Lesson 2. Sociology witnesses which did not happen to you.

A true given
self is not what unites these experiences, but it is
The social aspect of the self is explored in many ways, presumed unity of these experiences that gave rise to
in which social situation influence one’s view of self. a concept of the self.
The self is not created in isolation, and people are not 1.3 Post-modern View of the Self
born with perception of oneself as good in sports,
make-up artistry, dancing, or business. Such Self is a narrative, a text written and rewritten.
perceptions are identified through observations, or Self is a story. It is dynamic. Self is a product of
interactions with other people. “Am I beautiful?” “ Do modern discourse that is historically and socially
my eyebrow look like Liza Soberano na?” These imprisoned by what is acceptable by norms, etc. self in
questions can be answered by looking at those people post modernity is complicated by electronic mediated
around. The self has meaning only within the social virtual interaction of cyber self such as change in
context, and it is wrong to say that the social situation appearance ( in the cyberspace). According to N.
defines our self-concept and our self-esteem. We rely Green, self is “digitalized” in cyberspace, a virtual
on others to provide a “social reality”- to help us version of who we are. The self is seen in websites or
determine what to think, feel, and do (Hardin & social media- face book, twitter, instagram, etc.
Higgins, 1996). The following are the manifestation:

1. SOCIOLOGICAL VIEWS OF THE SELF 1. information technology dislocates the self,

thus, self is “digitalized” in cyberspace
1.1 The Self as Product of Modern Society 2. Global migration produces multicultural
Among Others identities.
3. Post-modern selves are “pluralized” selves
With modernization, the self becomes a
“delocalized” self which is free to seek its own identity; Social Construction of the Self
defining religion, theological tradition; free from
customary constraints hence, deviating from the Self is not discovered; it is made through the
traditional way of life. Stability one’s self-identity is no socialization process. BUT, individual are not just
longer based on pre-given traditional broad definition hapless victims of socialization. The individual is an
of the self. active strategizing agent that negotiates for the
Clifford Geertz (1973) believes that the definition of himself. (Ikaw ang gumagawa ng kung
struggle for ones individuality is only possible in ano ka”) self is acquired socially through language, like
modern society where religio-theological traditions are symbols. We construct ourselves based on our social
gradually replaced by rational and scientific roles through socialization agents – family, school,
calculations; and the intimate personal affiliations are community, etc.
replaced by urbanized way of life. Modernization or the 1.4 Rewriting the Self as an Artistic Creation
destruction of the traditional way of life “delocalizes”
Nietzsche states that the unity of the self is not pre-
the self. This poses certain
given but accomplished through conscious effort –
Problem as:
transform self through beautiful work art. Individual
1. The newfound freedom threatens the very must fashion, care for and cultivate themselves. We
authenticity of the self (e.g. love). can recreate ourselves to get hold of the present,
2. Alienation (Marx) – human beings haunted forgive the past and plan the future.
by the very images they have created Rorty: contingencies of selfhood – conceal the
3. Objectification of the body’s ( e.g. medical “ugly” reinterpreting the overall aesthetic contours of
practice) the self. This does not mean that by rewriting narrative
4. dehumanization of self of herself she will discover something deep about
Solution: for the individual to discover the “true” and herself… redescribing one’s self is just a way of
“authentic” part of himself/herself to realize his/her reinterpreting and redescribing one’s past.
potentials, there is a need to abolish repressive social 1.5 Self Creation and Collective Identity
constraints.
Memories (photographs, video) play significant
1.2 Self as Necessary fiction
role in creating the self and identity. Memory and
Self for Nietzsche, is the sum of individual’s forgetting are most important in recreating a
action, thoughts and feelings. Self is nothing more than person’s identity. Such memories of the past include
a metaphor, a representation of something abstract; pain, triumph, etc. Such experience of the past can be
symbolic. It is possible for us to remember something linked with social transformation.
even if we have not experienced it. Self has continuity Another important aspect of this view of self is
even if it is only in memory i.e, either heard or that creation is formed within “imagined communities”.
