lOMoARcPSD|52621560

lOMoARcPSD|52621560

UNIT I : THE SELF FROM VARIOUS PERSPECTIVE

INTRODUCTION
“THE GOOD LIFE IS PROCESS, NOT A STATE OF BEING . IT IS A DIRECTION , NOT A
DESTINATION.”CARL ROGER.

PHILOSOPHICAL PERSPECTIVE

“To find yourself, think for yourself -Socrates

PHILOSOPHERS PERSPECTIVE OF THE SELF

The way you choose to spend your life contributes to the development of your identity and self
understanding. Your past is a contributory factor to who you are today, but who you will be
tomorrow greatly depends on your perspective about yourself.

1. SOCRATES (470-399 B.C)

He explored his philosophy of immortality in the days following his trial and before his sentence
to death was executed.
According to him, an unexamined life is not worth living .This statement is reflected in his idea
of the self.
He believed in dualism that aside from the physical body (material substance). each person has
an immortal soul(immaterial substance).
The body belongs to the physical realm and the soul to the ideal realm. When you dir your body
dies but not your soul There is a life after the death of your physical body There is a world after
death
According to him, in order for you to have a good life, you must live a good life, a life with a
purpose, and that purpose is for you to do well. Then there you will be happy after your body
dies .

2.PLATO (428/427-348/347 BC)

He was greatly affected by Socrates death Socrates was Plato’s teacher He believed that the self
is immortal and it consists of 3 parts:
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

a. Reason- the divine essence that enables you to think deeply, make wise choices and achieve
an understanding of eternal truths;
b. Physical Appetite - your basic biological needs such as hunger, thirst, and sexual desire and;
c. Spirit or Passion-your basic emotions aggressiveness, and empathy. love, anger, ambition
The 3 components may work together e a conflict If human beings do not live in accordance
with their nature/function, the result will be an injustice.

3. ST. AUGUSTINE (354-430)

He was a great explorer m his youth and young adulthood, he spent great times with his
friends and up to the extent of fathering an illegitimate child. His explorations led to his
conversion to Christianity wherein he spent the remainder of his day serving the bishop of
Hippo and writing books and letters including his idea of the self. At first, he thought the
body as the “slave” of the soul but ultimately, regarded the body as the “spouse” of the soul
both attached to one another. He believed that the body is united with the soul, so that
man may be entire and complete. His first principle was, “I doubt, therefore I am.”
The self seeks to be united with God through faith and reason and he described that humanity
is created in the image and likeness of God, that God is supreme and all-knowing and everything
created by God who is all good is good.

4. RENE DESCARTES (1596-1650)

Descartes was a scientist in his professional life and during his time, scientists believed that after
death the physical body dies, hence the self also dies.
He was a devout Catholic who believed in the immortal souls and eternal life. By having the idea
of both the thinking self and the physical body, Descartes was able to reconcile his being a
scientist and a devout Catholic.
The self is a thinking thing, distinct from the body. The thinking self or soul is nonmaterial,
immortal, conscious while the physical body is material mortal, non-thinking entity, fully
governed by the physical laws of nature.
"Cogito ergo sum" (I think, therefore I Am) is the keystone to his concept of the T self. The
essence of existing as a human identity is the possibility of being aware of oneself.

5. JOHN LOCKE (1634-1704)

The intolerant and charged atmosphere in England kept Locke to stay abroad. and freedom from
political intrigues and duties allowed him to develop his philosophy.

)
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

According to Locke, the human mind at birth is a tabula rasa ("blank slate). The self or personal
identity is constructed primarily from sense experiences which shape and mold the self
throughout a person’s life.
Personal identity is made possible by self-consciousness. In order to discover the nature of
personal identity, you to have to find out what it means to be a person A person is a thinking,
intelligent being who has abilities to reason and to reflect A person is also someone who
considers itself to be the same thing at different times and different places.
Consciousness means being aware that you are thinking, this what makes your belief possible
that you are the same identity at different times and in different places. The essence of the self
is its conscious awareness of itself as thinking reasoning, reflecting identity.

6. DAVID HUME (1711-1776)

He left the University of Edinburg at the age of 15, to study privately. Although he was
encouraged to take up law, his interest was philosophy. It is during his private study that he
began raising questions about religion.
For him, there is no "self"" only a bundle of perceptions passing through the theatre of your
minds.
According to him, humans are so desperately wanting to believe that they have a unified and
continuous self or soul that they use their imaginations to construct a fictional self. The mind is
a theatre, a container for fleeting sensations and disconnected ideas and your reasoning ability
is merely a slave to the passions. Hence, personal identity is just a result of imagination.

