PDF - file.PHILOSOPHICAL PERSPECTIVE-UNIT-1

https://www.google.com.ph/search?
sa=G&hl=en-PH&q=sociology+transparent&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&tbs=simg:CAESwQIJY7q9_1cM 5YgatQI-
LEKjU2AQaBggVCAgIC gwLELCMpwgaYgpgCAMSKPQGs SxFIIKpQqFA_1gG9QP6BpkDmjSZNMY_1rz2uPbI9vj2iPcc_1mzQaMGJu7k4fzZHA 1uGETXor-
C7N5fYa6DS_1jTo4lPwIvIMeVuIYWu7TIX5eBbLYsnMEz_1SA EDAsQjq7CB oKCgIARIEzP_1W8Aw LEJ3twQkangEKHgoLZmlzaGluZyBuZXTapY-
j2AwsKCS9tLzA0OWgwbQodCgpzaWxob3VldHRl2qW I9gMLCgkv bS8wM3RoZ2sKGwoIY2xpcCBhcnTapYj2 AwsKCS9tLzAzZzA5dAojChByZWFyLXZ
pZXcgbWlycm9y2qWI9gMLCgkvbS8wNWoxMXgKGwoIY2hhaW5zYXfapYj2AwsKC S9tLzAxajR6OQw&fir=Ga53WwRMAmhp0M%253A%252CDU3
oEWpI9AJ6F M%252C_&usg=__B76iO1IwTQait01QrDeABSHg1E4%3D&ved=0ahUKEwi_y7-_38DbAhVMwbwKHUEFD4kQ9QEIOzAC#
LEARNING OUTCOMES:
At the end of the course, the students will be able to:
1. Discuss the different representations and conceptualizations
of the self according to various disciplinal perspectives.
2. Compare and contrast how the self has been represented
across different disciplines and perspectives.
3. Examine the different influences, factors and forces that
shape the self.
4. Demonstrate critical and reflective thought in analyzing the
development of one’s self and identity by developing a theory
of the self.
1 Understanding the Self Unit 1: The Self from Various Disciplinal Perspectives
LESSON 1
THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE SELF
Lesson Objectives:
a. Define the Self based on the philosophical perspective.
b. Recognize the similarities and differences of self conceptualizations according to the point of
view of philosophy.
c. Evaluate one’s concept of the ‘self’ as compared to its philosophical perspectives.
ACTIVATE
Pretend that you are a fresh graduate ready to enter the
real world of the labor force. While looking at the Classified Ads,
you came across the advertisement of your dream company, hiring
a qualified candidate who can genuinely take the role and contribute
to the advancement of the company. Then, you sent your resume
for evaluation and surprisingly, you got a phone call from the HR Department asking
you to come in for an interview. How are you going to sell yourself to get hired?
What characteristics about yourself are you going to say to the Interviewer? Write as
many descriptions as you can to define yourself. Use the space provided below and
answer the questions that follow.
1. How do you feel about choosing the best descriptions about yourself?
Box your answer
2. Why do you think you feel that way?
3. Do you really know yourself?
4. Do you want to know yourself?
EMPOWER
People say that the secret to success is to “know yourself”. Do you
agree? Have you ever asked yourself the question, “Do I really know
myself?” Some of you may have found the activity on the previous page
quite easy, but surely, many of you found it tough to look for the finest
words to describe yourself. Some of you may have encountered instances
wherein you underestimate yourself either because you are afraid to get embarrassed or you have
absolutely no idea of what you are capable of doing. Why do you think this happens?? The answer is
simple: because you do not truly know yourself.
Indeed, it is necessary to know yourself. But how do you go about it, right? This lesson
explores the philosophies of the self, which breaks into several key theories about human existence
that have been a heated debate throughout history and are still being argued about up until now.
In an effort to answer the countless inquiries about the self, the greatest thinkers, known as the
philosophers, have immersed themselves in search for knowledge about the nature of being human.
Questions like, “What does it mean to be a person?” or “Who am I?” or “Do I really matter?” or
“How do I know that I will continue to be me in the future?” have engaged key thinkers to address
these matters of existence to help us understand the different views about the self.
SOCRATES Most of what we know about Socrates come from the

