GE1 (Understanding the Self)

PHILOSOPHY: THE SELF FROM VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES

Philosophy
Philosophy comes from the word “philo” means “love” and “sophia” means “wisdom”; the “love of
wisdom.” Philosophy is about finding answers to serious questions about ourselves and about the
world we live in. Questioning existing knowledge and intuitions to get closer to the truth.

What skills you will get out of Philosophy?

☞ Critical thinking
☞ Argument skills
☞ Communication
☞ Reasoning
☞ Analysis
☞ Problem solving

With the help of that of those certain skills, you can justify your opinions, spot a bad argument no
matter what the topic, explain to people why they are wrong and you are right, and Philosophy
basically teaches you to think.

PHILOSOPHERS AND THEIR CONCEPT OF SELF

SOCRATES
He stated, "Know Thyself." He believed that every man is dualistic which composed of the body
and soul. And argued that self-knowledge is a prerequisite to a happy and meaningful life.

Two important aspects of personhood according to Socrates:

1. Body which is the imperfect and impermanent.
2. Soul which is the perfect and permanent.
Socrates' two (2) dichotomous realms
1. Physical Realm which is changeable, transient and imperfect.
2. Ideal Realm which is unchanging eternal, and immortal.

Our preoccupation with bodily needs such as food, drink, sex, pleasure, material possessions, and
wealth keep us from attaining wisdom. A person can have a meaningful and happy life only if he
becomes virtuous and know the value of himself that can be achieved through constant soul-
searching.

PLATO
He said, "The Soul is Immortal." Philosophy of the self can be explained as a process of self-
knowledge and purification of the soul. He believed in the existence of the mind and soul. Mind
and soul is given in perfection with God.

Soul has three (3) parts:

1. Rational Soul talks about reason and intellect.
2. Spirited Soul talks about emotion and passion.
3. Appetitive Soul = talks about the basic needs.

These three elements of ourselves are in a dynamic relationship with one another, sometimes in
conflict. When conflict occurs, Plato believes that it is the responsibility of our reason to sort things
out and exert control, restoring a harmonious relationship among the three elements of ourselves.

ST. AUGUSTINE
He said "I am doubting, therefore I am." And believed that knowledge can only come by seeing the
truth that dwells within us. He integrated the ideas of Plato and Christianity. Augustine's view of
the human person reflects the entire spirit of the medieval world. The soul is united with body so
that man may be entire and complete. Believed humankind is created in the image and likeness of
God. Therefore, the human person being a creation of God is always geared towards the good.
The self is known only through knowing God. Self-knowledge is a consequence of knowledge of
God.

RENE DESCARTES
He stated the "Cogito ergo sum" or "I think therefore, I am," The act of thinking about self - of
being self-conscious - is in itself is proof that there is self.

Descartes' two (2) distinct entities

1. Cogito is the thing that thinks (mind).
2. Extenza is the extension (body).

JOHN LOCKE
He said, "The Self is Consciousness." And that the human mind at birth is tabula rasa or blank
slate. He felt that the self is constructed primarily from sense experiences. Locke theorized that
when they are born, all babies know absolutely nothing. In essence, he argued that the inside of a
baby's brain was empty ready to learn everything through experience.

DAVID HUME
Hume believed that there is no such thing as a ‘self’. And made distinction between impression
(everything that originates from our senses) and ideas (feeble images from impression). He
believed that properties that we can sense are the only real parts of an object. Therefore, if we
look inside ourselves, we cannot find an impression, that is, an idea of a “self” as a substance.
Hume is also into the idea of empiricism, a philosophical methodology that all knowledge comes
from sense-experience. Therefore, he argued that we are just a bundle of experience (Bundle
Theory).

IMMANUEL KANT
He said, “Respect yourself.” Most of the philosophers during in his times were only considering
empiricism as a true path to knowledge. But most of Kant’s works were resorted to rationalism, a
philosophical methodology that it is reason rather than experience is the source of all knowledge.
He made the Kantian Ethics with the goal for human person to become morally perfect. As well as
the Categorical Imperative, an ethical orientation of moral that everyone must follow.