7. IMMANUEL KANT(1724-1804)
Although Kant recognizes the legitimacy in Hume’s account, he opposes the idea of Hume that
everything starts with perception and sensation of impressions, that’s why he brought out the
idea of the self as a response against the idea of Hume.
For Kant , there is unavoidably a mind that systematizes the impressions that men get from the
external world
Therefore, Kant believed that the self is a product of reason because the self regulates
experience by making unified experience possible.
We construct the self. The self exists independently of experience and the self goes beyond
experience.
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

8. SIGMUND FREUD(1856-1939)
Freud develops his theories during a period in which he experienced heart irregularities,
disturbing dreams and periods of depression He read William Shakespeare in English
throughout his Life
Based on him, the self is composed of three layers, conscious, preconscious and unconscious.
The conscious mind includes thoughts, feelings, and actions that you are currently aware of, the
preconscious and includes mental activities that are stored in our memory not presently active
but can be accessed or recalled while.
The conscious mind includes thoughts feelings, and actions that you e currently aware of, the
preconscious mind includes mental activities that are stored in your memory, not presently
active but can be accessed or recalled; while the unconscious mind includes activities that you
are not aware of
According to hun, there are thoughts, feelings, desires, and urges that the conscious mind wants
to hide, buried in your unconscious, but may shed light to your unexplained behavior.

9. GILBERT RYLE (1900-1976)

His father was a general practitioner but had a keen interest in philosophy and astronomy that
he passed it on to his children, they had an impressive library where Ryle enjoyed being an
omnivorous reader.
He graduated with first class honors in the New Modern Greats School of Philosophy, Politic, and
Economics
His concept of the self is provided in his philosophical statement, "I Act therefore I am." Ryle
views the self as the way people behave, which is composed of a set of patterned behavior.
Basically, for Ryle , the self is the same as your behavior.

10. PAUL CHURCHLAND (1942)

Churchland became a professor at the University of California where he later became the
department chair and member of the Cognitive Science Faculty, a member of the Institute for
Neural Computation His membership to these organizations prompted him to dwell on the brain
as the self.
Churchland’s theory is anchored in the statement, "the self is the brain. "The self is inseparable
from the brain and the physiological body because the physical brain gives the sense of self. In
short, the brain and the self are one. too.

)
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

Once the brain is dead , the self is dead too.

11. MAURICE MERLEAU-PONTY (1908-1961)

When he won the school’s "Award for Outstanding Achievement" in Philosophy it traced his
commitment to the vocation of Philosophy.
His concept. "the self has embodied subjectivity" explained that all your knowledge about
yourself and the world is based on your subjective experiences and everything that you are
aware of is contained in your consciousness medium for having a world.
For him, your body is your general medium for having a world.

SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE
Choose your self-presentations carefully, for what starts out as a mask may
become your face” – Erving Goffman

Sociology is the study of society, patterns of social relationships, social

interaction and culture of everyday life. Man is a social being, who is born into
existence in a community before he is able to know himself. Early in life, as children,
you become aware of your social nature. And it is through socialization that begins
in the family that you are exposed to behavior, social rules, and attitudes that lead
to social development. And it is through social institutions – family, school, church,
and the community you interact with every day, that will lead you to your deeper
understanding of your social identity – that of understanding your social self.

SOCIALIZING THE INDIVIDUAL

Personality Development- The concept of personality is a descriptive one. It describes
how an individual adapts to his or her cultural surroundings. Personality is the basic organization of
individuals that determines the uniqueness of their behavior.The basic organization refers to the
structure of the personality – how it is put together, and the relationships among the various parts.

It consists of the total physical, intellectual, and emotional structure of the individual. Each one is
unique. Your total personality structure will determine your particular way of behaving. Each one of
you has your own way of interacting with others and with your social environment.
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

Some Aspects of Personality

Physical characteristics – physical appearance is the most obvious part of an individual’s
personality. Are you short or tall, fat or thin, light or dark in complexion, black or brown hair, a
pointed or flat nose? These characteristics are inherited but can be altered by your culture. This
will be further discussed in the topic of the physical self as people make efforts to change their
appearance in order to fulfill the desired cultural values.

Abilities – are skills that are developed within the culture. For example, one may
develop ability in playing sepak takraw or football, to paint or do beadwork, to program
computers or use an abacus. Other than abilities, you have the capacity to learn skills,
or to acquire a particular body of knowledge – your aptitude. Aptitude is more related to
heredity, as abilities are always related to culture.

Interests – acquired from various kinds of things. You all differ in your interests. The
things that you become interested in depend on the cultural alternatives that are
available – and an awareness of your existence.

Beliefs – about yourself, your friends, nature, religion, work, etc. It also includes
attitudes, values, preferences, superstitions, prejudices, and knowledge. Some are
based on fact, others are not. But all beliefs are related to the culture and learned from
others in the society.

Habits – are regular, routine ways of thinking, feeling, or behaving. This can be
observed in ways of dressing, eating, interacting with others, and in your everyday
tasks. These are learned from others and help you distinguish one person’s behavior
from others. And almost all of your habits are related to your culture.

The Influence of Heredity and Environment

Heredity – characteristics that are innate, present at birth – physical characteristics,
like hair, skin, and eye color and body size. It is the transmitting of genetic
characteristics from your parents to you. We inherit basic needs and capacities. As
human beings, we have biological drives. Our hunger drive makes us want to eat. But

)
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

drives do not dictate our specific behavior. The hunger drive doesn’t tell us when, what,
or how to eat. You learn those things from other human beings within your culture.
Heredity gives you biological needs. Your culture determines how you meet
these needs. Heredity plays an important role in shaping human personalities
by setting limits on individuals. For example, if you were born with a five-foot
frame, you are not likely to become a professional basketball player. On the
other hand, it is not a guarantee that you’ll become one even if you are seven
feet tall. Inherited characteristics place limits on what is possible, but it will not
determine what you will do and what kind of personality you will have.