accounts of people’s writings long after his death. He was born
in Athens around 469 B.C. Some say he followed his father’s
trade as a stone mason and has even served in the Athenian
army at some point in his life. Granting that his ideas earned
him many followers in Athens, he has also upset a lot of people
with his philosophical inquiries. He was brought to trial in 399
B.C. under charges of corrupting the youth of the city. He was
found guilty and sentenced to death by drinking hemlock poison.
What was Socrates’ philosophy? Why did the Athenian city-state
consider him dangerous?
https://www.google.com.ph/searchrlz=1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767&biw=151 7&bih= 735&tbm =I
sch&s=1&ei=wu_dWoG9I4WF8gX546CICQ&q=socrates+image+png&oq=socrates+image+png
Socrates was often in the position of an examiner —
&gs_l=psy-ab.3...43962.44541.0.44692.6.5.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..6.0.0...0.
EiJG2sc_yBQ#imgrc=CUtfElr26zbmmM:
a questioner. He constantly looks for imperfections in the ideas
of others, which is actually the heart of his philosophy. Socrates knows that he knows nothing, more
importantly, he knows that he knows nothing, while everyone else is under the flawed
impression that they know something (Vlastos & Graham, 1971).
Do you realize the danger in this?
The highest form of human excellence, according to Socrates, is to question oneself and others
(Maxwell, 2013). In truth, Socrates is simply establishing a higher standard of truth, which must be
logically consistent and not contradicting itself. This is Socrates’ dangerous idea. Instead of being
satisfied with an answer that sounds pretty good, Socrates asserts that one should examine more
closely the things we call ‘true,’ considering that there are vast concepts that are not easily defined.
To Socrates, man has to look at himself to understand his long-standing mission, to “Know Yourself.”
For him, “an unexamined life is not worth living” (Vlastos & Graham, 1971). Basically, the most horrible
thing that can happen to anybody is to “live but die inside” (Alata, et. Al 2018). Therefore, to
preserve our souls for the afterlife, we must be fully aware of who we are and the virtues
that come with its attainment.
He also believed that an individual’s personhood is composed of the body and soul. The soul, for
him, is immortal. For this reason, he insisted that death is not the end of existence. Rather, it is
simply the separation of the soul from the body.
Socrates also raised the point that just because something seems true does not mean it is true
(Rowe, 2007). He further noted that, in reality, many people believe things that are not true.
Hence, Socrates made a distinction between knowledge and belief. The former being always and
universally true while the latter is only true in certain circumstances.
What made Socrates a menace was the fact that even matters of faith fall short of his
standard of truth since every religion in the world is full of contradictions. By undermining religion,
Socrates is essentially questioning the foundation of his society. So the Athenians made the worst
decision they could have made—they took him and turned him into a martyr (Anagnostopoulos, 2006).
PLATO
What happened to Socrates dismayed his friends and
followers. Plato, Socrates’ student, got mad at the plight of his
master, enough to write tons of books about him, making sure that
his dangerous ideas lived on.
Plato sustained the idea that man is composed of a dual nature
of body and soul. According to the Internet Encyclopedia of
Philosophy, Plato believed that the soul is immortal and separated
from the body. However, he took it to a higher level, claiming that
the soul was eternal. According to Plato, the soul does not exist
with the body. Instead, it exists prior to being joined to the body.
Resembling the idea of reincarnation, Plato ascertained that the soul
lives within a body and upon death, the soul moves onto another
https://www.google.com.ph/search?rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767&biw=20 49&
bih=993&tbm=isch&sa=1 &ei=FT3eWr_wL8W28QXNzrGQAw&q=plato+image +png
&oq =plato +image+png&gs_l=psy-ab.3...18871.20970. 0.21275.12.10.0.
0.0.0.396.1094.0j1j2j1.4.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..8.2.402...0j0i67k1j0i8i30k1j0i
body afterwards. Building on this belief, Plato called the body the
prison of the soul.
30k1.0.PzmucX 2fCdA #imgrc=fjRW67Yx0ctOJM:
In his dialogue, “The Republic” (Santas, 2010), Plato argued that the human soul or the
psyche is divided into three parts labelled as appetitive, spirited, and rational. For justice in the
human person to be attained, these parts of the soul should be in tune with one another.
Imagine this, there are three things in front of you: a moist, warm piece of chocolate cake, a
slice of your self-baked but half-burnt pie, and your favorite fruit. Which one would you end up
selecting to eat?
Plato’s theory tells us that if we are left with our own instincts to decide what is good for us,
then we are most likely to choose based on our desires (appetitive soul) to satisfy our needs in ways
that are easier and more likeable for all of us. We are also likely to choose based on our mood or
emotions (spirited soul) that have to be kept in control at all times to prevent causing us problems.
Lastly, we also choose based on logic and intellect (rational soul), choosing the healthy one for us.
When these three work in with each other, then the tendency to be enslaved by our own false
opinions is lesser and the human soul becomes just and virtuous through our capability of making
rational decisions, capable of breaking free of opinions, scrutinizing misleading sensory perceptions
and discovering true knowledge (Shoefield, 2006).
Augustine
Like Plato, he also asserted that the soul is immortal. However,
he believed that the soul AND the body make up a human. He does
not believe that the soul jumps from one body to another. Instead,
one person is made up of one body and one soul.
Augustine’s view of the human person states that the body is
that imperfect aspect of man that is bound to perish on earth,
which incessantly longs to be in communion with the spiritual realm
of the Divine God. The soul, on the other hand, is “capable of
reaching immortality by staying after death in an eternal realm with
the all-transcendent God (Mennel, 1994). The purpose, therefore, of
every human person is to attain this spiritual union with God by living
his life according to virtues.
https://www.google.com.ph/search rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767&tbm=isch&
q=augustine+picture&chips=q:augustine+picture,online_chips:saint+augustine&sa=
aquinas
X&ved=0ahUKEwjmt-3k89LaAhVHE7wKHS4WAWoQ4lYIKigD&biw=1020&b
ih=886&dpr=0.67#imgrc=W-e2NTjZVx6DFM:
Thomas Aquinas, in his theory of self-knowledge, claimed that all