Two (2) fold nature of a human person:

1. Homo Noumenon (Inner self) comprises the psychological state and rational intellect.
Two (2) aspects of noumenon self:

Free Choice




Will

2. Homo Phaenomenon (Outer self) comprises of senses and other instinctual functions.

SIGMUND FREUD
Sigmund Freud had made a big contribution to the works of psychology such as in terms of
psychoanalysis, it is a way of treating a patient through dialogue. He also made theory about
consciousness and personality.

Topographical Model of Consciousness:

1. Conscious deals with awareness which is the current focus of our attention.
2. Subconscious is the data that could readily be brought to consciousness.
3. Unconscious is inaccessible to consciousness which contains our feelings and motives
influenced by past experiences.

The Psychic Apparatus:

1. Id talks about the pleasure principle and also the first part of the self to develop and doesn’t
care about moral and societal norms according to Freud.
2. Ego is the reality principle which acts as the “executive” or “referee” that satisfy the demands of
the id in a safe way.
3. Super Ego is the morality principle that ensures the moral standard in an acceptable manner.

GILBERT RYLE
He said, “I act, therefore, I am.” And believed that the self is the way people behave. He argued
that there is an error in thinking to believe that mind really exists (Ghost in the Machine). Opposing
the concept of dualism, he called the mystical mind a “Categorical Mistake.”

PAUL CHURCHLAND

He said, “The self is the brain.” And adhere to the method of eliminative materialism. He argued
that there is no such thing as the mind that gives us the sense of ourselves. He believed that the
self is inseparable from the brain and physiology of the body. Therefore, it is the physical brain and
not the imaginary mind gives us our sense of self.

MAURICE MARLEAU-PONTY

He said, “The self is embodied subjectivity.” He believed that the mind and the body don’t exist as
separate entity. Mind and the body are interconnected and both are our seat of knowledge. “I have
a body; I am my body.”

ELECTRONIC REFERENCES

https://youtu.be/o0InjgHFpco
https://study.com/academy/lesson/david-hume-the-lack-of-self.html#quiz-course-links
https://www.simplypsychology.org/Sigmund-Freud.html#intro

https://study.com/academy/lesson/self-behavior-according-to-gilbert-
ryle.html#:~:text=Gilbert%20Ryle%20authored%20The%20Concept,also%20followed%20ordi
nary%20language%20philosophy.&text=Arguing%20that%20the%20mind%20does,physical%
20workings%20of%20the%20body.

https://study.com/academy/lesson/the-self-as-the-brain-according-to-paul-
churchland.html#:~:text=Dualism%20asserts%20that%20the%20mind,that%20nothing%20but
%20matter%20exists.&text=Adding%20to%20this%2C%20the%20physical,get%20our%20se
nse%20of%20self.
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/227643/pdf

Introduction
Sociology provides us with a more holistic understanding of why people do what they do and how systemic remedies
can improve the quality of life for all people. Asking tough questions, analyzing, and being more thoughtful with our
interactions can pave the way for great societal change in the future. Through its particular analytical perspective,
social theories, and research methods, sociology is a discipline that expands our awareness and analysis of the
human social relationships, cultures, and institutions that profoundly shape both our lives and human history.

Sociology
The word sociology derives from the French word, sociologie, a hybrid coined in 1830 by French philosopher Isidore
Auguste Comte. From the Latin: socius, meaning "companion"; and the suffix -ology, meaning "the study of", from
the Greek λόγος, lógos,"knowledge".
What is sociology?
Sociology as an academic discipline sociology emerged between 1890 and 1930. The first courses and chairs were
established, sociological journals appeared as the primary outlet for research; and sociological associations were
founded for furthering intellectual exchange and professional interest.
Sociology is the study of social life, social change, and the social causes and consequences of human behavior and
relationships. A social science that examines the dynamics of constituent parts of societies such as institutions,
communities, populations, and gender, racial, or age groups. Sociology also studies social status or stratification,
social movements, and social change, as well as societal disorder in the form of crime, deviance, and revolution.
Social life overwhelmingly regulates the behaviour of humans, largely because humans lack the instincts that guide
most animal behaviour. Humans therefore depend on social institutions and organizations to inform their decisions
and actions. Given the important role organizations play in influencing human action, it is sociology’s task to discover
how organizations affect the behaviour of persons, how they are established, how organizations interact with one
another, how they decay, and, ultimately, how they disappear. Among the organizational structures and institutions,
the major are Political, Education, Economic, Family, and Religion.
The 5 major social institutions
Political – Government as political institution, administers the regulatory functions of Law and order, and
maintains security in society. Form of government and its method of working depends on the accepted
patterns of behaviour in a society.

