UTS

1. MODULE 1
DEFINING THE SELF: PERSONAL AND DEVELOPMENTAL
PERSPECTIVES ON SELF AND IDENTITY
LESSON II
The Self, Society and Culture
INTENDED LEARNING OUTCOMES
At the end of the lesson, the students will be able to:
 Describe oneself based from the elementary, high school and college
pictures by listing important characteristics per stages
 Compare and contrast how the self can be influenced by the movement of
people in the society and;
 Write an essay on how culture has shaped self-concept.
INTRODUCTION
The self has been debated, discussed and conceptualized by
different thinkers in philosophy. Since the sixth century B.C.,
thinkers eventually got tired of focusing on a longstanding debate and put a halt
about the correlation between the body and soul that eventually renamed as the
body and the mind however, these two components of human person is less
important than the fact that there is a self (Atala et.al., 2018).
Throughout social sciences, “Identity” was a term used to describe a person’s
conception and expression of individuality also it is a complex multidimensional
concept with several components. Self and identity remain topics of high interest
not only for philosophers but for those across the social sciences – psychologists,
sociologists and anthropologists. Further, self and identity are sometimes used
interchangeably and other times used to refer to different things. (Sharma, 2014)

2. ABSTRACTION
What is the Self?
Self, is commonly defined by the following characteristics: “separate, self-
contained, independent, consistent, unitary and private” (Stevens 1996). Separate
defines that the self is unique from other selves. The self is always distinct and has
its own identity. Second, self-contained and independent, it can exist in itself. Its
uniqueness allows it to be self-contained with its own thoughts, characteristics and
volition. It does not need any other self for it to exist. Self means unitary, it is the
center of all experiences and thoughts that run through a certain individual. Finally,
the self is private. Each person figures out information, emotions and feelings, and
thought processes within the self. The entire process is never accessible to anyone
but the self.
In contemporary literature, the self is commonly defined by the following
characteristics: “self-contained, separate, consistent, unitary, independent, and
private” (Stevens 1996). By separate, it means that the self is unique from other
selves. One cannot be another person that the self is always unique and has its
own identity and even the twins are distinct from each other. Next, self is also self-
contained and independent because in itself it can exist that it does not need or
require any other self for it to exist. Its uniqueness allows it to be self-contained
with its own thoughts, volitions, and characteristics. Also, self is consistent because
it has a personality that is enduring and therefore can be expected to continue for
quite some time that its consistency allows it to be described, studied, and
measured or its particular self’s traits, tendencies, potentials, and characteristics
are more or less the same. Self is unitary, it is like the chief command post in an
individual where all emotions, processes, and thoughts converge. Lastly, the self
is private wherein each person figures out emotions, feelings, information, and
thoughts processes within the self and that this whole process is never accessible
to anyone but the self (Atala et.al., 2018).
Different conceptualization about the “self” had been offered by various
psychological perspectives. Whenever we talk about the “self” it always pertains to
one’s physical appearance, one’s personality and attributes, on how we see one’s
self (self-concept), or how we would like to see ourselves among many others. The
concept of “self” has been studied by different person/people, thinkers, or
disciplines in the social sciences and some other related fields. (Degho et.al.,
2018)

3. The Self and Culture
Marcell Mauss a French Anthropologist explained that every self has two
faces: personne and moi. Personne, is composed of the social concepts of what it
means to be who he is. This face has much to do much with what it means to live
in a particular family, religion, nationality, institution, and how to behave given
expectations and influences from others. Moi, on the other hand is a person’s basic
identity. It refers to a person’s sense of who he is, his body, and his basic identity
and his biological givenness. This capacity and dynamics for different personne
can be illustrated better cross-culturally. Example, an OFW adjusting to life in
another country. Many people in the Philippines unabashedly violate rules and the
most common is jaywalking. A common Filipino treats road as basically his and
just merely crosses whenever and wherever he likes. The self simply morphed
according to the circumstances and context example, men easily transform into
sweet, docile guy when trying to woe and court a particular woman and suddenly
change rapidly after hearing/receiving a sweet “yes”. Another example of a Filipino
attitude is that they tend to consider their territory as part of who they are, this
includes considering their immediate surroundings as a part of them (Atala et.al.,
2018).
The Self and the development of the social world
Most often, we think the human persons are just passive actors in the whole
process of shaping of selves. So how do people actively produce their social world?
How can a boy turn out to simply be like an ape? And how do twins coming out
from the same mother turn out to be terribly different when given up for adoption?
More than this his givenness (tendencies, personality, and propensities, among
others). One is believed to be in active participation in the shaping of the self. Men
and women are born with particularities that they can no longer change. However,
a recent study indicates that men and women in their growth and development
engage actively in the shaping of the self. The unending terrain of transformation
of the self is mediated by
language (Atala et.al., 2018).
https://tinyurl.com/y49z4shx https://tinyurl.com/y5lgc87b