our experiences about the world around us determine our
self-knowledge. He argues that our experiences greatly shape our
awareness of ourselves — the more experience we have, the more
we get to know ourselves. Answering the question, ’Who am I?’ can
only be unraveled from the inside by me, the one asking the
question. Such question can be resolved by reasoning taken from
life encounters as evidences. For Aquinas, our being is not composed
of isolated minds or selves, rather, we are agents interacting with
the environment (Torrell, 2005). Note that answering the said
question requires becoming more aware of ourselves as we engage
with real-life experiences. This is Aquinas’ deeper sense of self.
https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=thomas+aquinas+sense+of+self&rlz=1
C1CHBD_enP H767PH767&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahU KEwjDopXe-
gNPaAhVIjLwKHdKUBXQQ_AUICigB&biw=1020&bih=886#imgrc=XR5oMjcNe_p42M
DESCARTES
Rene Descartes is known to be the “Father of Modern
Philosophy” and one of the most famous dualistic thinkers of all
time (Rozemond, 1998). Dualism is the concept that reality or ex-
istence is divided into two parts: the mind and the physical body.
According to dualism, the mind is somehow separate from the
physical attributes of the body. The body is nothing but a part
attached to the mind, while the mind is part of the unseen crea-
tion. Literally speaking, if a human skull is opened-up, one can
use his senses to find out something about the human brain, but
can never find anything about the mind. Descartes asserted that
one cannot rely on his senses because they are sometimes
misleading. https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=rene+descartes&rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767&sour
ce=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwij3OqdjNPaAhVS6bwKHag1AlcQ_AUICigB&biw=10
20&bih=886#imgrc=dsaEkoWFv13JjM:
He further believed that the mind is the seat of our consciousness. Because it houses our
drives, intellect, passion and understanding, it gives us our identity and our sense of self. In short,
all that we really are comes from the mind. As Descartes puts it, “I think, therefore I am” (“ Cogito,
ergo, sum” in Latin). He argued that the only thing that cannot be doubted is the existence of the
self, as man himself was the one doing the doubting in the first place. One thing should be clear
by now, we exist, because we think; we think therefore we exist. In the Second Meditation, he
explored on the idea that he is “nothing but a thinking thing that doubts, understands, affirms,
denies, is willing, is unwilling, and also imagines and has sensory perceptions” (Skirry, 2005; Flage &
Bonnen, 2014).
LOCKE
Identity has been defined in so many ways but for philosophers,
identity means being one thing and not another. It is what makes you
“you” and me “me”. John Locke believed that our identity is tied with
our consciousness, which to him, is the perception of what passes in
a man's own mind (Anstey, 2011). In other words, it comprises our
memories.
Was there ever a time that you asked yourself, “Am I still the
person I once was?” To answer this, Locke used his principle of
individuation, the idea that a person keeps the same identity over
time. For instance, would we be a different person if we lost an arm
or a leg? Locke’s answer was simple: Of course, not! To Locke, our
https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=john+locke&rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH
identity is not defined by our physical being. Whether we grow taller, 767PH767&source=ln ms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwisuIyer9X aAh-
WFl5QKHZDzBlIQ_AUICigB&biw=906&bih=853&dpr=0.75#imgrc=pQiwfyETVhFjdM:
lose hair, go blind or get a face lift, our memories are still the same. Therefore, Locke simply tells
us that our memories give us our identity (Ayers, 1993).
HUME
David Hume is known for his lack of self theory. He held to
empiricism, the theory that all knowledge is derived from human senses.
Basically, he believes that it is only through our physical experiences
using our sense of sight, sound, touch, taste, and smell that we know
what we know.
To understand his lack of self beliefs, Hume made a clear
distinction between impressions (everything that originate from our
senses) and ideas (which are just faint images of thinking and
reasoning based on impressions) in his Essay Concerning Human
https://www.google.com.ph/search?rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767&bi
Understanding (Source: Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy). For
instance, our sense of touch tells us that a sea urchin is spiny and
w=906&bih=853&tbm= isch&sa=1&ei=_X_gWp_cHoSA8wX49alY&q=david+hu
me+png&oq=david+hume+png&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0l5j0i67k1j0l4.19 22
86 .192807.0.192989.4.4.0.0.0.0.204.204.2-1.1.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-
therefore, sharp. This is an impression and is wild because it is