Birth order – your personality is also influenced by whether you have

brothers, sisters, both, or neither. Were you born first, last, or in
between? Do you have only sisters – or only brothers – or both? Think
about ways in which your own life situation could have been different,
and how your personality might have been affected by these factors.

Parents – another difference within the family that can influence a

person’s personality is the age of the parents. How might you be affected
by your parents’ age? Parents amount of education, religious beliefs,
ethnic backgrounds, economic/social status, occupations, and
communities in which they live, all contribute to the personality
development of an individual.

Subcultures – a subculture is a portion of a society that has enough

characteristics of its own to set it apart, and yet is included within the
general society. Identify a subculture different from your own. Imagine
growing up in it. What would your family life, interests, values, and beliefs
might be like? How might your personality be influenced?

The cultural environment – every culture is different. These cultural

differences affect your personality development. It is cultural environment
that makes individuals human. It makes you embrace your similarities
and celebrate your differences.
Research and few recorded evidences show that children or individuals
who were raised without the influence of a cultural environment resulted
to having no human characteristics except in their appearance. No
reasoning, no manners, no abilities even in controlling bodily functions or
to move like human beings. Your personality – our humanity – comes
from our cultural environment.
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

THE SOCIAL SELF

At birth, you cannot talk, walk, feed yourselves, or even protect yourself from harm. You know
nothing about the ways of your culture or society. Then, through interaction with other people
and your environment, you are developed into individuals who have knowledge of your culture–
you become participants of your society. This process of cultural molding, how individuals learn
the basic skills, values, beliefs, and behavior patterns of the society, is called socialization.

The Socialization Process

1. JOHN LOCKE (1632-1704)

John Locke was an English philosopher who insisted that

each newly born individual was a tabula rasa – or clean
slate, on which could be written just about anything. He
claimed that you are born without qualities. You develop
your personality as a result of your experiences. The basic
assumptions about socialization are related to Locke’s
views. Most sociologists think of socialization as a process
by which you absorb those aspects of your culture with
which you come into contact. Through the socialization
process, you develop your social self. The social self is the
way that you see yourselves as a result of interacting with https://oll.libertyfund.org/people/jo hn-locke
others. You begin to have a sense of your own self from
your daily interactions with other people.

2. CHARLES HORTON COOLEY (1864-1929)

Charles Horton Cooley was an American sociologist who developed the theory about
the social self. He observed that you only begin to have a sense of your own self – of
who you are and what you are like – after you notice how others see you.
According to Cooley, a newborn baby has no sense of person or place. Various people
– parents, brothers, sisters, other family members, and friends – interact with the baby.
These people as they relate to the baby provide the infant with a mirror that reflects the
infant’s image. The image reflected back is created during the interaction between the
baby and the other people. This

)
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

theory puts a great deal of responsibility on parents and others who have contact
with children. They contribute to the child’s sense of
ability or inability depending on the way they interact with
the child. He called his theory “the looking glass
theory”.Social interaction is a kind of looking glass that
reflects yourself back to you – but only after you are
interpreted by those with whom you interact. According to
Cooley, you are as other people see you. You can only
see yourselves only as others see you. And what they
see is what you are. You are continually changing your
personality as you adjust your self-image to the way you
are viewed by the rest of society. How do you react when
others see you differently from the way you see yourself?
How the Looking-Glass Self Works r

3.

3. GEORGE HERBERT MEAD (1863-1931)

According to George Herbert Mead, seeing
yourselves as others see you is only the beginning.
Eventually, you not only come to see yourselves as
others see you, but actually “take the role of the
other”. Mead believes that all of us come into contact
with two kinds of people – “significant others” – they
are from your earlier contacts; people who are most
important to you; they know you and love you for what
you are – parents, brothers and sisters, relatives, and
close friends; they are important to you because of
who they are, rather than just for what they can do for
you; and “generalized others”.
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

a) Significant others and the I-self – from these relationships you develop the I-
self. The I-self does not depend on your role or where you are. You may be in
class, in the mall shopping, with your friends, or working. You are something
more than what your role as a student, shopper, and so on indicates. It is
subjective, or personal, and entirely constant. You can act in a way that is not
expected of someone in your role because of your Iself.As you grow, you
begin to expand beyond the significant others of the family. When you were
kids, while playing the “bahay-bahayan”, you realize that one can take the
role of a mother or a father. At this point, you begin to realize that there is
more than one mother and one father.You see mothers and fathers as
“generalized others” – people or roles to whom you relate in a more abstract,
general way.

b) Generalized others and the me-self – in playing the game

“bahaybahayan”, each child takes on not only his or her own role, but also
the role of the other. The father must be able to play (in his head) the role of
mother as well. He must anticipate her responses and understand her duties
and expectations. Likewise, the mother also mentally plays the role of the
father. This can be seen in your role as a student, you relate to your teacher
by anticipating the kinds of responses your teacher is likely to make.Human
interaction and communication depend on the existence of many generalized
others. The me-self is directly related to a particular social situation. We have
many me-selves as the number of roles we occupy. It comes from our
continual interaction with our social environment. It is our objective social
identity.

