LESSON 2: SELF AND SOCIETY

OVERVIEW

After analyzing the nature of the self through the lens of philosophy, let us now examine the self
through the lens of sociology. Sociology is a discipline which studies society’s effect on the person or the
self. This is a very essential tool because we do not only conform to the theory of eugenics, which says
that the biological makeup of the person is the sole factor that develops the self. There is also euthenics
that tells us that the environment rather shapes the self. In this module, let us explore on how the society
or the environment directly and indirectly affect the constitution of the self.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

At the end of this module, you will:

1. Explain the relationship between and among the self, society, and culture
2. Compare and contrast how the self can be influenced by the different institutions in the
society
3. Examine one’s self against the different views that were discussed in the class.
SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM
The self does not live in isolation. The human person or the self-lives in the society or in
others words, with others. As the old saying goes, no man is an island.
In understanding the self, it is inevitable to look at the society which shapes the self. Social
constructivism argues for a merged view of ‘the person’ and ‘their social context’ where the
boundaries of one cannot easily be separated from the boundaries of the other. (Stevens 1996)
Social constructivists argue that the self should not be seen as a static entity that stays
constant through and through. Rather the self has to be seen as something that is in unceasing flux,
in a constant struggle with external reality and is malleable in its dealings with society.
6 Characteristics of the Self:
(Stevens 1996 as cited by Atlata, etal.,)
1. Separate- The self is always unique and has its own identity, one cannot be another person.
Even twins are different form each other
2. Self- Contained and – It can exist on its own it does not require any other self for it to exists
3. Independent
4. Consistent – Self is consistent because it has a personality that is enduring therefore can be
expected to persist for some time. Its consistency therefore, allows it to be studied,
described and measured.
5. Self is unitary – in that it is the center of all experiences and thoughts that run through a
certain person.
6. Self is private – Each person sorts out information, feelings and emotions and thought
processes within the self. The whole process is never accessible to anyone but the self
According to French anthropologist Marcel Mauss, every self has two faces: personne and moi
1. Moi refers to a person’s basic identity, his body,and biological givenness.
2. Personne is composed of social concepts of what it means to be who he is.
Has much to do with what it means to live in a particular institution, family, religion,
nationality and how to behave given expectations and influences from others.
George Herbert Mead
He is well-known for his theory of the social self, which is based on the central argument
that the self is a social emergent. The social conception of the self-entails that individual selves are
the products of social interaction and not the logical or biological preconditions of that interaction.
It is not initially there at birth, but arises in the process of social experience and activity. For Mead,
mind arises out of the social act of communication.
According to Mead, there are three activities through which the self is developed (Mead 1934):
1. Language allows individuals to take on the “role of the other” and allows people to respond
to his or her own gestures in terms of the symbolized attitudes of others.
2. During play, individuals take on the roles of other people and pretend to be those other
people in order to express the expectations of significant others. This process of role-
playing is key to the generation of self-consciousness and to the general development of the
self. “All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players.”
3. In the game, the individual is required to internalize the roles of all others who are involved
with him or her in the game and must comprehend the rules of the game
George Herbert Mead is also well-known for his concept of the “I” and the “me”.
According to Mead, the self has two sides.
1. The “Me” represents the expectations and attitudes of others (the generalized other). It is
the organized set of attitudes of others that the individual assumes.

It is the socialized aspect of the individual. It represents the learned behavior, attitudes,
and expectations of others and the society. The “me” is considered a phase of the self that is
in the past.

The “me” has been developed by the knowledge of society and social interactions that the
individual has gained.
2. The “I” can be considered the present and future phase of the self. It represents the
individual’s identity based on response to the “me”.
The “I” is the response to the “me,” or the person’s individuality.
It allows the individual to still express creativity and individualism and understand when to
possibly bend and stretch the rules that govern social interactions.
 Existence in community comes before individual consciousness. One must participate in the
different social positions within society and only subsequently can one use that experience
to take the perspective of others and thus become self-conscious.
How Mead matters today:
What others think of us, the perspective of others we gain from being a part of the
conversation of gestures, are absolutely necessary for us to even have a sense of self. We think of
ourselves as individuals, to be sure, but we are only able to do so by virtue of being a part of a larger
social community.

ANTHROPOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE ON THE SELF

After examining the self by using the lens of sociology, let us now explore the usage in its
anthropological facet. Anthropology tends to study the human person or the self in its
most basic constitution as a person starting from its primitive development down to its
most contemporary development.

At this, we can look at the self through its cultural aspect until its most recent, that is to
say, modern development. The self does not just exist in a vacuum.

The self develops across time and space. The self develops in a cultural setting and
in a particular temperament.

The anthropological perspective on the self will let us see the development of the self
along the pressing questions and schools of thought during the time.

Anthropology has been concerned with the interaction of the cultural and
biological processes on how the self is shaped.

We can further see that the self is explored in the perspective of how societies
conceptualize the self and how it is relative to culture. The probing lead to finding
meaning of what culture is, self and identity in order to reach a better understanding of
the self.

The aim to understand the self has surpass boundaries of other academic fields. The
wholistic approach of anthropology a similar to other fields like humanities has exceeded
conventional boundaries as it addresses questions of the past, the issues of the present
times and may have further implications and clarity with the future. (Peacock, 1986)

Therefore, it could be understood that both biological and cultural factor have important
influence on the development of self-awareness among individuals within the society.

The Cultural Construction of Self and identity.