Education – The process of socialisation, which begins informally at home and then formally in educational
institutions. Education as an institution helps develop knowledge, skill, attitude and understanding of the
people and strives to make them competent members of the society.

Economics – Economy provides basic physical sustenance of the society by meeting the needs for food,
shelter, clothing, and other necessary supply and services. Economic institutions include agriculture, industry,
marketing, credit and banking system, co-operatives etc.

Family – Is the most basic social institution in a society, and is a system of organized relationship involving
workable and dependable ways of meeting basic social needs.

Religion – is belief in the supernatural. Religion constitutes a set of beliefs regarding the ultimate power in
the universe, the ideal and proper pattern of behaviour, and ceremonial ways to express these beliefs.
Religion also provides a foundation for the mores of the society.
The Self as the product of modern society among other constructions
According to the theory of Mead and Cooley, the self is not dependent on biological predisposition; rather, it is a
product of social interaction. It means that; relating to the basic idea, self is not present at birth or it doesn’t come
from our parents or ancestor’s trait, but it is a product of social interaction.
As stated by Gerry Lanuza, in modern societies the attainment and stability of self-identity is freely chosen. While in
the postmodern societies, our self-identity continuously changes due to the demands of a multitude of social
contexts, new information technologies, and globalization. It means that we can freely choose what identity we want
to have for self-cultivation but there are some problems that may arise. For instance, the limitation of close
interaction if we choose not to socialize because that’s the identity we developed.
Another concept from a sociologist Jean Baudrillard, individuals achieve self-identity through prestige symbols and
we consume goods that will give us a feeling of goodness instead of choosing our needs. It’s one of the major
problems about self-identity in our postmodern society because we tend to compare the social class we have from
other people just to feel good. We keep on finding more because we can never be satisfied in life.
Pre modern society
Individuals had very little preferred to live, which line of work they chose and whom they wanted to marry. They
behaved according to rules and traditions. The family and nearest environment provided people with social
supervision.
Modern society
In modernization, the living conditions have improved and people’ choices freedom about what to do with their lives
have increased. Stability has decreased and traditions and traditional support system, such as the family, lost their
importance. Self-identity is no longer given like it was in pre-modern settings as a result of traditions localities,
identity is created by individual through choice. With the rising of modernity, the body was drawn into the reflexive
organization of social, became increasingly socialized, and people “make” their body just as they make their self –
identity.
Choosing a life style
Life style are routine customs, such as the routines incorporated in to the habits of eating, dressing, and means of
acting. But these routines that the individual follows are reflexively open. With the constant intense and rapid
impulse of change within modern institution and the reflexivity of modern social life, what is considered be
appropriate and acceptable behavior today could be soon differently tomorrow, due to new knowledge changed
circumstances (Giddens, 1991). Ideas about what is right and what is wrong also change very fast and what was
common knowledge few decades ago is considered prejudice today.

Mead and social self

Who is George Herbert Mead?
George Herbert Mead was an American philosopher, sociologist, and psychologist, primarily affiliated with the
University of Chicago, where he was one of several distinguished pragmatists. He was refereed as “a seminal mind of
the very first order” (Dewey, 1932, xl). Yet by the middle of the twentieth-century, Mead's prestige was greatest
outside of professional philosophical circles. He is considered by many to be the father of the school of Symbolic
Interactionism in sociology and social psychology.
The “I” and the “Me”
According to Mead, in the early months of life, children do not realize that they are separate from others. After birth,
infants start to notice the faces of those around them. Mead developed a theory about how the social self develops
over the course of childhood. His distinction between the “I” and the “Me.” It is worth emphasizing that while this
distinction is utilized in sociological circles, it is grounded philosophically for Mead. The “me” is the social self and
the “I” is the response to the “me.” The “I” is the individual’s impulses. The “I” is self as subject; the “me” is self as
object.