The I-Self and the Me-Self

I-Self Me-Self
The result of your subjective, Comes from your objective,
private self (personal) social self
Self as subject Self as object
Self-expression Conformity
Subjective behavior, quite Objective behavior that is quite
constant predictable

)
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

How you act according to the

Your unique personal
rules and expectations of a
qualities, your individual
specific role in a given situation
impulses

To summarize, your personality is socially created, and develops through social

interaction. Each time you step into a social situation, you respond to your surroundings.
And you add to that your unique experiences. This combination produces your social
self.
ANTHROPOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE
“The main purpose of anthropology is to make the world safe for human
indifferences”
–
Ruth Benedict

Social scientists and anthropologists have long recognized the idea that people in different
parts of the world view themselves in different ways. These different ways of viewing one’s
self may be attributed to biological or genetic variants and partly to social or cultural
variation. Your racial category, family structure, ethnic affiliation, religious customs,
language, social beliefs and values, cultural expression and identification indubitably
contribute on your formation as a person, and accordingly, on your self-construal.
Etymologically, the word “anthropology” stemmed from two Greek words,
anthropos meaning man and logus meaning study or science. Thus,
anthropology is the science of man. It is concerned about the various aspects of
the human species, irrespective of time and place, from ancient to the
contemporary. Anthropologists are interested not only on how humans have
structurally evolved from their animal predecessors but also on how humans
transformed and into a culturally and socially adaptive beings. By taking a
closer look unto how we have metamorphosed physically and culturally, this unit
can help us explore what makes us uniquely different from other living
organisms. This topic on anthropological perspective about the self will be
finished in 3 hours.

THE SELF AND THE PERSON IN CONTEMPORARY ANTHROPOLOGY

These questions about human universals form part of the central themes of
anthropology since its inception as a scientific discipline.
In their book, Personality in Nature, Society and Culture, psychologist Henry
Murray and anthropologist Clyde Kluckhohn (1953) claimed that “Every man is in
certain respects like all other men, like some other men, and like no other man.”
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

This statement pictured how pre-contemporary and contemporary anthropology

viewed the human person. The pre-contemporary view of human nature
demonstrated sameness, invariability, and universality where man was regarded
as identical, constant, and general.
Humans, like all other species, are considered essentially the same regardless of
place and time. Thus, they are predictable and can be studied uniformly.
While recognizing the self as an unchanging entity, anthropologists also accept
its inherent variability. Contemporary anthropologists subscribe to a more holistic
approach in studying the self by looking unto human variety brought about by
variations across cultures and variations over time.

They suggest that the human person can be studied from many points of view. And that it’s
only when we study the full range of human phenomenon and consider the inescapable fact
that men are in many respects like no other man, can we genuinely appreciate human nature.
This calls for a more comprehensive and encompassing approach towards understanding the
human person. That is, taking into account all the physical, biological, psychological, social
and cultural elements that make up the self.
This pursuit towards a holistic appreciation of the human nature was supported scientifically.
For instance, Anthropology Professor Katherine Ewing as cited by Quinn’s (2006) The Self
asserted an integrative stance on the self by defining it as one that which “encompasses the
physical organism, possessing all aspects of psychological functioning, andsocial attributes”,
(1990:254). Even the neurobiologist Joseph LeDoux described the self as the totality of what
an organism is physically, biologically, psychologically, socially, and culturally. He further
claimed that though the self is a unit, it is not unitary” (2002: 31).
Considering then the totality of all the processes and elements that constitute the self and
the interrelationship between and amongst these remain to be fundamental in understanding
the human being.

The Concept of Culture

Cultural anthropology being one of the sub-disciplines of anthropology underscores the
concept of culture and its influence in shaping the self. By reflecting on your outputs in
the activity Festival of Cultures, you probably had a good grasp of what culture is and

)
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

what constitute it. You might have also realized how culture affects the way you
construe your personal identity. Culture is a broad construct which covers a wide range
of elements – from your clothing designs to your food preferences, the dialect you use
for communicating, the festivals you enjoy, the religious beliefs and customs you
observe, the set of values you conform to, or even the kinds of books you read, or the
jokes you crack – all these illuminate your way of life and all these elements form part of
the culture you were raised to. One of the most fundamental aspects of culture is
symbol. As people interact, they share a common set of symbols which represent their
identity. Cultural symbols aid in establishing the uniqueness of a particular culture.When
properly preserved and accurately passed on from one generation to the other, it
continues to be an indelible representation of one’s personhood.

Our Bodies and Culture

Recall some circumstances in your life where you pursued a particular fashion
statement or modified your body image because it is what’s “in” or it is what seems
typical based on your cultural context. Did you ever go through tattooing or body
piercing because these convey something about your status? Or had you ever been
refrained from letting yourhair be cut because of some religious beliefs? What about
having been restricted of wearing revealing clothes because it is considered a taboo? If
you answered in the affirmative then you probably adhere unto the proposition that
culture influences our body image. Consciously or unconsciously, your body image or
your perception of your body or that of others is largely influenced by your culture. Your
bodies and what you do with it is a reflection of the life you live and the culture you were
accustomed to. Body modifications and embellishments for instance are regarded as
part of the norms and representations of some cultures.

