GE

101

UDERSTANDING THE
SELF

INTRODUCTI
ON

Understanding the Self is one of the core courses under the General Education
Curriculum. It covers the nature of identity, the factors and forces that affect personal
development and the maintenance of personal identity. Understanding oneself is an
integral process one needs to undergo to set direction for current and future actions
and behaviors. It is important to be able to address issues about the self –
philosophical, psychological, sociological, anthropological, and even the dilemma of
viewing the self from the eastern and western perspectives – to define one’s purpose
and act accordingly.

Understanding the Self presents a broad range of topics under the themes the
self from various perspectives, deconstructing or unpacking the self, managing and
caring for the self. It must be emphasized that understanding the self is a
multidisciplinary approach and endeavor, and that no discipline supersedes other
disciplines in comprehending the self. Various perspectives on the self, offering a wider
view or even just a fragment or glimpse of oneself are available at one’s disposal.

DEFINING THE SELF: PERSONAL AND DEVELOPMENTAL PERSPECTIVES ON

SELF AND IDENTITY.

MODULE
1

THE SELF FROM VARIOUS PHILOSOPICAL

PERSPECTIVES

Intended Learning
Outcomes

At the end of the lesson, you should be

able to:
 1. explain why it is essential to understand the self; 2. describe and discuss the
different notions of the self from the points-of-view of the
various philosophers across time and place: 3. discuss the conceptualization and
representation of the self from various disciplines and
perspectives 4. examine one’s self against the different
views of the self.
The Philosophical View of
Self

Socrates: Know
Yourself

Socrates is principally concerned with man. He considers man from the point of
view of his inner life. The famous line of Socrates, “Know yourself”, tells man to bring
his inner self to light .He was the first philosopher who ever engaged in a systematic
questioning about the self. For Socrates, every man is composed of body and soul.
This means that every human person is dualistic, that is, he is composed of two
important aspects of his personhood. For Socrates, this means all individuals have an
imperfect, impermanent aspect to him and the body, while maintaining that there is also
a soul that is perfect and permanent.

Plato: The Ideal Self, the Perfect

Self

Plato, Socrates’s student, basically took off from his master and supported the
idea that man is a dual nature of body and soul. According to Plato, man was
omniscient or all-knowing before he came to be born into this world. In addition to what
Socrates earlier espoused, Plato added that there are three components of the soul;
the rational soul, the spirited soul, and the appetitive soul. The rational soul forged by
reason and intellect has to govern the affairs of the human person, the spirited part
which is in charge of emotions should be kept at bay, and the appetitive soul in charge
of base desires like eating, drinking, sleeping and having sex are controlled as well.
When this ideal state is attained, then the human person’s soul becomes just and
virtuous.

Immanuel Kant: Respect for

Self
 Thinking of the “self” as a mere combination of impressions was problematic for
Immanuel Kant. He recognizes the veracity of Hume’s account that everything starts
with perception and sensation of impressions. To Kant, there is necessarily a mind that
organizes the impressions that men get from the external world. Time and space, for
example, are ideas that one cannot find in the world, but is built in our mind. Kant calls
these the apparatuses of the mind.

Rene Descartes: “I think, therefore I

am”

Rene Descartes, Father of Modern Philosophy, conceived of the human person

as having a body and a mind. Descartes states that the self is a thinking entity distinct
from the body. His first famous principle was “cogito, ergo sum”, which means “I think,
therefore I am”. Although the mind and the body are independent from each other and
serve their own function, man must use his own mind and thinking abilities to
investigate, analyze, experiment and develop
himself. In Descartes view, the body is nothing else but a machine that is
attached to the mind.

John Locke: Personal

Identity

John Locke holds that personal identity [the self] is a matter of psychological
continuity. For him, personal identity is founded on consciousness [memory] and not on
the substance of either the soul or the body.