a product of our direct experience with the world. From this impression, we form the idea that it is
dangerous to the touch. The concept of ‘dangerous’ is difficult to define completely since it cannot
be seen, touched or tasted — it is just an idea. Hume also argued that these impressions are the
changing, shifting elements of our existence and because of this, our personal identity cannot
persist through time. In short, we perceive a sense of self depending on how our mind put
impressions together and makes sense of them as ’me.’
To Hume, the idea of the self that we make is a bunch of physical impressions. He argued in
his bundle theory, the assertion that the properties we can sense are the only real parts of an
object (Larsen & Buss, 2013). If an orange fruit is round and orange in color, the theory holds that if
we remove all the properties of an orange, the idea of the orange vanishes and we are left with
nothing. In the same manner, Hume emphasized that if a human is stripped off of all his/her
physical properties, the idea of the human also disappears. Therefore, our sense of self is simply a
combination of all the impressions that we have, that, once removed, leave us with a complete lack
of self.
KANT
Several philosophers during Immanuel Kant's time take into
account empiricism as the only path to true knowledge, which
asserts that knowledge is only attained through the senses. In
other words, ’To see is to believe!’ Hence, if something cannot be
seen, tasted, touched, heard, or physically experienced, it might as
well be a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow!
Then again, many of Kant's supporters advocated rationalism, a
theory which states that reason is the foundation of all knowledge,
rather than experience. Say for example, while watching a 3D movie,
your eyes tell you that a dinosaur is about to jump out of a screen.
However, your rational mind lets you know that it is not! Therefore,
seeing is not believing — reasoning is!
httpshttps://ph.images.search.yahoo.com/search/images?p=immanuel+kant&fr=yfp- In the middle of this heated debate on self-knowledge and
t&imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fs.fixquotes.com%2Ffiles%2Fauthor%2Fimmanuel-
kant_G1w32.jpg#id=2&iurl=http%3A%2F%2Fs.fixquotes.com%2Ffiles%2Fauthor%
2Fimmanuel-kant_G1w32.jpg&action=click perception between empiricism vs. rationalism was Kant, who
believed that we all have an inner and an outer self which together, form our consciousness.
The inner self is comprised of our psychological state and our rational intellect. The outer
self includes our sense and the physical world (Carver & Scheier, 2014). To Kant, both of these
theories are incomplete when it comes to the self. When speaking of the inner self, there is
apperception, which is how we mentally assimilate a new idea into old ones. Basically, it is how we
make sense of new things. Consider Person A to be the owner of a 180-lb. dog. For him, his dog
is huge so whenever he meets an 80-lb. dog (or any other weight less than his dog’s, for that
matter), he does not consider it to be big. On the other hand, to a person who spends all day with
a small breed dog like a Chihuahua, the same 80-lb dog would seem immense. With this, Person A’s
rational thoughts on ‘big’ are based on the already formed apperception of his big dog, while the
other person’s is based on undersized canines. According to Kant, neither is right nor wrong — the
idea of ‘big’ is just based on internal reasoning that cannot be experienced through senses.
As a fragment of the outer self, Kant argued about a mental imagery based on past
sensations and experiences called representation, which occurs through our senses. Let us say that
you are a person who is not into cold places. You have never been to Alaska but based on the
photos you found online and your personal experiences with snow even in other places in the past,
you already have imagined what Alaska would feel like. This representation of cold for you is
enough to keep you from going to Alaska. As per Kant, empiricists who only rely on the sensory
world and representation miss the mark on self by negating the effects of apperception.
Conversely, rationalists who cancel out representation miss by just as much. It is through these
that Kant believed that the inner and outer self combine to give us our consciousness instead of
self being one or the other.
RYLE
While many philosophers support, “I think, therefore I am,” Gilbert
Ryle in a way said, “I act, therefore I am!” Ryle unravels the separation
between the mind and the body by claiming that it is our behaviors and
actions that give us our sense of self. In other words, we are all just a
bundle of behaviors that if someone thinks she is beautiful, it is
because she acts beautifully. If someone thinks he is intelligent, it is
because he acts intelligently.
Ryle tells us that those who think that the mind exists separately
from the body are committing a category mistake, an error in logic in
which one category of something is presented as belonging to another
category (Hofstadter, 1951). This concept is best explained below:
“One day a girl visited a college campus. After seeing the buildings,
https://www.google.com.ph/search?rlz=1C1CHBD_e n PH76 7PH7
67&biw=1821&bih=882&tbm=isch&sa =1&ei=By7iWrCnHcOT8 wX5-
qFI&q=gilbert+ryle &oq =gilbert+ryle&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i67k1l 3j0l7. 56965.
teachers, students, and dorms, she looked at the tour guide and
58 393.0.58573.12.8.0.0.0.0.341.482.0j 1j0j1.2.0.... 0… 1c.1.64. psy-
ab..10.2.481....0.Zoajkk6 y0Us#imgrc =U8XEv_RFVaQ3mM:
sweetly asked, ‘This is all nice, but when do I get to see the university?'
With this question, the girl committed a category mistake. Rather than realizing everything she saw