The Self Embedded In Culture

The figure below illustrates a hypothetical self-concept of Mr. Juan Dela Cruz.
Given the different roles he assumes, he may be viewed in different ways by people
around him. This demonstrates Mead’s idea that the meaning or the
characterization that we ascribe to the self depends on our roles in the society. The self
as a basic psychological concept which is commonly assumed to be static and have a
universal nature is therefore susceptible to changes depending on social situations and
cultural contexts. The self is malleable and can act in different ways depending on
circumstances; it is multi-faceted yet unified. As such, the self has to be examined as
an entity embedded in culture.

Having interest in cross-cultural understandings of the person, French sociologist

and anthropologist Marcel Mauss (1950) substantiated on the notion of person as a
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

cultural category. He used the terms moi(refers to the concept of self) and
personne (refers to the concept of person) but underscored the latter in elucidating
about personhood. According to him, the person was considered primarily a cultural
conception, or a ‘category’ of a particular community.

As a social category, the person is said to be socially and culturally constituted that can
only be understood in relation to everything else in the society and thus, may be subject
to quite substantial, if not infinite, variation. In the hypothetical self-concept map of Mr.
Juan Dela Cruz, you might have noticed the different attributes of his personne or the
person that he is depending on his social situation. At home, he has to be the
affectionate but strict father that he is; he can be a very caring husband to his wife, yet
may likewise be wary. At one point, he is regarded soft-hearted but at another, he is
viewed as someone firm. This points out to the malleability of his personne depending
on his cultural context.
Harry Triandis (2019), a psychology professor at the University of Illinois, furthered the
discourse about the self being culturally shaped. In his research, The Self and Social
Behavior in Differing Cultural Contexts (1989), he introduced and distinguished three
aspects of the self: private, public, and collective self. The private selfare cognitions that
involve traits, states, or behaviors of the person; it is an assessment of the self by the
self. Statements like “I am amiable”; “I am outspoken”; “I will buy X” are examples of our
self-assessments about ourselves.
The public self on the other hand refers to cognitions concerning the generalized other’s
view of the self, such as statements like “People think I am shy” or “People think I will
buy X”. The public self is an assessment of the self by the generalized others. The
collective self are cognitions concerning a view of the self that is found in some

)
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

collective (e.g., family, co-workers, tribe, scientific society), such as, “My family thinks I
am introverted” or “My co-workers believe I shop too much.” The collective self
corresponds to an assessment of the self by a specific reference or groups. These
aspects of the self are heavily influenced by culture.

PSYCHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE
“Everything that irritates us about others can lead us to an understanding of ourselves”
– Carl Jung
PSYCHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES ABOUT THE SELF

The ontology of the self has been one of the most immensely researched foci of
psychology. Established as a scientific discipline in 1879, psychology in its attempt to
broaden theoretical explanations on the self has been so fascinated in looking unto
indispensable phenomena like social interactions and individual difference variables
which include personality, behavior and mental processes. Postmodern psychologists
also expounded on the multiplicity of the self by exploring its subselves. These will all be
tackled as we discuss each of the psychological perspectives about the self.

1. William James’s Me-Self and I-Self

American philosopher and psychologist, William James (18421910),
extensively explained the self and its aspects on his 1890
publication The Principles of Psychology. According to James, a
man's self is the “sum total of all that he can call his, not only his
body and his psychic powers, but his clothes and his house, his wife
and children, his ancestors and friends, his reputation and works,
his lands and horses, and yacht and “Whenever two people meet,
there are bank-account.”This suggests that the self is really six
people present. There is each comprise of everything the person
has. man
as he sees himself, each man as the other person sees him, and each man as he really
is.” - William James
It embraces all his physical and corporeal possessions and extends even to the
nonphysical or intangible aspects. As such, our sense of self pertains to all entities
which we consider ours and which we value as they are deemed extensions of us.
James proposed that the self has two facets: the I-Self and the Me-Self. The I-Self is
said to be the self in action or as subject; it is that aspect of the self that does the acting,
thinking, and feeling. It is also known as the self as the knower or perceiver. The MeSelf
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

on the other hand refers to the self as an object;it is that facet of the self which is the
known or the perceived. Also termed by James as the Empirical Self, the me is one’s
accumulated understanding of one’s self. Further, James suggests that the Me-Self or
the Empirical
Self has three components: the Material Self which encompasses all of our
important possessions as well as the people we treasure; the. Social Self
involved how we think we are viewed and regarded by others and also our
instinctive desire to be recognized; and the Spiritual Self contains our
subjective dispositions like our selfappraised abilities, beliefs,
attitudes, emotions, etc. For William James, these facets of the Me-
Self help people define us; and aid us too in defining and
understanding ourselves. These may further bring about positive or
negative self-feelings that will motivate and direct our efforts to
maintain, change, or improve ourselves.

2. Carl Rogers’s Real Self and Ideal Self

Known for being one of the pillars of humanistic theory, American psychologist Carl Rogers
(1902 – 1987), posited about self-concept.Self-concept simply speaks of how we think and
view of ourselves. It includes the entire schema and the knowledge that we have or that
we are aware of about ourselves.
As we come to interact with others, we may come across feedbacks or may be subjected to
experiences which will challenge “The curious paradox is that when I our self-
concept.Once established however, we accept myself just as I am, then I can may have
difficulties changing our self-concept change.” -Carl Rogers and thus, we are likely to deny
or distort them whenever there are incongruences. Rogers posited two essential
components of the self: the real self and the ideal self.According to him, the real self
speaks of how we genuinely appraise ourselves. It is the self that feels most true to what
and who we really are. It may not be perfect but it is the part of us that feel most real. The
ideal self on the other hand, denotes one’s view of self as one wishes to be. It contains
attributes, usually positive, that people aspire to possess. Further, Rogers suggests that a
discrepancy between our ideal and real selves redounds tononequilibrium,
indicating an unhealthy personality.