David Hume: The Self is the Bundle Theory

of Mind

David Hume, a Scottish philosopher. Has a very unique way of looking at man.
As an empiricist who believes that one can know only what comes from the senses and
experiences. Hume argues that the self is nothing like his predecessors thought of it.
The self is not an entity over and beyond the physical body.

To David Hume, the self is nothing else but a bundle of impressions. If one
tries to examine his experiences, he finds that they can all be categorized into two:
impressions and ideas. Impressions are the basic objects of our experience or
sensation. They, therefore form the core of our thoughts.

Thomas
Aquinas
 Thomas Aquinas, the most eminent thirteenth century scholar of the medieval
philosophy, appended something to this Christian view. Adapting some ideas from
Aristotle, he said indeed, man is composed of two parts: matter and form. Matter or
hyle in Greek, refers to the common stuff that makes up everything in the universe.
Man’s body is part of this matter. Form on the other hand, refers to the “essence of a
substance or thing”.

Gilbert
Ryle

Gilbert Ryle solves the mind-body dichotomy that has been running for a long
time in the history of thought by blatantly denying the concept of an internal, non-
physical self. For Ryle, what truly matters is the behavior that a person manifests in
his day-to-day life.

Merleau-
Ponty

Merleau-Ponty is a phenomenologist who asserts that the mind-body

bifurcation that has been going on for a long time is a futile endeavor and an invalid
problem. He says that the mind and the body are so intertwined that they cannot be
separated from one another.
MODULE
2

THE SELF, SOCIETY AND

CULTURE

Intended Learning
Outcomes

At the end of this lesson, you should be

able to:

1. explain the relationship between and among the self, society and culture; 2.
describe and discuss the different ways by which society and culture shape the
self; 3. examine one’s self against the different views of self that were discussed
in the class.

What is the
self?
 The self, in contemporary literature and even common sense, is commonly
defined by the following characteristics: separate, self-contained, independent,
consistent, unitary and private. By separate, 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. Second, 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 and characteristics. 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. Consistency also means that
a particular self’s traits, characteristics, tendencies and potentialities are more or less
the same. Self is unitary in that it is the center of all experiences and thoughts that run
through a certain person. It is like a chief command post in an individual where all
processes, emotions and thoughts converge. Finally, the self is private. Each person
sorts out information, feelings and emotions, and thoughts processes within the self.
This whole process is never accessible to anyone but the self.

The Self and

Culture

According to Marcel Mauss, the French Anthropologist, 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. Personne, 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.
The Self and the Development of the Social
World

So how do people actively produce their 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 giving up for adaption? More than his given ness, one is
believed to be in active participation in the shaping of the self. We think the human
persons are just passive actors in the whole process of the shaping of selves. That
men and women are born with particularities that they can no longer change. The
unending terrain of metamorphosis of the self is mediated by language. “Language as
both a publicly shared and publicly utilized symbol system is the site where the
individual and the social make and remake each other”.

Mead and
Vygotsky
 For Mead and Vygotsky, 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 dialog. “Should I do this?” “But if I do this, it will be like this”.
So cognitive and emotional development of a child is always a mimicry of how it is
done in the social world.

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 connection 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.

Human persons learn the ways of living and therefore their selfhood by being in
the family. It is what a family initiates a person to become that serves as the basis for
this person’s progress. Without the family, biologically and sociologically, a person
may not even survive or become a 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. 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.

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.
Men on the other hand, in the periphery of their own family, are taught early on
how to behave like a man. This normally includes holding in one’s emotion, being
tough, fatalistic, not to worry about danger and admiration for hard physical labor.
Masculinity is learned by integrating a young boy in the society. The gendered self is
then shaped within a particular context of time and space. Gender has to be personally
discovered and asserted and not dictated by culture and the society.
MODULE
3

THE SELF AS COGNITIVE

CONSTRUCT

Intended Learning
Outcomes

At the end of this lesson, you should be

able to:

1. identify the different ideas in psychology about the “self”; 2. create your own
definition of the “self” based on the definition from psychology; 3. analyze the
effects of various factors identified in psychology in the formation of the
“self”.