Selves obtain their nature from cultural traditions which the community exercises control over the
embodied in various social institutions. These are conduct of its individual members.
preserved in a collective narrative which becomes the The “I” is the response to the “me”, or the
reservoir for the project of self-creation. Self creation person’s individually. It is essence of agency in human
along cultural lines must be done in maximum cultural action. So, in effect, the “ me” is the self as object,
recognition of differences among and between while the “I” is the self as subject (Crossman, 2017).
individual and cultural groups. In other words, the “I” is the responses of an
1.6 Self Creation and the struggle for cultural individual to the attitudes of others while the “me” is
recognition the organized set of attitudes of others which an
individual assumes. The “me” is the accumulated
This is a challenge of self-identity amidst understanding of the “generalized other,” i.e how one
recognition of racial and ethnic identities. Self creation thinks one’s group perceives oneself. The “I” is the
is necessarily grounded on collective solidarities. We individual’s impulses. The “I” is self as subject; the
create ourselves by struggling with cultural hassles “me” is self as object. The “I” is the knower , the “me”
then owning the created self. We hide the ugly part of is the known. The mind, or stream of thought, is the
our cultural nature. We learn to adjust. self-reflective movements of the interaction between
Beyond Self Creation the “I” and the “me” these dynamics go beyond
selfhood in a narrow sense, and from the basis of a
The quest or search for self-identity is a
theory of human cognition. For Mead the thinking
product of modern society but this is complicated by
process is the internalized dialogue between the “I”
the socio-cultural sensibilities of postmodernity, new
and the “me”
information technologies and globalization,
Understood as a combination of the “I” and the
reconfiguring ourselves as to gender, sex, ethnicity,
“me”, Mead’s self proves to be noticeably entwined
and creating one’s style, signature.
within a sociological existence. For Mead, existence in
Yet the project of self creation is embedded
a community comes before individual consciousness.
within imagined communities. The self constantly live
First one must participate in the different social
in this paradox: to pursue self creation pre-given, not
positions within society and only subsequently can one
willfully chosen social circumstances.
use that experience to take the perspective of others
and become self-conscious (Boundless, 2016).
2. Mead’s Theory of Self 2.1 Mead’s Three Stages of Development of Self
George Herbert Mead (1863-1931) is an Stage 1: The Preparatory Stage
American sociologist best known as a founder of
American pragmatism, a pioneer of symbolic The first stage is the preparatory stage. The
interaction theory, and as one of the founder of social preparatory stage starts from the time we are born until
psychology. we are about age two. In this stage, children mimic
Mead’s theory of the self maintains that the (imitate) those around them. This is why parents of
conception a person holds of himself/herself in his/her young children typically do not want you to use foul
mind emerges from social interaction with others. This language around them (Rath,2016). If a two-year-old
is, in effect, a theory and argument against biological child can “read” what he or she has most likely done is
determinism because it holds that the self is neither memorized the book that had been read to him or her.
initially there at birth nor necessarily at the beginning In a noontime TV show, Vic Sotto, Allan K., Jose
of a social interaction, but is constructed and re- Manalo, use quite foul language like “bwisit” “bastos”
constructed in the process of social experience and “siraulo” and so is the language of a child who hears
activity. them. Does he or she idea of what he/she is saying or
The self, according to Mead, is made of two doing? No. He/She is mimicking. He/She is in the
components: the “I” and the “me”. The “me” represents preparatory stage. If he/she had been an older child,
the expectations and attitudes of others (the the scenes in the segments of the show would cease
“generalized other”) organized into a social self. The to have any humor. It works because he/she doesn’t
individual defines his or her own behavior with understand the meaning behind his/her words, actions,
reference to the generalized attitude of the social or tone of voice.
group(s) he/she occupies. When the individual can Stage 2: The Play Stage
view himself or herself from the standpoints of the
generalized other, self- consciousness in the full sense From about age two to six, children are in the
of the term is attained. From this standpoint, the play stage. During the play stage children play pretend
generalized other (internalized in the “me”) is the major and do not adhere to the rules in organized games like
instruments of social control, for it is the mechanism by patintero or basketball (Rath,2016). Playing a game
with children of this age is far easier to just go will any
“rules” they come up with during the course of the
game than trying to enforce any “rules” upon them. is when those expectations start to become self-
Playing the never-ending Chinese garter with girls still fulfilling prophecies, and our self-concept and even our
do not actually have one specific set of rules the same behavior start to align with them. For example, when
as last time played, and yet they still play the game children are labeled in special education context, these
while adhering to these rules. During this stage, labels can then impact their self-esteem (Taylor,
children play “pretend” as the significant other. This Hume, & Welsh, 2012).