3. Albert Bandura’s Proactive and 30 Agentic Self

Albert Bandura (1925 – present) is a renowned psychologist who
advocated the social cognitive theory of learning. This learning
perspectivecontends that human behavior results from vicarious
learning, through the experiences of other people. Bandura
viewed people as agents or originators of experience. We don’t

)
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

just “Self-belief does not necessarily ensure merely observe and imitate behavior; we
have success, but self-disbelief assuredly cognitive faculties that enable us to discern
spawns failure.” Albert Bandura unto whether or not such behavior is worth emulating
or if such can help us become better individuals.One of
the fundamental concepts espoused by social cognitive theory is self-efficacy, which is
defined as one’s conviction or belief that he or she can take on a certain task
successfully. With these emerged the concept of the self as proactive and agentic.The
self as proactive is constructive; it is optimistic that it can get through whatever
adversities it may encounter. Being proactive means having the capacity to recognize
and take advantage of opportunities that may be beneficial to our selves and to better
our lives in general. An agentic self is one who takes charge of his choices and actions;
it is self-reflective and self-regulating. Bandura views people as being more than just
mere planners and fore thinkers. We are agents of change; we can be actively involved
in shaping our own lives because we are equipped with the cognitive faculty and
capacity to do so. We can be highly motivated and not easily discouraged when he
faced with challenges. An agentic and proactive self believes that no matter how big the
problem may seem to be, he or she can overcome it.

4. Murray Bowen’s Differentiated Self

Known for being one of the forerunners of family therapy and notable for having
developed a family systems theory, American psychiatrist Dr. Murray Bowen (1913 –
1990), posited on the differentiation of selves.
Differentiation of selves refers to the degree to which one is able to balance: (a)
emotional and intellectual functioning, and ((b) intimacy and autonomy in relationship
Skowron& Friedlander, 1998).
“We all have an infant inside of us, but the infant doesn’t have to run
the show.” -Murray Bowen
On a more personal level, differentiation involves the ability to make
clear boundaries between our thoughts and feelings, and to choose
which of the two will guide our behavior.Highly differentiated
individuals are able to balance autonomy and intimacy in their
relationship. This means that one is able to establish connection with
others without losing one’s self in the process. For instance, a highly
differentiated person may be able to assert one’s self despite
the influence of peers.
Poorly differentiated individuals, on the other hand, may engage
in fusion in their relationships. This means that they become
much attached to the roles they play in a relationship, they have
few firmly held beliefs, they are more likely to be compliant, and
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

seek approval from others before making major decision. Moreover, highly
differentiated individuals are flexible and are better able to adapt to stressful situations.
Since they can set clear boundaries between their thoughts and feelings, they can
shift of being emotional to being rational (or vice versa) depending on what the
situation and may make impulsive decisions based on their current emotional
states.Thus differentiation of self is the capacity to achieve a clear, coherent sense of
self along with emotional relationships with important others. According to Bowen,
differentiation is a salient trait foe attaining mature development and psychological
well-being (Skowron& Friedlander, 1998).

5. Donald Woods Winnicott’sTrue and False Selves

Donald Woods Winnicott (1896-1971 was an English psychoanalyst who
conceptualized the true and false selves. According to him the true self is based on our
authentic experiences as a person. This is somehow similar to Roger’s concept of the
real self. The feeling of being alive, doing the things you want to do, and just being
yourself comprise the true self.On the other hand, the false self, which may also
referred to as a fake self or superficial self, is our defense against the vulnerabilities or
imperfections of our real self. Our true self may have its own share of blemishes and
weakness that sometimes lowers our self-esteem. As a result, we try to cover up these
flaws and act “as if” we do not have them. “the child or the adult create, and use With
games, and only with games, can their whole personalities, The false self may start to
surface as early as individual only discovers his infancy, when we are put under the
control of personality creator.” when he becomes a our parents or early caregivers. As
we grow Donald Woods Winnicott old, we are taught different rules imposed by our
families, the school, or the society. At times, we may have to put our true selves aside,
just to abide by the demands of other people. We do this to maintain harmony in social
relationship. There are instances when it is necessary for the false self to take over a
certain situation. For instance, we need to follow norms of conduct in various social
setting and if we show the false self because of forced compliance to others, then this
may be unhealthy.
Continually suppressing our true selves may inhibit us from truly expressing who we
are, which may negatively impact our wellbeing.