Introducti
on

As discussed in the previous lessons, every field of study at least in the social
sciences have their own research, definition and conceptualization of the self and
identity. There are various definitions of the “self” and other similar or
interchangeable concepts in psychology. Self is the sense of personal identity and of
who we are as individuals.

William James was one of the earliest psychologists to study the self and
conceptualized the self as having two aspects—the “I” and the “me”. The “I” is
thinking, acting and feeling self. The “me” is the physical characteristics as well as
psychological capabilities that make who you are.

Other concepts similar to self are identity and self-concept. Identity is

composed of personal characteristics, socials roles and responsibilities as well as
affiliations that define who one is. Self-concept is what basically comes to your mind
when you are asked about who you are.
Carl Rogers captured this idea in his concept of self-schema or collection of
knowledge about who we are. The schema includes your interests, work, course, age
name and physical characteristics. As you grow and adapt to the changes around you,
they also change. But they are not passive receivers, they actively shape and affect
how you see, think and feel about things.
The self-awareness also presents us with at least three other self-
schema:

1. actual self – who you are at the

moment 2. ideal self – who you like to be
3. ought self – who you think you should
be

Self-awareness may be positive or negative depending on the circumstances and

our next course of action. One of the ways in which our social relationship affects
our self-esteem is through social comparison. According to the social comparison
theory, we learn about ourselves, the appropriateness of our behaviors, as well as
our social status by comparing aspects of ourselves with other people.

Two types of
Comparison

1. Downward social comparison – is the more common type of comparing

ourselves with
others. As the name implies, we create a positive self-concept by comparing
ourselves with those who are worse off than us. 2. Upward social comparison – is
comparing ourselves with those who are better off than
us. It can be a form of motivation for some, a lot of those who do this actually
felt lower self-esteem as they highlight more of their weakness.

MODULE
4

THE SELF IN WESTERN AND EASTERN

THOUGHTS

Intended Learning
Outcomes

At the end of this lesson, you should be

able to:

1. Differentiate the concept of self, according to Western thought against

Eastern
 perspective; 2. Explain the concept of self as found
in Asian thoughts; 3. Create a representation of the
Filipino self.
Introducti
on

Different cultures and varying environment tend to create different perceptions of

the “self” and one of the most common distinctions between cultures and people is the
Eastern-vs- Western dichotomy wherein Eastern represents Asia.

There are actually a lot of sources in which you can analyze the perspective of
each culture and country about the concept of the self. In this lesson, we will look at
religious beliefs and political philosophies that greatly influenced the mindset of each
nation or culture. Since almost all the theories about the self, which were discussed,
also came from the Western scientific research, we will highlight the Eastern thoughts
in this lesson.

Confuciani
sm

Confucianism can be seen as a code of ethical conduct of how one should

properly act according to their relationship with other people, thus, it is also focused on
having harmonious social life. Therefore, the identity and self-concept of the individual
are interwoven with the identity and status of his culture, sharing its pride as well as its
failures.

Taoism Taoism is living in the way of Tao or the universe. However, Taoism rejects

having one definition of what the Tao is, and one can only state clues of what it is as
they adopt a free- flowing, relative, unitary, as well as paradoxical view of almost of
everything. Taoism rejects the hierarchy and strictness brought by Confucianism and
would prefer a simple lifestyle and each teaching thus aim to describe how to attain that
life.

Buddhism There are various groups who have adopted Buddhism, thus, you may find

differences in their teachings but more likely, their core concepts remained the same.
The self is seen as an illusion, born out of ignorance, trying to hold and control things or
human centered needs, thus, the self is also the source of all these sufferings.
 The Western culture is what we would call an individualistic culture since
their focus is on the person. The Asian culture is called a collectivist culture as a
group and social relations that is given more importance than individual needs and
wants.