Culture is defined by Edward Tylor a British anthropologists as “that complex whole

which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law customs and any other
capabilities and habits acquired by man as member of society”. (Tylor as cited by
Monilla and Ramirez 2018)
Anthropology have emphasized that culture is not behavior but the shared
understanding that guides behavior. (Peacock 1986)

Although it was made aware that the Self is the least tackled subject about culture as
Robbins (2012) said it is the most taken for granted topic in relation to culture. Culture
and self ha to be understood as complimentary ideas that are in relation to each other.

2 ways on how self is viewed in the society:

1. EGOCENTRIC VIEW – the self is seen as an autonomous and distinct individual.

Each person is defined as a replica of all humanity but capable of acting
independently from others.
Example: The Americans are egocentric. They believe that they should be
assertive and independent. Robbins (2012 as cited by Monillan and Ramirez)

2. SOCIOCENTRIC VIEW - the self is contingent on the situation or social

setting.
Example: In Japan, the membership of a person in a particular social is more
valued than independence. The interdependence of the person and the
group is more valued than independence. On the other hand, the Chinese kin
ties and cooperation is another example. Interpersonal relations are mutual
dependence.

Social Identities and its Determinants:

Social identities are constructed out of people’s similarities and differences in

characteristics of individuals.

Identity Toolbox – refers to the feature of a person’s identity that he or she chooses to
emphasize in constructing a social self.

An example of these characteristics are kinship, gender, and age are almost universally
used to differentiate people.

Other characteristics, such as

ethnicity,
personal appearance, and
socio-economic status is not always used in every society.

Family membership which determines a person’s social identity. This is the most
significant feature of identity.

Language – is an identity determinant which is viewed as essential for the

maintenance of a group identity.

Religious affiliation- is another important marker of group identity. For example, in

Mindanao it could be possible that an important defining feature is being a Christian or a
Muslim.
Naming a person establishes a childbirth right and social identity. A name is an important
defining feature of one’s social identity. It individualizes a person and legitimize him or
her as a member of a social group such as family.

For example: Aymara Indians do not consider do not consider an infant as a true human
until a name I given to him/her. When the child is around 2 years old and ready to speak
the Aymara language, a special ritual is performed to give it a name. This, marks the
Aymara child’s social transition from a state of nature to culture which is also
consequently makes him or her fully accepted into the Aymara community.

Rites of passage – usually involves ritual activities to prepare individuals for new
roles from one stage of life to another. Such as giving birth, puberty, marriage,
having children and death.

The Self as Product of Modern Society

The American Anthropologist, Clifford Geertz (1974), reminds us that the notions of
selfhood and individualism are peculiar to modern Western culture.

The struggle for one’s individuality is only possible in modern society where religio-
theological traditions are gradually replaced by rational and scientific
calculations; and exceedingly impersonal associations brought about by urbanized way
of life replace the intimate personal affiliations. (Simmel, 1971)

Modernization or the destruction of the traditional way of life “delocalized” the self
(Mannheim, 1950).

That is, the self is dislocated and deracinated from its traditional attachment
to the community. This is now here more vividly demonstrated than in the modern
notion of love and intimate relationship.

This is rather a newfound freedom from the shackles of tradition.

The problems lie however that this newfound freedom threatens the very authenticity
of the self, for instance love.

Secondly, as Marx suggests, alienation is a curse that faces human beings

haunted by the very images they have created.

Thirdly is the objectification of the body, which is oftentimes raised in the medical
practice.

A solution states that for the individual to discover the true and authentic
part of herself to realize her potentials, thus, the need to abolish repressive
social constraints.

1. The Self as Necessary Fiction

Friedrich Nietzsche proposed an artistic cultivation of the self.

 He, like some skeptical philosophers, also dismissed the metaphysical fiction of the
self-prevalent during his time.

For Nietzche, the self just like any other “substance,” is just the sum of all its
effects – the individual’s actions, thoughts, and feelings (Nehamas, 1985).

Consequently, there is nothing solid or palpably real behind the actions of individuals.
Behind the actions, there is no doer.

Like his definition of truth as necessary errors, and metaphors as inventions of human
beings to enable them to live in a society, Nietzche (1964) also supposes that the self is
nothing more than a metaphor that is invoked to understand the cause of
human actions. The self, therefore, is a necessary fiction – without which social
life is impossible.

2. Post-modern view of the self

The post-modern view of the self-states that the self is a narrative, a text written and
rewritten.

The self is turned into a text, a complex narrative accomplishment suffused with
discourses. It is a text written and rewritten from moment to moment according to the
demands of multitude of social contexts (Burr, 1999:115).

Manifestations of this school of thought are: the information technology that

dislocates the self, thus self is “digitalized” in cyberspace and the global migration that
produces multicultural identities. Post-modern selves are therefore seen as “pluralized”
selves.

3. Social Construction of the Self

Self is not discovered, it is made through the socialization process. But individuals are
not just hapless victims of socialization. Individual is an active, strategizing agent that
negotiates for the definition of himself.

4. The Self as an Artistic Creation

Nietzche [ nee-chuh] believes that the unity of the self is not pre-given but
accomplished through conscious effort. We can recreate ourselves to get hold of the
present, forgive the past and plan the future.

5. Self Creation and Collective Identity

This states that memories (photographs, videos) play significant role in creating
the self and identity. Self- creation is formed within “imagined communities.”

Self-creation along cultural lines must be done in maximum cultural

recognition of differences among and between individuals and cultural groups.
 6. Beyond Self Creation

Search for self-identity is a product of modern society but this is complicated

by the socio-cultural sensibilities of postmodernity, new information technologies and
globalization.

Yet the project of self-creation is embedded within imagined communities. The self
constantly lives in this paradox: to pursue self-creation within pre-given, not
willfully chosen social circumstances.