GENSANTOS FOUNDATION, INC

COLLEGE

Self-Learning Module

Understanding the Self

Prepared by: Felmar P. Claver, MaEd
 LESSON 2: THE SELF, SOCIETY AND CULTURE

SELF
- In contemporary literature and even common sense, is commonly defined by the following
characteristics:
 Separate, self-contained, independent, consistent, unitary and private
-it is meant that the self is distinct from other selves
-the self is always unique and has its own identity.
-one cannot be another person. Even twins are distinct from each other.
 Self is also self-contained and independent because in itself it can exist.
-its distinctness allows it to be self-contained with its own thoughts, characteristics, and volition.
-it does not require any other self for it to exist.
-it is consistent because it has a personality that is enduring and therefore can be expected to
persist for quite some time. Its consistency allows it to be studied, described and measured.
-Consistency also means that a particular self’s traits, characteristics, tendencies and
potentialities are more or less the same.
 The self is private
-each person sorts out information, feelings and emotions and thought processes within the
self. This whole process is never accessible to anyone but the self.
-suggests that the self is isolated from the external world. It lives within its world. However, we
also see that this potential clash between the self and the external reality is the reason for the
self to have a clear understanding of what it might be, what it can be, and what it will be.

The concern then of this lesson is in understanding the vibrant relationship between the self and external
reality. This perspective is known as the social constructionist perspective.
Social constructionist/constructivist
- Argue for a merged view of the person and their social context where the boundaries of one cannot
easily be separated from the boundaries of the other.
- Argue that the self should not be seen as a static entity that stays constant through and through. Rather,
the self has to be seen as something that is in unceasing flux in a constant struggle with external reality
and is malleable in its dealings with society. The self is always in participation with social life and its
identity subjected to influences here and there.

We ourselves play different roles, act in different ways depending on our circumstances. The self is capable of
morphing and fitting itself into any circumstances it finds itself in.

THE SELF AND CULTURE

Remaining the same person and turning chameleon by adapting to one’s context seems paradoxical. However,
the French Anthropologist Marcel Mauss has an explanation for this phenomenon. According to Mauss, every
self has two faces:
1. Personne
-is composed of the social concepts of what it means to be who he is.
- has much to do with what it means to live in a particular institution, a particular family, a particular
religion, a particular nationality and how to behave given expectations and influences from others.
2. Moi
- refers to a person’s sense of who he is, his body, and his basic identity, his biological givenness.
-is a person’s basic identity.
Language
-is another interesting aspect of social constructivism.
-it has something to do with culture. It is salient part of culture and ultimately, has a tremendous effect in our
crafting of the self.
-This might also be one of the reasons why cultural divide spells out differences in how one regards oneself.
-in one research it is found that North Americans are more likely to attribute being unique to themselves and
claim that they are better than most people in doing what the love doing. Japanese people on the other hand,
have been seen to display a degree of modesty. If one finds himself born and reared in a particular culture, one
definitely tries to fit in a particular mold.

*If self is born into a particular society or culture, the self will have to adjust according to its exposure.
The Self and the Development of the Social World

How do children growing up become social beings? How do twins coming out from the same mother turn out to
be terribly different when given up for adoption?

More than his givenness (personality, tendencies, and propensities, among others), one is believed to be in
active participation in the shaping of the self. Recent studies, however indicate that men and women in their
growth and development engage actively in the shaping of the self. The unending terrain of metamorphosis of
the self is mediated by language. Language as both a publicly shared and privately utilized symbol system is the
site where the individual and the social make and remake each other.

Mead and Vygotsky

For them, the way that human persons develop is with the use of language acquisition and interaction with
others. The way that we process information is normally a form of an internal dialogue in our head. Those who
deliberate about moral dilemmas undergo this internal dialog. “Should I do this or that?” “But if I do this, it will
be like this.” “Don’t I want the other option?” And so cognitive and emotional development of a child is always a
mimicry of how it is done in the social world, in the external reality where he is in.

Both of them treat the human mind as something that is made constituted through language as experienced in
the external world and as encountered in dialogs with others.

For Mead, this takes place as a child assumes the “other” through language and role-play. A child conceptualizes
his notion of “self” through this. Can you notice how little children are fond of playing role-play with their toys?
How they make scripts and dialogs for their toys as they play with them? According to Mead, it is through this
that a child delineates the “I” from the rest.

Vygotsky, for his part, a child internalizes real-life dialogs that he has had with others, with his family, his
primary caregiver, or his playmates. They apply this to their mental and practical problems along with the social
and cultural infusions brought about by the said dialogs. Can you notice how children eventually become what
they watch? How children can easily adapt ways of cartoon characters they are exposed to?

Self in Families

Apart from the anthropological and psychological basis for the relationship between the self and the social
world, the sociological likewise struggled to understand the real connections between the two concepts. In
doing so, sociologists focus on the different institutions and powers at play in the society. Among these, the
most prominent is the family.

While every child is born with certain givenness, disposition coming from his parents’ genes and general
condition of life, the impact of one’s family is still deemed as a given in understanding the self. The kind of
family that we are born in, the resources, available to us (human, spiritual, economic), and the kind of
development that we will have will certainly affect us as we go through life.

Human persons learn the ways of living and therefore their selfhood by being in a family. It is what a family
initiates a person to become that serves as the basis for this person’s progress. Babies internalize ways and
styles that they observe from their family.

Without a family, biologically and sociologically, a person may not even survive or become a human person. One
is who he is because of his family for the most part.

Gender and the Self

Another important aspect of the self is gender. Gender is one of those loci of the self that is subject to
alteration, change, and development. We have seen in the past years how people fought hard for the right to
express, validate, and assert their gender expression. Many conservatives may frown upon this and insist on the
biological. However, from the point-of-view of the social sciences and the self, it is important to give one the
leeway to find, express, and live his identity. This forms parts of selfhood that one cannot just dismiss. One
maneuvers into the society and identifies himself as who he is by also taking note of gender identities.
Oftentimes, society forces a particular identity unto us depending on our sex and/or gender. In the Philippines,
husbands for the most part are expected to provide for the family. The eldest man in a family is expected to
head the family and hold it in. Slight modifications have been on the way due to feminism and lesbian, gay,
bisexual and transgender (LGBT) activism but for the most part, patriarch has remained to be at work.

Nancy Chodorow
-a feminist, argues that because mothers take the role of taking care of children, there is a tendency for girls to
imitate the same and reproduce the same kind of mentality of women as care providers in the family.

The gendered self is then shaped within a particular context of time and space. The sense of self that is being
taught makes sure that an individual fits in a particular environment. This is dangerous and detrimental in the
goal of truly finding one’s self, self-determination, and growth of the self. Gender has to be personally
discovered and asserted and not dictated by culture and the society.

Reference:

Jones, M., & Araje, L. (2002). The Impact of Constructivism on Education: Language, Discourse, and Meaning.
American Communication Journal, 5(3).