Mead's Theory of Social Behaviorism

Mead believed that people develop self-images through interactions with other people. He argued that the Self,
which is the part of a person’s personality consisting of self-awareness and self-image, is a product of social
experience. He outlined four ideas about how the self develops:
The Self Develops Solely Through Social Experience
Social Experience Consists of the Exchange of Symbols
Knowing Others’ Intentions Requires Imagining the Situation from Their Perspective
Understanding The Role of the Other Results in Self-Awareness

Development of Self
According to Mead, the development of the self goes through stages:
1.Preparatory/imitation stage – children initially can only imitate the gestures and words of others.
2. Play stage – (beginning at age three) children begins to formulate and play the roles of specific people.
3. Game stage – (in the first years of school) children learns the rules that specify the proper and correct
relationship involving different people with a variety of purposes.
Three activities develop the self: language, play, and games.
Language develops self by allowing individuals to respond to each other through symbols, gestures, words, and
sounds. Language conveys others' attitudes and opinions toward a subject or the person. Emotions, such as anger,
happiness, and confusion, are conveyed through language.
Play develops self by allowing individuals to take on different roles, pretend, and express expectation of others. Play
develops one's self-consciousness through role-playing. During role-play, a person is able to internalize the
perspective of others and develop an understanding of how others feel about themselves and others in a variety of
social situations.
Games develop self by allowing individuals to understand and adhere to the rules of the activity. Self is developed by
understanding that there are rules in which one must abide by in order to win the game or be successful at an
activity.

References:
https://www.britannica.com/topic/sociology
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-sociology/chapter/the-self-and-socialization/
https://study.com/academy/lesson/george-herbert-mead-the-self-me-i.html
https://iamrolex.wordpress.com/2018/09/06/the-sociological-perspective-of-the-self-the-self-as-a-product-of-
society/

ANTHROPOLOGY
⇒ Branch of knowledge which deals with the scientific study of man, his works,body, behavior
and values within a specific time and space.
“ANTHROPOS” (Greek) = “man”
“LOGOS” (Greek) = “study”

THE SELF ACCORDING TO ANTHROPOLOGY

Anthropological characterizations of “the other” are often inversions of

European self-images. (Fardon 1990:6)

This certainly applies to understandings of others’ selves. In the conceptualization of non-

western selves, the western self was taken as the starting point and the non-western self
 was accordingly characterized as its opposite: unbounded, not integrated, dependent,
unable to set itself reflexively apart from others, unable to distinguish between the individual
land a role or status that individuals occupies, unable to pursue its own goals independently
of the goals independently of the goals of a group of community.

In anthropology discourse, the question of identify is almost completely detached from

the problem of the self. In the vast body of literature about ethnic identity the self is rarely
mentioned, and in writings about the self a relation between the self and identities is
sometimes noted but remains unexplored (e.g., Morris 1994: 1)

THE SELF AND THE PERSON IN CONTEMPORARY ANTHROPOLOGY

Anthropology
⇒ Is the study of people, past and present. It focuses on understanding the human
condition in its cultural aspect.
Joseph LeDoux (2002)
⇒ Conceptualized the implicit and explicit aspects of the self.
Explicit
⇒ The self that you are consciously aware of
Implicit
⇒ The one that is not immediately available to the consciousness
ANTHROPOLOGY AND SELF

Given the importance of the concept of culture in anthropology and its conventional
meaning, it is clear that a distinction between a cultural conception of the self or person and
the ‘‘actual’’ self or person cannot be strictly maintained.

Culture is understood not as something ephemeral but, according to a dominant view, as a

‘‘power’’ constituted by systems of shared meaning that is effective in shaping social
reality.

THE SELF EMBEDDED IN CULTURE ● Cultural

Psychologist
⇒ Distinguished two ways of how the self is constructed.
Independent Construct - Individualistic Culture
⇒ Represents the self as separate, distinct with emphasis on internal
attributes or traits, skills, and values. Interdependent Construct -
Collectivist Culture
⇒ Stressing the essential connection between the
individual to other people.