means that when they play “bahay-bahayan”, they are If we are repeatedly labeled and evaluated by
literally pretend to be the mommy or the daddy that others, then self-labeling may occur which happens
they know. when we adopt others’ labels explicitly into our self-
Stage 3: The Game Stage concepts. The effects of this self-labeling on our self-
esteem appear to depend very much on the nature of
The third stage is the game stage, which is the labels. Labels used in relation to diagnosis of
from about seven onwards. In this stage, children can psychological disorder can be detrimental to people
begin to understand and adhere to the rules of games. who then internalize them. For example, Moses (2009)
They can begin to play more formalized games found that adolescents who self-labeled according to
because they begin to understand other people’s diagnoses they had received were found to have
perspective- or the perspective of the generalized higher levels of self-stigma in their self-concepts
other. In this stage, when children play “pretend” they compared with those who described their challenges in
may still play “bahay-bahayan”, but are pretending to a non-pathological terms. In these types of situation,
mommy or a daddy independent of the one that those who self-label may come to experience
resides in their home. The generalized other refers to internalized prejudice, which occurs when individuals
the viewpoint of the social group at large. The child turn prejudice directed toward them by others onto
begins taking this perspective into account during this themselves. Internalized adjustment in members of
stage (Rath 2016). various groups, including sexual minorities
(Carter,2012) and racial minorities ( Szymanski &
Obiri, 2011).
2.2 The Looking-Glass self: Our Sense of Self is
In other cases, labels used by wider society to
Influence by Others ‘Views of Us
describe people negatively can be positively reclaimed
The concept of the looking –glass self states by those being labeled. Galinsky and colleagues
that part of how we see ourselves comes from our (2013) explored this use of self-labeling by ,members
perception of how others see us (Cooley, 1902). of oppressed groups to reclaim derogatory terms,
According to the American sociologist Charles including “queer” and “bitch” used by dominant groups.
Horton Cooley (1864-1929), the degree of personal After self-labeling, minority group members evaluated
insecurity you display in social situations is determined these terms less negatively, reported feeling more
by what you believe other people think of you. powerful, and were also perceived by observers as
Cooley’s concepts of the looking glass self, states that more powerful. Overall, these results indicate that
a person’s self grows out of a person’s social individual who incorporate a formerly negative label
interactions with others. The view of ourselves comes into their self-concept in order to reclaim it can
from the contemplation of personal qualities and sometimes undermine the stigma attached to the label.
impressions of how others perceive us. Actually, how 2.3 Social Comparison Theory: Our Sense of Self
we see ourselves does not come from who we really Is Influenced by Comparison with Others.
are, but rather from how we believe others see us
Self-concept and self-esteem are also heavily
(Isaksen,2013).
influenced by the process of social comparison
Sometimes, the influence of other people’s
(Buunk & Gibbons, 2007; Van Lange, 2008). Social
appraisals of ourselves on our self-concepts may be
comparison occurs when we learn about our abilities
so strong that we end up eternalizing them. For
and skills, about the appropriates and validity of our
example, we are often labeled in particularly ways by
opinions, and about our relative social status by
others, perhaps informally in terms of our ethnic
comparing our own attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors
bacwkground, or more formally in terms of a physical
with those of others. These comparisons can be with
or psychological diagnosis. The labeling bias occurs
people who we know and interact with, with those
when we are labeled, and other’s views and
whom we read about or see on TV, or with anyone
expectations of us are affected by that labeling (Fox &
else we view as important. However, the most
Stinnett, 1996). For example, if a teacher knows that a
meaningful comparisons we make tend to be with
child has been diagnosed with a particular
those we see as similar to ourselves (Festinger, 1954).
psychological disorder, that teacher may have different
Social comparison occurs primarily on
expectations and explanations of the child’s behavior
dimensions on which there is no correct answer or
than he or she would if not aware of that label. Where
objective benchmark and thus on which we can rely
things get really interesting for our present discussion
only on the beliefs of others for information. Answers
to questions such as “what should I wear to the
interview?” or what kind of music should I have at my
wedding?” are frequently determined at least in part by
using the behavior of others as a basis of comparison.
We also use social comparison to help us determine
our skills or abilities – how good we are at performing
a task or doing a job, for example. When students ask
their teacher for the class average on an exam, they
are also seeking to use social comparison to evaluate
their performance.