made up the university, she thought it existed as a separate category.”
To Ryle, the idea that “there is something called ‘mind’ over and above a person’s behavioral
dispositions” is questionable. He argued that the mind does not exist and therefore cannot be the
seat of self. In other words, we neither get our sense of self from the mind nor from the body,
but from our behaviors in our day-to-day activities.
CHURCHLAND
When it comes to discussing the mind, many Western philosophers
held to dualism, which asserts that the mind and the body are
separate. In other words, we all have a physical brain, but we also
have a separate mind. Because the mind is the seat of our
consciousness, it is what gives us our identity.
But Paul Churchland, a modern-day philosopher, believed otherwise.
Instead of dualism, he holds to the belief that the physical brain is
where we get our sense of self. This is known as eliminative
materialism, the belief that nothing but matter exists (Churchland, 1981).
In short, if it cannot be recognized by our senses, then it is simply a
fairy tale. Therefore, since the mind cannot be experienced by our
senses, then it does not really exist. For him, it is the physical brain
https://www.google.com.ph/searchq=paul+churchland&rlz=
and not the imaginary mind that gives us our sense of self. 1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi
Ju63p0d_aAhXDpJQKHUz4DwgQ_AUICigB&biw=1821&bih=882#imgrc=H8o
nDFclLg5A7M:
To prove this, Churchland points out that if the mind is the seat of
the self, how can personalities be altered by physical injuries or brain trauma? Using this
argument, he claims that the physical brain is the origin of the ‘self’ and that the belief in the mind
is rather unnecessary.
MERLEAU -PONTY
Maurice Merleau-Ponty believed the physical body to be an
important part of what makes up the subjective self (Carbone,
2004).
Subjectivity, or subject is something that has being (Zahavi,
2005; Clark, 1997). It is defined as a real thing that can take real
action and cause real effects. In short, it exists. However, he ar-
gued that this concept contradicts with rationalism and empiri-
cism.
Rationalism asserts that reason and mental perception, rather
than physical senses and experience, are the basis of knowledge
and self (Alloa, 2017). Merleau-Ponty believed that the mind is the
seat of our consciousness (Barbaras, 2014). The body is just a shell
and it is the subject behind what it means to be human. On the
https://www.google.com/search?q=MERLEAU+PONTY&rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767
&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwibx-nE4cHbAhWKXLwKHbQEAfoQ_AUI
CigB&biw=715&bih=615#imgrc=THdUgT-sm0C9GM:
other hand, empiricism is the belief that our physical senses are
our only source of knowledge. If the source of knowledge cannot be seen, touched, heard, tasted,
etc., it really cannot be trusted. While the rationalists would say, ‘I think, therefore I am,” Empiri-
cists would say, “I sense, therefore I am!.”
Merleau-Ponty disagreed with these concepts. Rather than seeing and perceiving the mind and
the body as two separate entities, Merleau-Ponty argued that they are interconnected. They both
are our seat of knowledge, and they both give us our sense of self. Like love and marriage, you
cannot have one without the other! In other words, the self and perception are encompassed in a
physical body. The physical body is part of the self — the body is not a prison house of self, rather,
it is the subject that embodies self.
.
EVALUATE
Name: ________________________________________________________________ Year/Section: ________
Worksheet 1
Who are you according to...
Who are you? In your own understanding, briefly express the concept of the ‘self’ for each
philosopher. Then, state how similar or different your view of the ‘self’ is as compared to that of
Socrates Plato Augustine
Aquinas Descartes
Locke Hume Kant
Ryle Churchland Merleau-Ponty
Worksheet 2
How is self understood?
Examine your ‘self’ now that you are in college. Write a short essay below on how you
understand your self. Identify the different influences, factors and forces that led to yourself.
Then, reflect on the kind of identity that you have at present by developing a theory of your own.
Worksheet 3
How do you see me?
Do you want to know how other people see you? Do you believe that you have the same
perception of your self as compared to how others see you? Let’s find out by asking your
classmates to describe you by writing their perceptions of you on the space provided below.
What did you discover about yourself from other people’s point of view? _________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Do you believe in their perception about you? Why or why not? __________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________
What could be the possible reason/s why others perceive you differently from what you know about
yourself? __________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________
REFERENCES:
Alloa, E. (2017). Resistance of the Sensible World. An Introduction to Merleau-Ponty. New York:
Fordham University Press.
Anagnostopoulos, M. (2006). “The Divided Soul and the Desire for Good in Plato’s “Republic” in
Santas, Gerasimos (ed.). The Blackwell Guide to Plato’s Republic. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Anstey, P. (2011). John Locke & Natural Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ayers, M. (1993). Locke: Epistemology and Ontology. New York: Routledge.
Barbaras, R. (2004). The Being of the Phenomenon. Merleau-Ponty's Ontology. Bloomington: Indiana
University Press.
Carbone, M. (2004). The Thinking of the Sensible Merleau-Ponty’s A Philosophy. Evanston:

Northwestern University Press.
Carver, C. & Scheier, M. (2014). Perspectives on Personality (7th ed.). Edinburgh Gate: Pearson
Education Limited.
Churchland, P. (1981). Eliminative Materialism and the Propositional Attitudes. Journal of Philosophy
78:67-90.
Clark, A. 1997. Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Flage, D. & Bonnen, C. (2014). Descartes and Method: A Search for a Method in Meditations. New York:
Routledge.
Giles, J. (1997). No Self to be Found: The Search for Personal Identity. Maryland: University Press of
America.
Hofstadter, A. (1951). The Journal of Philosophy, vol.48,No.9, pp.257-270. DOI: 10.2307/2021599

Retrieved from : http://www.jstor.org/stable/2021599
Larsen, R. & Buss, D. (2013) Personality Psychology: Domains of Knowledge About Human Nature (11th
ed.). New Delhi: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Lear, J. (1997). “Inside and Outside the Republic”, in Kraut, R. edition, Plato’s Republic: Critical
Essays. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.
Maxwell, M. (2013). The Fundamentals of Education: A Socratic Perspective on the Cultivation of

Humanity. Retrieved from: http://www.socraticmethod.net/how_to_use_the_socratic_method/
page1.html.
Mennel, S. (1994). Journal of Early Christian Studies, vol.2, no.3, pp. 291-324, doi: 10.1353/earl.0.0138
Rowe, C. (2007). “The Place of the Republic in Plato’s Political Thought” in Ferrari, G.R.F. The
Canbridge Companion to Plato’s Republic. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rozemond, M. (1998). Descartes’ Dualism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Santas, G. (2010). Understanding Plato’s Republic. New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell.
Schofield, M. (2006). Plato: Political Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Skirry, J. (2005). Descartes and the Metaphysics of Human Nature. London and New York:
Thoemmes-Continuum Press.
Torrell, J. (2005). Saint Thomas Aquinas: The Person and His Work. Washington, DC: The Catholic
University of America Press.
Vlastos, G. & Graham, D. (1971). “The Paradox of Socrates,” in The Philosophy of Socrates: A
Collection of Critical Essays. Melbourne: Anchor Books.
Zahavi, D. (2005). Subjectivity and selfhood: Investigating the first-person perspective. New York:
MIT.
LESSON 2
THE SOCIOLOGY AND ANTHROPOLOGY OF THE SELF
Lesson Objectives:
a. Describe the connection between the self, society and culture.
b. Recognize the social and cultural factors that shape the self.
c. Examine the comparisons of the self based on the different societies.
d. Reflect on one’s development of the self based on one’s cultural and societal backgrounds.
ACTIVATE
Have you ever feel the need to wear a variety of masks in order to blend into
social situations? At some point in our lives, we all try to conceal that ‘part of us’
which we do not like the world to see because we fear rejection. They are normal,
yet not an ideal part of human life. If you are to represent yourself to other
people, how would your mask look like? Create a mask for yourself using the template
provided.
1
1
1. Describe the image that you want to portray in your mask.
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
2. In one word, define how you have been labeled by your:
a. classmates/friends:
______________________________________________________________
b. family:
______________________________________________________________
https://www.google.com.ph/search?sa=G&hl=en-PH&q=reflection+ps
c. teachers/adults:
ychology&tbm=isch&tbs=simg:CAQSlwEJSwz5Tuzj9asaiwELEKjU2AQa
BAgUCAoMCxCwjKcIGmIKYAgDEijKE8kT-B_1OE9YT-R_1uE5II1x3tE8Q
nmDWnLcYnmyOcI8UnhyqpI9Y0GjDUrox0PcMipmhsMcvpA9fWKK
hfJW1ZiIrj-eaXheQqHPf8Pew82ZB_1U_1X9HKj5zG0gBAwLEI6u_1gga
_____________________________________________________________
CgoICAESBHOX1IkM&ved=0ahUKEwjCgdq2y8fbAhUMfbwKHWkOCtEQ
3. How would you describe what people typically know about what you do
wg4IJSgA&biw=1093&bih=490#imgrc=EyWmzzp_KaSnMM:
or about your life?___________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
4. Explain how your personality is really like (what you really love to do that not everyone knows or
what your life is really like). ___________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
5. Are there any similarities or differences between your own descriptions as compared to that of
the others about you? _______________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
6. What could be the possible factors that influenced these similarities or differences? ____________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
EMPOWER
Many philosophers have debated upon the concept of the ‘self.’ Later on, more discussions
about the ‘self’ emerged with the advent of the social sciences to revisit new ways and theories
that would best explain the true nature of the self.
Among the emphases in the examination of the self is the connection between the self and the
outside world.
You may have encountered the term, tabula rasa, the idea that individuals are born without any
mental content. Therefore, knowledge of something comes from experience or perception (Diels-
Kranz, 1987). In the same manner, our sense of self begins to develop as we experience the world
around us — the more we interact with the outside world, the more we develop our selves. If you
happen to have watched the movie, “Mean Girls,” that was what exactly happened to Cady Heron
whose innocent life changed after attending a public school for the first time, meeting different
kinds of people and shaping a brand new person in Cady. Consequently, the sociological and
anthropological perspectives of the self tell us that the ‘self’ is a by-product of one’s interaction
with the environment, and not because of the mind or the soul infused into us.
What Is Identity?
After being part of the first batch of senior high school graduates, you
are now in the middle of figuring out what you really want to be - like it or
not, you are in search of an identity, the concept that we have of our role
in the world around us (James, 2015). Remember, we do not just wake up
one day and decide on the person we want to become. Instead, we try to
find our identity through a continuous complex process throughout our lives.
At this stage of your life, you are beginning to make your own decisions
— what course to take in college, what school to go to, which friends to be
with, and so on and so forth — but this does not mean you are free of
influences. Say for example, you chose the course BS Aeronautical https://www.google.com.ph/search?
q=identity&rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767&source
Engineering in the number one aviation school in the Philippines. Did you =lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjB_rm4ieLaAhXHEbwKHSdHAO
4Q_AUICigB&biw=1517&bih=681&dpr=0.9#imgrc=yUzEWuqlNWfT1M:
decide on this because you really want to design aircrafts? Are you
interested in finding out if it is a difficult course? Did you get pressured by a family member, a
relative perhaps, because he/she is also an Aeronautical Engineer even though you did not really
want to take the course? Or, are you simply taking it because your friends chose this course as
well?
Thinking about these questions can help us see that the decisions we make are prompted by a
variety of factors. To some extent, you may have chosen a particular course, but your decision is
also influenced by external factors that are out of your control. Your perceptions, attitudes, values,
and beliefs and those around you all play an important role (Heggertveit-Aoudia, 2012).
Self-Identity vs. Social Identity

The way you see yourself is your self-identity (Shoemaker,
2015). Your self identity shapes your perceptions, or the way
you see the world. Your attitude about life, the way you think
or feel about something, depends on how you identify yourself.
Also, the way you see yourself is also manipulated by
your values, what you think is right or wrong, and beliefs, what
you see as true and untrue. All these factors influence what
you can accomplish and where you will fit in (Stevens, 1996).
If you do not see yourself as capable of finishing BS
Aeronautical Engineering, would you be taking the entrance
examination for this course? Would you take this course if you
felt that it was not a worthy course? With this in mind, we
https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=identity&rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767&source=lnm
s&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiXusOv3uPaAhUY6bwKHRfdAvoQ_AUICigB&biw=755&bih=711&dpr=0
realize that we make decisions about who we are, based on our perception of the world, the way we
feel about things, the consequence of our beliefs and values on the choices that we make. On the
other hand, your social identity, or the way others see you, is also influenced by
others’ perceptions, attitudes, values, and beliefs. Perhaps a family member has high expectations
of you because they were a successful Aeronautical Engineer. Maybe you feel like you do not belong
in the Aero Family because of your race or religion. Social identity and self-identity are not always
on the same page, which can actually cause conflict in a person's life. Imagine how you might feel
if you were identified with being an A+ student and then you were asked to shift to another course
because you did not meet the maintaining grade.
STEREOTYPES
Another important concept in relation to
identity is stereotypes (Operario & Fiske, 2003).
These are assumptions that are made about
individuals because they belong to a particular
social group. Going back to the previous
example, applying the concept of stereotype is
similar to saying, men are better Aeronautical
Engineers than women. When someone believes
that a stereotype is true, unfair judgments https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=stereotype+job+roles&tbm=isch&tbs=rimg:Ca_1FzOPKLpXGIjgvCL-JdAY9S1gnKflpS7 iN-
q8_1seLHgcVR5XWjBS0LsLrRV7pEouh2syWr6odub3dQG5dERgsq7eioSCS8Iv4l0Bj1LEUQ_1G6tpZ3_1GKhIJWCcp-WlLuI0Rrq12wk MQzGAqEgmrz-
are made about an individual. This can be