THE SELF IN WESTERN & EASTERN THOUGHTS

“One ship sails east and another sails west with the same self–wind that blow, it’s
the set of the sail and not the gale that determines the way we go. As the winds of

)
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

the sea are the ways of fate. As we voyage along through life, it’s the act of the
soul that determines the goal and not the calmness of the strife.”- Ella Wilcox

INDIVIDUALISTIC VERSUS COLLECTIVE THOUGHTS

The aforementioned scenario captures individualistic and collectivistic orientations
toward the self which are espoused by the Western and Eastern worldviews
respectively. The individualistic perspective views the self as one that is independent
from others; it is a separate, autonomous, and distinct entity. Like John Doe,
individualists when asked to talk about themselves would prefer to express their unique
inner attributes, abilities, personal preferences and achievements. The individualistic
thought recognizes individual differences; it tends to prize autonomy over collective
wisdom and effort where the individual is a regarded a self-made whose success and
happiness do not necessarily depend on others, not even to the society in general. On
the other hand, in the collectivistic thought, all things are seen as interdependent and
inseparable parts and parcels of the larger social world. One of the most distinguishing
hallmarks of the Eastern worldview is the awareness on unity and mutual interrelation of
all things and events in life.
The fundamental relatedness of the self to others is accentuated and people construe
themselves and ascribe meaning to their personhood by emphasizing their social roles,
group memberships or personal relations to their significant others. Collectivists
recognize that their identity and self-esteem are wrapped up in their group and so they
would more likely value promoting group harmony and cohesion, belonging and fittingin.

The collectivistic thought underscores that relationships with others in specific 37

contexts is the primordial consideration in defining the self. Reflecting back unto the
result of your activity on Individualist or Collectivist? And considering the above
discourse, what realizations do you have? Were you able to distinguish the two
orientations particularly in terms of how they view the self? Now take a look on the table
below and learn more about their notable differences particularly in terms of their
philosophies.

EASTERN AND WESTERN THOUGHTS

Western Eastern
(Greek and Judeo-Christian (Classical Indian and
Traditions) Chinese
Philosophies)
Individualism/Fragmentary/Dualistic: Collectivism/Wholistic:
A human being has an individualistic A human being is an integral part of
nature and is an independent part of the universe and the society. People
the universe and the society. More are fundamentally connected. all
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

focused on the individual events and events in the universe are

the role of the person. Emphasis is interconnected (Systematic
on the “I”. Approach). Emphasis is on the
“WE”.
Outer-world dependent: Searching Inner-world dependent: Searching
outside yourself – through research inside yourself – through meditation
and analysis and right living
Science/evidence-based culture: Evidence is meaningless; truth is
What given and does not have to be
can be proven/measured is deemed proven
the truth
Man is an element of the Divine Man is a part of the cosmic unity
Life is a service (to God, money, Life is a journey towards eternal
business, etc.) realities outside the world
The journey of mankind is linear; The journey of mankind is cyclical:
everything has its beginning and perception of eternal recurrence (life
end. after death, reincarnation)
Action is not necessarily a The action is the extension of the
translation of the mind. mind.
The concept of “Me”: the true “me” is Me- to be discovered by liberating
a part of the Divine that need not from the false “me” – attachment to
become apparent: it is given, does the material things
not have to be cognizable

Construction of the Self in the Western Perspective

The Western worldview underscores the importance of the parts rather than the whole.
It suggests a fragmentary approach in understanding phenomena as it does not
subscribe to a holistic view of reality. As such, all aspects of life are explored and
analyzed not as whole but as separate parts.
Even the self is purported to be investigated and viewed as a highly compartmentalized
entity. The Western Thought maintains the individual as a separate, self-contained
individual, whose sense of self-worth is focused on internal attributes (ability,
intelligence, personality, goals, preferences, rights). Since the West values individuality
and freedom, the self as an independent individual is given preference over the others.
It does not however discredit the role of environment and society in the development of
the self but its focus is always looking toward the self. The personal achievements of
the self over the others for instance is highlighted, thus Westerners tend to compare
themselves to the rest of the group in order to be better. Their self-esteem can in fact be
verified and confirmed through social comparison. But they can set out their own goals
regardless of whether or not these goals conform to the society’s shared goals.

)
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

Moreover, individual needs and wants are given more importance as they put primacy in
developing themselves.
From this standpoint, equality is accorded to every individual self who is regarded as an
independent being that has inalienable right to life and personal development. Individual
rights are recognized and given prominence over duties as it is only through this where
the society at large attains progress and civilization.
The self according to Western theories was comprehensively discussed in the
preceding topics. For us to fully appreciate the self and make an objective synthesis
about it, we shall, in particular, take a brief look unto how it is explained based on the
Eastern theories. We will be examining how the self was explained by the major
philosophies of the East – Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism. We shall
likewise explore the indigenous conceptualization of the self based on the Filipino
culture.

The Self as Embedded in the Oriental Thoughts

Understanding the propositions of the East regarding the self entails a paradigm shift of
the Western views. While its western counterpart highlights the importance of
individualism, the eastern thought values unity and harmony and being part of the
greater whole, where everything is believed to be connected and the interdependent
with others and nature. The Eastern perspective does not see any distinction in all the
things in the world; everyone is interconnected thus, the other person is deemed part of
yourself.
The self, through this holistic view, is considered a relational being whose very
existence is defined by his being blended harmoniously with the other selves, all things
and events. The self is fundamentally connected with the other selves and is an integral
part of the universe and society. In this web of interdependency, harmony is the key.
One’s conformity with shared norms and values is very important. Consequently, the
self must place duties over rights. Individual goals are manifested and find fulfilment in
society’s shared goals. It is crucial for the self to participate in creating harmony, and to
avoid criticism, ridicule, and rejection to gain approval and acceptance.