PROF. KATHERINE EWING

⇒ Who described self as encompassing “physical organism, possessing psychological
functioning and social attributes”

ANTHROPOLOGIST
Franz Boas (1858 – 1942)
 Bronisław Malinowski (1884 – 1942)
Margaret Mead (1901 – 1978)
Ruth Benedict (1877 – 1948)
Ralph Linton (1893 – 1953)
Claude Lévi-Strauss (1908 – 2009)

The self as a cognitive construction

In cognitive psychology the self is understood as contextual, or ecological, intertwining cognitive

capacities with social experiences and Bernard’s analysis affirms the novel’s narrative where the
self develops through cognitive and cultural interconnections.

William James and the Me-self; I self

Almost 130 years ago, James (1890) introduced the distinction between “Me” and “I” to the debate
about the self. The former term refers to understanding of the self as an object of experience,
while the latter to the self as a subject of experience. This distinction, in different forms, has
recently regained popularity in cognitive science and provides a useful tool for clarifying what one
means when one speaks about the self. However, its exact meaning varies in cognitive science,
especially in regard to what one understands as the self as subject, or “I.”

James (1890) chose the word “Me” to refer to self-as-object. What does it mean? In James’ (1890)
view, it reflects “all the things” which have the power to produce “excitement of a certain particular
sort.” This certain kind of excitement is nothing more than some form of experiential quality of me-
ness, mine-ness, or similar – understood in a folk-theoretical way (this is an important point,
because these terms have recently acquired technical meanings in philosophy, e.g., Zahavi, 2014;
Guillot, 2017). What are “all the things”? The classic formulation suggests that James (1890)
meant physical objects and cultural artifacts (material self), human beings (social self), and mental
processes and content (spiritual self). These are all valid categories of self-as-object, however, for
the purpose of this paper I will limit the scope of further discussion only to “objects” which are
relevant when speaking about consciousness. Therefore, rather than speaking about, for example,
my car or my body, I will discuss only their conscious representations. This limits the scope of self-
as-object to one category of “things” – conscious mental content.

Characterizing self-as-object as a subset of conscious experiences specifies the building blocks of

“Me” (which are contents of consciousness) and provides a guiding principle for distinguishing
between self and non-self (self-relatedness). However, it is important to note two things. First, the
distinction between self and non-self is often a matter of scale rather than a binary classification,
and therefore self-relatedness may be better conceptualized as the strength of the relation with the
self. It can be illustrated with an example of the “Inclusion of Other in Self” scale (Aron et al., 1992).
This scale asks to estimate to what extent another person feels related to one’s self, by choosing
among a series of pairs of more-to-less overlapping circles representing the self and another
person (e.g., a partner). The degree of overlap between the chosen pair of circles represents the
degree of self-relatedness. Treating self-relatedness as a matter of scale adds an additional level
of complexity to the analysis, and results in speaking about the extent to which a given content of
consciousness represents self, rather than whether it simply does it or not. This does not, however,
change the main point of the argument that we can classify all conscious contents according to
whether (or to what extent, in that case) they are self-related. For the sake of clarity, I will continue
to speak using the language of binary classification, but it should be kept in mind that it is an
arbitrary simplification. The second point is that this approach to “Me” allows one to flexibly
discuss subcategories of the self by imposing additional constraints on the type of conscious
content that is taken into account, as well as the nature of self-relatedness (e.g., whether it is
ownership of, agency over, authorship, etc.). For example, by limiting ourselves to discussing
conscious content representing one’s body one can speak about the bodily self, and by imposing
limits to conscious experience of one’s possessions one can speak about one’s extended self.
“I” As A Subject Of Experience: Metaphysics Of Subjectivity

Thoughts which we actually know to exist do not fly about loose, but seem each to belong to some
one thinker and not to another (James, 1890, pp. 330–331).

