 LESSON 2: DEVELOPMENT OF THE

SELF
2.1 Sociology and the Development of Self
George Herbert Mead is a sociologist who advanced the
idea that the development of the self is influenced by
significant persons in one's life. For Mead, the self
develops in a chronological order or a stages wherein one
has to undergo the first stage before proceeding to the next
stage. He clarified that very young children where in no
way influenced by others. Instead, they create their own
world and do not have ability to understand other people's
perspectives. However, as children grow up, other people's
opinion about them takse a central role in the development
of the self.
HerePREPARATORY
are Mead's development stages.
STAGE GAME STAGE

PLAY STAGE

First, the child learns to imitate others, usually the primary care givers.
Important elements in this stage include symbols such as language,
gestures, and objects that from the basis of communication.
This changes when the child transitions to the Play Stage. This goes
beyond imitation as the relationship between the child and others
becomes more social which can be observed when children start to
pretend play as other people.
The last stage is characterized by the influence of the generalized other,
or society as a whole. In the Game Stage, children start to understand
that Nanay is not only a mother but she can also assume other roles.
Children are now capable of understanding that people have
multiple roles. They also start to become aware that other
people also have opinions about them. And this opinions are
derived from how they behave around them which in turn,
influences their perception of their own self.

Undergoing through the Three Stages will lead to the

development of "Me" and the "I" self.
Me - can be considered as the social self while the / is the
response to the social self. It developed through the
perception of the generalized others.
I - is our individual responses to what society thinks.

Although the I and the Me self may sometimes be conflicting,

accordingly to Mead, the healthy self should be a balance
between these two.
2.2 Anthropology's Conception of the Self

Clifford Geertz - a French anthropologist was one of the best

anthropologist of the 20th century. He emphasized the importance
of studying the cultural context of a certain behavior to understand
it. He believed that cultural serves as a control mechanism that
guides behavior. Studying culture means looking into the small
details of that culture and drawing conclusion from those details.
In his study, therefore important to understand culture to
understand the people. In understanding the collective, we will be
able to understand our individual behavior, to understand the Self.
(Sōkefeld, 1999)
Prospero Covar (2015) - a Filiipino anthropologist,
acknowledges the importance of knowing the Filipino culture
in understanding the Filipino identity. You are born as a
human being but becoming a person is a process embedded in
culture thus the saying, "Madaling maging tao, mahirap
magpakatao". It only takes approximately nine months to be
born as a human being, but becoming a person takes a
lifetime of learning.

Covar likened the Filipino identity

to a jar - it has Labad, Loob, and
Lalim; the jar is made of clay, man
(in the Biblical sense) is also made
from the earth. He used the method
of
tambalang lapit (dynamic dualism) to dissect the Filipino
identity. When we used dynamic dualism as a method, this
is ME that is, if there is Labas, there is Loob; if there is
Kaluluwa, there is Budhi.
Labas - we witness the reflectiobeof the person's experience
of culture.
Loob - is a broad concept which needs to be understgood
deeply. Therefore necessary to look at Loob not only with
Labas but also has
Lalim - which gives the loob it's profound meaning.

In the context of the person, one should note merely look

into the exterior (labas) of the individual as this is an
incomplete concept of the person. Looking at the interior
(loob) of the person, his thoughts, his feelings and internal
systems working inside the body is not enough to capture the
whole personhood. But if one will include depth, the person's
convictions, beliefs, and principles (which are largely
influenced by culture), we get to perceive the totality of the
human person (Navarro, Petra's, Ujano-Batangan, 2013).
Thank you :)