4. “The similarities between G.H Mead’s and L.S. Vygotsky’s theories are an
interesting aspect of the history of social sciences” – Glock 1986, VariSzilagi 1989.
Mead remained under the influence of pragmatism while Vygotsky, Marxism was
the main source of inspiration. However, they suggested identical or similar
solutions to many fundamental problems in the methodology of the social sciences
(KOCZANOWICZ, July 17, 2020).
For Vygotsky and Mead, the way that we process information is normally a
form of an internal dialogue in our head while in human persons develop is with
the use of language acquisition and interaction with other people. Those who
deliberate about moral quandary undergo this internal dialog. “Should I do this or
that?” “But if I am going to do this, it will be like this. “I do not want the other option?”
So cognitive and emotional development of a child is always an imitation of how it
is done in the social world, in the external reality where he is in Also, they both treat
the human mind as something that is made, constituted through language as
experienced in the external world and as encountered in dialogs with others. As a
young child internalizes values, practices, norms, and social beliefs and more
through exposure to these dialogs that will eventually become part of his individual
world. For mead, child assumes the “other” through language and role-play and a
child will conceptualize his notion of “self” through this. How little children are fond
of playing role-play with their toys? How they make scripts and dialogs for their
toys as they play with them? Because it is through this that a child delineates the
“I” from the rest. While to Lev Vygotsky, a child internalizes real-life dialogs that he
has had with other people, with family, caregiver, or his playmates. Did you
observed how children eventually become what they watch? How can a child easily
adapt ways of cartoon characters they are exposed with? They apply this to their
mental and practical problems along with the social and cultural infusions brought
about the said dialogs (Atala et.al., 2018).
Self in Families
The kind of family that we are born in, the resources available (spiritual,
human, economic) and the kind of development that we will have, will certainly
affect us as we go through life. Human persons are one of those beings whose
importance of family cannot be denied. Learning therefore is critical in our capacity
to actualize our potential of becoming humans. In trying to achieve the goal of
becoming a fully realized human, a child enters a system of relationships. Most
important of which is the family. Without a family, biologically and sociologically, a
person may not even survive or become a human person. For instance, the survival
of Tarzan in the midst of the forest is already a miracle. Getting reared by different
families gives an obvious manifestation of the point being made in this section.
One is who he is because of his family for the most part (Atala et.al., 2018).

5. Gender and the Self
Another important aspect of the self is gender. Gender is one of those core
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 validate, express, 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 freedom to find express, and live his identity. This forms
part of selfhood that one cannot just dismiss. One maneuvers into the society and
identifies himself as who he is by also taking note of gender identifies. Our gender
partly determines how we see ourselves in the world. Many times, society forces a
particular identity unto us depending on our sex, and/or gender. In the Philippines
husband for the most part are expected to provide for the family. The eldest son in
a family is expected to head the family and hold it in. Slight modifications have
been on the way due to feminism and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender
(LGBT) activism but for the most part, patriarchy has remained to be at work. Within
a particular context of time and space, gendered self is then shaped. The sense of
self that is being taught makes sure that an individual fits in a particular
environment and this is detrimental and dangerous in the goal of truly finding one’s
self, self-determination, and growth of the self. Gender has personally discovered
and asserted and not dictated by culture and the society (Atala et.al., 2018).