The Self in Hinduism

Who is the self? The self is Atman, and Atman is the innermost essence of the self
whose destiny is to be Brahma in Nirvana. Attachment of the self to the material world
(maya/illusion) leads to suffering (samsara). Reincarnation of the self is a form of
suffering because the self keeps coming back to the material-world thinking that it is its
real destiny. The self has to liberate itself from this ignorance by cultivating an authentic
knowledge (self-realization) that the self has is NOT MAYA but ATMAN. When the self
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

has been thoroughly cleansed from its llusions, the self is filled with the sense of
wellbeing, and at death, its soul is liberated from endless rebirths (reincarnation) and
join the universal spirit Brahma and becomes one with Brahma.

The Self in Buddhism

The doctrine of non-self or annata dictates that the self is subject to the law of changes.
Everything, including the self, is always in constant change: born, grows, and dies. The
self is composed of five aggregates: natter, sensation, perception, mental construct, and
consciousness. Each aggregate is transitory in nature. That is why there is no such
thing as permanent self. Buddhism discards the existence of the self. The idea of the
self is illusory. This false belief yields harmful thoughts of selfish desire, “me-and-mine”
mentality, craving, attachment, ill-will, hatred, conceit, pride, egoism, and any other
defilements and social problems. It is the source of all troubles in societies. The goal of
the self is to attain enlightenment by freeing oneself from ignorance that causes
suffering. To eliminate ignorance and attain enlightenment, the self should:
1.Know the four noble truths that there is suffering in this world; the cause of suffering is
craving for self-identity as if it is permanence; there is way out of this bondage of
suffering.
2.The way to get out of suffering is by practicing the eightfold path

The Self in Confucianism

The self is a moral and social being. Confucius was essentially concerned with what
made a good life. Good life depends on order, and order depends on good and just
government. If a ruler lives and governs virtuously, virtuous people would obey him.
Virtue consists of correct behavior, such as benevolence, righteousness, propriety,
wisdom, and loyalty.
These virtues must guide human relations, namely, (a) between ruler and people; 40 (b)
between parents and children; (c) between husband and wife; (d) between elder brother
and younger brother; and (e) between friends and friend. A true self is a noble man
possesses all the virtues, and this noble man is called the man of JEN.
The self is a dot in the universe and being a part of nature, the self must live in
accordance with the law of nature that rules and directs the movements of all things.
The highest achievement of every human being is being a wise person. As a wise
person, his highest achievement is affinity with the universe. The happiness of the self
is found in the self’s conformity with nature.

)
lOMoARcPSD|52621560

Confucius advocated the active role of man in relation to creating oneness with nature.
Since the self is the master of nature, his duty is to actively harmonize himself with
nature by translating the innate law of nature into action.

The Self in Taoism

As a philosophy, Taoism advocates what is natural and spontaneous, simple, and

necessary. Taoism derived its name from its central idea, Tao or the Way of nature.
Taoism, just like Confucianism aimed at humanity’s oneness with nature. But Taoism
contradicted Confucianism as regards to how oneness shall be achieved. Taoism
considers the self as merely one of the many elements of the natural world. Tao is an
indescribable force that govern natures. The self must bring himself in harmony with Tao
by practicing the three great virtues: humility, frugality and contentment. The self should
not strive for learning, riches, and power; the self should find last thing happiness by
being, quiet, thoughtful, and humble. In other word to be able to harmonize, the self
must practice the WU-WIE or the non-interference with the natural courses of events.
Most of the problems in the world is caused by the self’s active participation in creating
harmony with nature. Too much involvement of the self in nature can lead to destruction.

Filipino Concept of the Self

Do Filipinos have their own concept of the self? Who is a Filipino? Most of our worldviews are in
common with the other oriental thoughts. But some neighboring countries often consider the
Filipino as the most westernized person because of the captive or colonial consciousness that
has long been imbued in us. A Filipino is also multilayered because of foreign influences, such
as those of India, Indonesia, Malay, Chinese, Spanish, and American which are embedded in our
culture. So how do we define a Filipino as a self?
Our understanding of the Filipino as a self must be based on the concepts of PAGKATAO and
LOOB.Pagkatao or humanities indicates the fact that a Filipino is a human being just like
anyone else. The concept of loobis exemplified by Filipino holistic worldview and interiority
(human heartedness) (Mercado, 1974).
With this nondualistic worldview, the self is seen as a body-soul embodiment. Life is not seen as
compartmentalized, the present is the continuation of the past, and this continuity moves in a
cyclic manner that has no beginning and no end (Gulong ng Palad). A Filipino does not
distinguish the subject from the object, the person from feelings. Harmonious relationship is of
prime importance; this is maintained by the value of sensitivity. Interiority pertains to love,
mercy, charity, elemency, and leniency.
This human heartedness is mirrored in the Filipino concepts of kagandahangloob,
kabutihangloob, kalooban, which somehow depict our interdependency with others. They slow
the social dimension of the self, sharing of the self with others in values of pakikisama,
camaraderie, hospitality, utang-na-loob, bayanihan spirit, family-centeredness,
mealcenteredness, etc.
lOMoARcPSD|52621560