kanagawa, 2001). The self relies on the environment and culture it is put in. The self evolves and is constantly changing to the environment so that it is not threatened. Therefore, researcher wanted to study the differences between cultures and see if individual’s conceptual selves change due to their culture and environment.

Researcher Kanagawa and Heine’s have studied participants who lived in western and eastern cultures. Throughout the study the researchers concluded that western cultures such as North America and West European cultures are more independent cultures (Heine & Lehman,1992). The individuals in the western society tend to look only for positive attributes and strive for goals that will put them ahead of others. Western cultures are more goal oriented for individualism, instead of being more collective for the group to advance ahead. This is due to the culture that westerners instills, the whole culture concept is to out beat another individual to advance their own well being (Kanagawa, 2001). The independent cultures create selves and self-concepts to worry about their own individual thoughts and feelings (Heine & Lehman,1992). Where as eastern cultures such as Japan, Asian, Africa, Latin American, and South Europe cultures are interdependent culture (Heine & Lehman,1992). The culture is very different in eastern cultures because their culture is based on the collective, instead of focusing on one individual. For instance, Japanese culture focuses heavily on self-criticism and trying improve themselves to become better individual’s (Kanagawa, 2001). They really depend on negative feedback and aspects of themselves so that they can advance and help the entire culture and society. The whole goal is to maintain harmony and balance within society (Kanagawa, 2001). Therefore, Japan’s conceptual self is very different to western culture due to the environment and standards that each culture upholds. Eastern cultures are represented as interdependent because they only think and feel for others instead of thinking about themselves (Heine & Lehman,1992). In addition, the studies that these researchers have conducted show an important relationship between the self and how cultures can play a major role in shaping the self and self-concept.

Furthermore, the self is shaped by our social interactions and our physical environments. An Individuals social interactions occurs when they’re in a specific society or culture. If these individuals grow up in a certain culture they’re going to conform to societal norms and pressures to follow a specific standard that their culture believes in. This is why culture is important to study and explore when searching how the self evolves and changes. To conclude, western cultures are more self absorbed in their own lives where as eastern cultures are less self absorbed because they cherish the collective. The self is dynamic and complex and it will change or conform to whatever social influence it is exposed to. The main reason why the self is constantly dynamic is because it always looks for reason to not be harm. The self in any culture looks out for it’s well being and will avoid as much threat as possible. This can be explained through evolutionary psychology concept called survival of the fittest.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ James,W. (1891). The Principles of Psychology, Vol.1. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1890)
  2. ^ Sedikides, C. & Spencer, S. J. (Eds.) (2007). The Self. New York: Psychology Press
  3. ^ Conway MA, Pleydell-Pearce CW. (2000). The construction of autobiographical memories in the self-memory system. Psychol Rev. 107(2):261-88. PMID 10789197
  4. ^ Rathbone CJ, Moulin CJ, Conway MA. (2009). Autobiographical memory and amnesia: Using conceptual knowledge to ground the self. Neurocase. 21:1-14. PMID 19382038
  5. ^ Berrios G.E. & Marková I.S. (2003) The self in psychiatry: a conceptual history. In Kircher T & David A. (eds) The Self in Neurosciences and Psychiatry. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp9-39
  6. ^ Cox, William T. L.; Abramson, Lyn Y.; Devine, Patricia G.; Hollon, Steven D. (2012). "Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Depression: The Integrated Perspective". Perspectives on Psychological Science 7 (5): 427–449. doi:10.1177/1745691612455204. 
  7. ^ Hall, Manly P. Self Unfoldment by Disciplines of Realization. Los Angeles, California: The Philosophical Research Society, Inc. 1942. page 115 "On rare occasions we glimpse for an instant the tremendous implication of the Self, and we become aware that the personality is indeed merely a shadow of the real."
  8. ^ Charon, Joel M. Ten Questions: A Sociological Perspective. 5th edition. Thomson & Wadsworth. pg. 260
  9. ^ "The concept "self" and "person" in buddhism and in western psychology". NY:Columbia University Press. 2001. Retrieved 2001. 
  10. ^ a b Kiesling, Chris; Montgomery, Marylin; Sorell, Gwendolyn; Colwell, Ronald. "Identity and Spirituality: A Psychosocial Exploration of the Sense of Spiritual Self"

Further reading[edit]

References for Cultural Differences on the Self[edit]

Aronson,E. (2002). The Social Animal. Worth Publishers. Retrieved from: http://moodle.questu.ca/moodle/pluginfile.php/54/mod_resource/content/0/The-Social-Animal-Aronson-English.pdf

Kanagawa,C.,Cross,S.Markus,HR. (2001). “Who Am I?” The Cultural Psychology of the conceptual Self. Sage Publication. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Retrieved from: http://www.sagepub.com/dimensionsofmulticulturalcounselingstudy/articles/section1/Article32.pdf

Self, Culture, & Society Class. (2015). Definition of Self and Society. Quest University Canada.

Heine,S.,Lehman,D.(1992). The Effects of Culture on Self-Implicated Proccesses: A Comparison of Canadians and Japanese. University of British Columbia. Retrieved from: www2.psych.ubc.ca/ ~heine/docs/otopaper.rtf

Kroeber, Alfred L. and Kluckhohn, C. (1963). Culture: A critical review of concepts and Definitions. New York. Vintage.