x4seBxVBH3eqf0SzSIoSoSCXldaMFLQuwuESBN-nrWLJUSKhIJtFXukSi6HawRU7f5ZKQXlv0qEgnJavqh25vd1BFjYw cRMpHOti-
oSCQbl0RGCyrt6EWk7T_1gnZTBX&tbo=u&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj6m5-Dr-LaAhVOPrwKHYMyDM4Q9C96BAgBEBs&biw
=1517&bih=681&dpr=0.9#imgrc=Lwi_iXQGPUvYzM:
seen in a situation where an aviation

company may give preferential treatment to male Aeronautical Engineers and demean the
capabilities of female Aeronautical Engineers. Think about how different the ladies’ experience of
trying to get in an aviation company as compared to that of the men’s. Will the male co-workers
treat the ladies differently? Will the ladies’ abilities be judged fairly? Stereotypes are most of the
time untrue and judgments should not be made about an individual based on an assumption (Fiske,
2002).
SENSE OF SELF AND SELF-SOCIALIZATION

Can you say that you are smart, physically attractive and talented? How do you know you are?
Oftentimes, you believed these to be true about yourself because someone told you so. The self is a
transforming but persistent aspect of one’s personality. Our sense of self is defined as a collection
of beliefs that we hold about ourselves. We put together these beliefs based upon our social
interactions with others (Sedikides & Spencer, 2007).
This lesson will explore the effect of the socialization process on the self according to two
social scientists, George Herbert Mead and Charles Cooley (Macionis & John, 2010). Both of them
believed that the self was developed through the process of self-socialization, a developmental
process that allows us to reflect upon and argue with ourselves for us to develop an accurate self
-image. It is important to note that this process begins in early childhood and has many influencing
factors such as the family, peers, teachers and the media.
mead
George Herbert Mead, in his Social Self Theory, believed that the
sense of self is developed through social interactions, such as
observing and interacting with others (Ritzer, 2008). According to
Mead, the self is not yet present at birth. Rather, it is developed
over time from social experiences and activities. Simply put, When a
baby is first born, he does not seem to have a sense of who he is,
but that changes as he grows.
He also identified three activities that develop the self: language,
play, and games (Mead & Morris, 1967).
By means of symbols, gestures, words, and sounds, which enables https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=george+herbert+mead&rlz=1C1CHBD_e
nPH767PH767&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwihgJH3r-
individuals to communicate with and respond to each other, the self is

LaAhWMppQKHS1YBiIQ_AUICigB&biw= 1517&bih=681#imgrc=
Auxz0jseCsxB7M:
developed through language. A person’s attitudes and opinions towards another person are
conveyed using language. Consequently, it is through play that
the self is developed since it allows us to take on different roles,
pretend, and express expectation of others. Remember the times
when little children think and act like the people they frequently
see such as those little girls who used to play ‘dress-up’ by
putting on her mommy’s lipstick and shoes? Our
self-consciousness is developed through role-playing, which
enables us to assume other roles and internalize how others
perceive us in a variety of social situations.
Children begin to examine their own actions and that of the
others at ages five and eight. Games develop the self by allowing individuals to understand and
adhere to the rules of the activity, teaching them the value of accountability. The self is developed
by understanding that there are rules that one must follow in order to win the game or be
successful in an activity (Miller, 2009).
Let us examine the two sides of the self according to Mead: ‘Me’ and ‘I.’ To Mead, the “me” is
considered the socialized aspect of the individual, which represents the learned behaviors, attitudes
and expectations of others and of the society. This is known as the “generalized other,” where
children and young adults interact with the society and adopt to other people’s expectations
(Gillespie, 2006). It is at this stage that we learn to put our trash in the proper waste can. This
knowledge is developed through our social interactions with other people.
On the other hand, the ‘I’ is the representation of the person’s identity based on the response
to the ‘me.’ In other words, the ‘I’ says, “If the society dictates that I should behave nicely, then I
should act the same (or perhaps differently)” - this notion becomes the self. Take note of the
perceptive relationship between the ‘me’ and the ‘I.’ Akin to a system of checks and balances, the
‘me’ employs societal control over one’s self — it is the part of the self that prevents a person
from being a rule-breaker or disregarding the expectations of the society. Then again, the ‘I’
allows us to bend some rules governing social interactions, which enables us to still express our
creativity, originality and imagination. To Mead, the ‘me’ and the ‘I’ make up the self (Mead, 1934).
Cooley
Charles Cooley built on the work of Mead with his theory called
the Looking-Glass Self (Cooley, 1998). He explained how people
develop a sense of self. Having three elements, the first element is
how we imagine we appear to others. The second element is the
judgment we imagine that other people may be making about us,
and the third element is our self-image based upon the evaluations
of others.
These elements can be best understood by discussing the three
stages of behavioral and personality development of the
Looking-Glass Self. According to Cooley, it takes time to develop
one’s self. Beginning after birth, the self continues to develop
throughout a person's life through the following stages: imagining, https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=charles+cooley&rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH7 67PH
767&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj07tiotOLaAhXGw
rwKHf7tB54Q_AUICigB&biw=1517&bih=681#imgrc=ZBgMwCv1nT3fEM:
interpreting, and developing self-concept.
Imagining occurs when an individual judges the way he or she acts and appears from the points
of view of family and friends. Perhaps your mom sees you as someone who is shy and quiet,
your friends see you as cheeky and confident, while your teachers see you as friendly. Primarily,
these views make-up a self-concept. In fact, this can be understood as, ‘this is how I must appear
to others’ stage.
The second stage is a learned ability called interpreting, which occurs when a person elicits
conclusions coming not only from past experiences but from what others think as well, and then
reacts to the judgement of other people’s views.
As the individual combines everything from his or her past experiences, including others’
perspectives, he or she approaches the final stage, which is developing self-concept. This is where
a sense of self-image is formed and seen as the ‘this is who I am’ stage.
Cooley held high regard for other people’s opinions, and believed that these opinions of the
society shape the individual into becoming who they are. In short, we know if we look good today
because when we wear our favorite outfit, we feel confident and dazzling. Therefore, every time we
wear our favorite outfit, everyone always tells us how good we look in it.
the social & cultural systems and the sense of self