Let us assume that phenomenal consciousness exists in nature, and that it is a part of the reality
we live in. The problem of “I” emerges once we realize that one of the fundamental characteristics
of phenomenal consciousness is that it is always subjective, that there always seems to be some
subject of experience. It seems mistaken to conceive of consciousness which do “fly about loose,”
devoid of subjective character, devoid of being someone’s or something’s consciousness.
Moreover, it seems that subjectivity may be one of the fundamental inherent properties of
conscious experience (similar notions can be found in: Berkeley, 1713/2012; Strawson, 2003;
Searle, 2005; Dainton, 2016). It seems highly unlikely, if not self-contradictory, that there exists
something like an objective conscious experience of “what it is like to be a bat” (Nagel, 1974),
which is not subjective in any way. This leads to the metaphysical problem of the self: why is all
conscious experience subjective, and what or who is the subject of this experience? Let us call it
the problem of the metaphysical “I,” as contrasted with the problem of the phenomenal “I” (i.e., is
there a distinctive experience of being a self as a subject of experience, and if so, then what is this
experience?), which we discussed so far.

Global vs. differentiated models

Global- refers to the general value of that person places on herself or himself.

Differentiated model of self- Refers to your ability to separate your own feelings and thoughts from
others.

There are 10 differentiated model of self

Self consciousness- It is a heightened sense of self awareness.

Self multiple- Someone’s role is not stop being her or him. His or her responsibilities and
sense of self.

Self as looking-glass – Other people serve as a mirror in which we can see ourselves.

People develop a sense of WHO THEY ARE AND WHAT TO THINK OF

THEMSELVES by watching the reactions of the people in their “primary group” as
well as those they meet throughout they lives.

We see ourselves through the eyes of other people, even to the extent of
incorporating their views of us into our own self-concept.

Self as structure- The self, as that which can be an object to itself, is essential a social
structure and it arises in social experiences.

Self as a flower- The self in this view is like a flower, potentially growing into a full bloom.

Self as self creative- “Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself.” Rejecting any
traditional, essentialist idea of human nature” Sartre adds: “ In other words there is
freedom.” To clarify: “You are nothing less than your life.” Combining all your projects,
action and choices. The self, in this view, is not an iceberg, nor a passive reflection, nor a
flower that may grow, it is what we make it, but it is somewhat atomistic.
 Self a onion- This model is indicated by the phrase “hidden depths” and reflects the notion
that one may not really know someone, just the GOFFMANESQUE presentation of the
different selves acting in different roles and circumstances, which may be camouflage and
masks.

Self as identity- Our self concept is our identity. It is the concept you develop about yourself
that evolves over the course of your life. This may include the aspects of your life that you
have no control over, such as where you grow up or the color of your skin, as well as the
choices you make in life, such as how you spend your time and what you believe.

Self as unicorn- It is a party unknown, even unknowable because it is so below

consciousness and in progress.

Self as chameleon- Chameleon because it is multiple, mutable, adaptable and selective in

a presentation. These selves may be complementary, contradictory or conflicted.

Real and ideal self concepts

Self concepts
Is defined as the totality of individuals thoughts and feelings having reference to her/his as
an object.
Lifestyle in many ways, is an outward expression of ones self concepts.

Carl Rogers Self Theory

Ideal Self
Real Self

Real Self

The Real Self is who we actually are. It is how we think, how we feel, look and act. The real self
can be seen by others, but because we have no way of truly knowing how others views us, the
real self is our real self image.

Ideal self

The ideal self, is how we want to be. It is an idealized imaged that we have developed overtime,
based on what we have learned and experienced. The ideal self could include components of
what our parents have taught us, what our society promotes, and what we think is in our best
interest.

Multiple selves v.s. Unified Selves

What is multiple selves?

Multiple selves refers to the different ways of how individuals act with various versions of
oneself, interacting with the different situations and circumstances in their lives (Alley, 2020).
Saying that every individual can act and change their personality depends on who they interact
with, and depends on what situation they encounter.
 According to Carter (2008) from her published book entitled “Multiplicity: The New Science of
Personality”, she says that multiplicity is enabling our personalities to participate in functioning to
be successful in life. Carter discusses having the ability to switch between personalities is a huge
strength for every individual because the person can change his/her personality and traits to work
together from the team rather than against one another.

