Lesson 2: The

Self, Society,
and Culture
Introduction
Across the time and history, the self has been
debated, discussed, and fruitfully or otherwise
conceptualized by different thinkers in philosophy.
Eventually with the advent of the social sciences, it
became possible for new ways and paradigms to
reexamine the true nature of the self. Thinkers just
eventually got tired of focusing on the long-standing
debate since sixth century BC between he relationship of
body and soul, which eventually renamed body and the
mind.
Thinkers just settled on the idea that there are two
components of the human person and whatever
relationships these two have is less important than the fact
that there is a self. Given the new ways of knowing the
growth of the social sciences, it became possible for new
approaches to the examination of the self to come to the
fore. One of the loci, if not the most important axis of
analysis is the relationship between the self and external
world.
 What is Self?
Self in contemporary literature and even common
sense, is commonly defined by the following
characteristics: “separate, self-contained, independent,
consistent, unitary, and private” (Stevens 1996). By
separate, it is meant that the self is distinct from other
selves. The self is always unique and has its own
identity. Self is also self-contained and independent
because in itself it can exist.
On the other side, it is consistent because it has a
personality that is enduring and therefore can be
expected to persist for quiet some time. Its
consistency allows it to be studied, described , and
measured. Self is unitary in that it is the center of
all experiences and thoughts that run through a
certain person. Lastly, the self is private. Each
person sorts out information, feelings and
emotions, and thought processes within self. The
whole process is never accessible to anyone but
self.
 The Self and Culture
Remaining the same person turning chameleon by
adapting to one’s contact seems paradoxical. According to
Mauss, every self has two faces: personne and moi. Moi refers to
a person’s sense of who he is, his body, and his basic identity.,
his biological givenness. Personne, on the other hand, is
composed of the social concepts of what it means to be who he
is. Personne 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.
In the Philippines, Filipinos tend to consider their
territory as a part of who they are. This includes
considering their immediate surrounding as a part
of them, thus the perennial “tapat ko, linis ko.”
Filipino most probably do not consider national
roads as something external to who they are. It is a
part of them and they are part of it, thus crossing
the road whenever and wherever becomes no-
brainer.
 Language is another interesting aspect of social
constructivism. Filipino language is incredibly interesting
to talk about. The way by which we articulate our love is
denoted by the phrase, “ Mahal kita.” This of course, is
the Filipino transition of “ I love you.” There is simply a
word for love, mahal , and the pronoun kita, which is a
second person pronoun that refers to the speaker and the
one being talked to. In the Filipino language, unlike in
English, there is no distinction between the lover and the
beloved. They are one.
 Another interesting facet of our language is its
being gender-neutral. In English, Spanish, and other
languages, the distinction is clear between a third
person male and third person female pronoun. Our
language does not specify between male and female.
We both call it “siya.” So we have seen how language
has something to do with culture. It is a salient part of
culture and ultimately, has tremendous effect in our
crafting of the self. This might also be one of the
reason why cultural divide spells out differences in
how one regards oneself.
The Self and the Development of
the Social World
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 medicated by
language.
 For Mead and Vygotsky, the way that human persons
develop is with the use of language acquisition and
interaction with others. Both of them treat human mind as
something that is made, constituted through language as
experienced in the external world and as encountered in
dialogs with others. A young child internalizes values,
norms, practices, and social beliefs and more through
exposure to these dialogs that will eventually become part
of his individual world. For Mead, this takes place as a
child assumes the “other” through language and role-play.
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.
Self in Families
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 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 trough life. As a matter of evolutionary fact,
human persons are one of those beings whose
importance of family cannot be denied.
 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. So those who
develop and eventually grow to become adult who did
not learn simple matters like basic manners of
conduct failed in internalizing due to parental or
familial failure to initiate them into the world.
Without family, biologically and sociologically,
a person may not even survive or become human
person.
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.
Form 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. One
maneuvers in the society and identifies himself as
who is by also taking note of gender and
identities.
 In the Philippines, husband for the most part are
expected to provide for the family. The eldest man in a
family 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 for the most part, patriarchy has
remained to be at work. A feminist argues that because
mother take the role of taking care of children, there is
a tendency for girls to imitate the same as care
providers in the family. Men on the other hand, in the
periphery of their own family, are taught early on how
to behave like a man.
 The gendered self is then shaped within
particular context of times and space. Gender
has to be personally discovered and asserted and
not dictated by culture and the society.