Carter has a hypothesis about the division of multiple selves, she introduced the division of
multiple selves into major and minor and micro.

Major selves is a personality and character with thoughts, desire, intentions, emotions,
ambitions and beliefs. Various possibilities for multiple selves in major selves are single major and
double major.

Minor selves is simply enough to deal with a particular condition such as necessity to argue
with certain people. Possibilities for multiple selves in minor selves is multiple major.

Micro selves is a simplest part of building blocks of a personality, individual responses,

thoughts, idea’s habit as a small as a physical or vocal contraction or a renewed interfering
thought or emotions.

Carter bases her assessment of our multiple selves using the Big 5 (OCEAN) personality
dimensions and charting the personality traits for each multiple self.

OCEAN stands for

O – Openness
C – Conscientiousness
E – Extroversion
A – Agreeableness
N – Neurotism

Carter also proposed a Typology of Selves

The framework based on Rita Carter’s book is an easy way for people to measure their
personality type.

Typology of Selves

•Defenders: Protect and guard us against threats, both real and imagined
•Controllers: Drive and steer our behavior
•Punishers: Controllers or defenders whose energy has become misdirected
•Role players: Personalities created for a particular situation or purpose
•Relics: Old minors that no longer have a useful function
•Creatives: Originate new ideas, aims, visions

What is unified selves?

According to Alleydog (2020), unified selves is a “composite” persona, or the “self” that
encompasses all of the other personas that exist within a person’s interactional style, integration of
subselves into one.

The difference between multiple selves and unified selves are multiple selves is describe as other
have define them while unified self is the integration of the subselves into one.

True self vs. False self

 Dr. Donald Winnicott, a British psychoanalyst and child psychiatrist, proposed the concept of a
true self and a false self in a series of publications in the 1960s. Everyone is separated among
these two selves, according to Winnicott, and many establish a fake self to protect their inner,
more vulnerable genuine self.

What is true self?

According to Dr. Winnecott, true self refers to the feeling of being fully present and alive, as
well as a sense of self based on true experience.

The true self is founded in the sense of being alive. The newborn develops a sense of reality, a
sensation that life is worth living, as a result of this. The baby’s spontaneous, nonverbal gestures
are derived from that intuitive awareness, and if acknowledged by the parents, they become the
foundation for the true self’s continued growth.

In Winnicott’s formulation, the infant’s true self is by nature asocial and amoral. It isn’t
socialized and isn’t interested in other people’s sentiments. Even if it’s in the middle of the night or
on a busy train, it yells when it needs to. It may be forceful, biting, and surprising and a little nasty
in the eyes of the other people.

What is false self?

According again to Dr. Winnicott, False self refers to the behind which a person can feel empty,
with learned and controlled behavior rather than spontaneous and authentic ones.

How does the false self get created?

The False Self develops as the infant is repeatedly subjected to maternal care that intrudes
upon, rejects, or abandons his experience. As a result, the growing child loses his feeling of
initiative and spontaneity, as “there is a growing sense of futility and sadness in the individual.
(Dhainert, 2013)

The False Self is a made up persona that people build early in life to protect themselves from
reliving developmental trauma, shock, or stress in close interactions. This False or “public” Self
presents itself as polite and well mannered, putting on a “show of being real.” People who live out
of their False Self feel empty, dead, or “phony” on the inside, unable to be spontaneous and alive,
or to exhibit their True Self in any aspect of their lives. (Barry and Janae Windhold, 2012).

THE SELF AS PROACTIVE AND AGENTIC

SELF AS PROACTIVE
-refers to as acting in anticipation of future,needs or changes.
-taking control of a situation and making early changes before it occurred.
- it can be contrast with other work-related behaviors such as proficiency. (Initiating change)

REACTIVE/REACTIVITY BEHAVIOR
-As a behavior pattern, is a habitual mode.
-It is a form of Disempowerment.
HISTORY
•1930- The word proactive(pro-active) was limited to the domain of experimental psychology and
was used with different meaning.
•1933- the Oxford English Dictionary (OED), credited Paul Whiteley and Gerald Blankfort in their
citation… “impairment or retardation of learning or of the remembering of what is learned by
effects that remain active from conditions prior to the learning”.
•1946- the book “ Man’s search for Meaning” brought the word to the wider public domain.

Dr. Viktor Frankl, an existential Neuropsychiatrist used to describe yha word as a person
who took responsibility for his/her life rather than looking for causes in outside
circumstances or other people.
SELF AS AGENTIC
-is defined as the aspect of human personality that is determined by future assessments of
one’s goals, objectives, and actions.
- described as an individual’s power to control his or her own goals actions and destiny.
- it is adversely affected by degenerating planning, selecting, and implementing the capabilities
of an individual.
- unified agentic self is composed of different cognitive components that influence the overall
personality and future aspirations of an individuals.
- Parkinsons Disease (PD- is a debilitating neurodegenerative disorder that severely affects
movement and ccordination) -has a significant impact on agentic self and its function.

Sources

The self as a cognitive construction

https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/clcweb/vol9/iss2/5/

William James and the Me self;I self

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01656/full#B58

Global vs. differentiated models

https://www.scribd.com/presentation/443475908/Global-vs-Differentiated-Models-Real-and-Ideal-
Self-Concepts

Real and ideal self concepts

https://www.scribd.com/presentation/443475908/Global-vs-Differentiated-Models-Real-and-Ideal-
Self-Concepts

https://archive.org/details/multiplicitynews0000cart_b3y9/page/n1/mode/1up

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.2466/02.09.28.CP.1.5

https://theweekenduniversity.com/true-or-false-winnicotts-notions-of-self/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_self_and_false_self

https://www.theschooloflife.com/thebookoflife/the-true-and-the-false-self/

https://icpla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Daehnert-C-The-False-Self-Contemp.-Psychoa.-34-
251-
271.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiSw6i69KnzAhUIDN4KHdOFAJQQFnoECBMQBQ&usg=AOvVaw0jYdQlS
IJcZ8IqLatXJW-a

https://thealywayfaring.wordpress.com/2018/10/31/the-self-as-proactive-and-agentic/amp

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proactivity

https://thealywayfaring.wordpress.com/2018/10/31/the-self-as-proactive-and-agentic/amp/
INDIVIDUALISTIC VS. COLLECTIVE SELF

The individual identifies primarily with self, with the needs of the individual being satisfied before those of
the group. Looking after and taking care of oneself, being self-sufficient, guarantees the well-being of the
group. Independence and self-reliance are greatly stressed and valued.
The collective self consists of those aspects of the self that are based on memberships in social groups or
categories. It refers to a perception of self as an interchangeable exemplar of some social category rather
than a perception of self as a unique person.

THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE SELF IN EASTERN AND WESTERN THOUGHT

The self is the most important intervening factor to come between phenomenal objects (other people,
roles, and external things) and an individual's own behavior and action. I ask questions about the individual
and his or her role in the social construction process, by comparing Eastern and Western ideas about the
concept of self. The most important commonality between Eastern and Western thought is an emphasis on
constructing the self in relationship with others and exploring the dialectical relationships between self,
culture, organization, and society. If our understanding of organizational reality fails to grapple with the
dynamic nature of the self, organizations will remain more of a management's interest in explaining and
controlling human behavior than in understanding human experience and action.

THE SELF AS EMBEDDED IN RELATIONSHIPS AND THROUGH SPIRITUAL DEVELOPMENT

IN CONFUCIAN THOUGHT

Since the publication of his book on Zhongyong (Tu 1976), TU Weiming has worked for more than 30 years
on an anthropocosmic reconstruction of the Confucian universe, in which self-transformation is defined both
as the starting point and as the necessary vehicle for one’s spiritual journey. This article is primarily intended
to examine Tu’s attempts to reconstruct Confucian spirituality but further to take a step forward to argue
that in the spiritual world as construed by Confucius and Mencius, the experiential functions as
transcendental by which the self initiates and empowers the transformative process. Through exploring the
spiritual significance of Confucian experiences, this essay will conclude that although “transcendental
experience” is only one of many dimensions in other religious or intellectual traditions, it is the most
important path for Confucians by which the self is enabled to become fully integrated with ultimate reality.