The formation of our self-identities is indeed a very complex process. While the list of
contributing factors is nearly infinite, it is best to discuss several of the most powerful factors.
Considering the fact that these factors change — so does our definition of ourselves. Let us look at
a few of the factors that shape our self and identity, and realize how culture influences our
understanding of these factors.
How we see ourselves shapes our lives, and is shaped by our cultural context. We all have
probably asked ourselves “Who am I?” a dozen times. Certainly, we have heard the saying, “No two
people are alike,” from our personal encounter with other people in different situations. This is
because we will never ever see
ourselves being exactly the same as the
others since we all have different life
experiences. Self-perceptions
influence how we think about the world,
our social relationships, health and
lifestyle choices, community
engagement, political actions, and
ultimately our own and other people's
well-being (Vignoles et. Al, 2016).
It has been a given fact that social
scientists are well-aware that people in
different parts of the world see
https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https://3.bp.blogspot.com/--R-oQcXMnF8/Ws-yzLg_6mI/AAAAAAAAAu4/sNvwKLOodVgFfSo_roHyMUdzo9rJtZ7uQCLcBGAs/w1200
-h630-p-k-no-nu/International-arrivals.jpg&imgrefurl=http://misswagnac-englishtime.blogspot.com/2018/04/unit-3-business-communication-
themselves in different ways.

1tsam_12.html&h=419&w=799&tbnid=vXZN037BswU8YM&tbnh=162&tbnw=310&usg=__JlDgaqTsw4jzD3AsVS-3vL5qdO0=&hl=en-PH&docid=fhdqSjMSNZQT2M
‘’I’ vs. ‘we’

One can attest to the differing culture of the East and the West in terms of self-construction.
Western cultures are inclined to foster individualism, the ‘I’ idea that describes the self as existing
independently of others and includes own traits. In contrast, collectivism dominates the perspective
on the self in Eastern cultures. Collectivism,
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/x64tWB0-ZVqYRhgj3V-
1aSYI2k83djKUQdvALyt-6YWICBDvDDzj_Hr3ILLWgajhFVGQQzI=s121
the ’we’ idea, views the self in relation to

others, emphasizing the interdependence of
the self as part of a larger network of people
who all help shape each other.
Family,, Age,,, and Gender

We all know how the family plays a crucial
role in our development (Banaag & Cruz, 2016).
Being the primary agent of socialization, we
first learn to interact with our parents and
other family members — we are a child to our parents and a brother or sister to our siblings. We
enter a system of relationship — the family — which is the most important of all. We consciously
learn the use of the magic words, ’please’ and ’thank you’, the use of po and opo and the many
ways to show respect such as pagmamano, in the most basic foundation of our growth and
development — the family. Without a family, our sense of self will be difficult to develop. Imagine the
life of Tarzan including his behaviors, attitudes and basic manners. As fabricated as the character
appears, he is who he is because of his ape ‘family.’
Our age is also a factor that influences our identity. Notice how protective our parents have
been when we were little. Young children are more dependent while older children show more
independence. Sometimes they are even asked to take care of their younger siblings. As we age, our
identities and position in the family network transform. Beginning from being a baby, you grow as a
child, then as an adult child of your parents and sooner or later, you may have your own children
and your significant other, and have nieces and nephews (David, 2002).
The role of culture plays a significant role in determining the kind of relationships we establish
with our families. While some aunts and uncles are an important part of a child’s life, some were
raised in a home with one or more parental figures. While others live in a nuclear family, others live
in an extended one where parents, grandparents, and relatives live under the same roof (Banaag &
Cruz, 2016).
Gender also contributes to these relationships. Remember, sex is a biological term for a
person's genetic condition of being male or female. Hence, we only have two sexes. Gender, on the
other hand, is a social interpretation that varies across cultures. This is why different cultures can
have a number of gender categories like lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender. Basically, gender is
how a person expresses his or her biological sex according to cultural definitions (Udry, 1994).
In the Philippines, we still have the terms tomboy, girly-girl, and manly-man to classify the way
people express masculinity or femininity. Even the roles that the society dictates to a specific gender
influence our identity like assigning household tasks to women, fathers being the breadwinner of the
family, toy cars and robots for the little boys, and dolls and dresses for the little girls (Landy, 2017).
ETHNICITY,, NATIONALITY,, AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC CLASS

Similar to the factors mentioned above, a person's ethnicity also contributes to how an individual
interacts with others, yet, those interactions differ depending on where a person lives and his or
her nationality. Ethnicity is a social construct determined by a person's ancestral origins, culture,
and physical attributes inherited from their ancestors (Banaag & Cruz, 2016). Various studies say
that racial or ethnic differences affect one’s self-image.
In a research by Gray-Little & Hafdahl (2000), African-
Americans, who believe that they belong the ethnic
minorities, are found to have lower self-esteem when
they compare themselves to Whites, who are more
advantaged. In the same manner, people with Middle
Eastern ethnicity, regardless of whether or not they
were born and raised in the Middle East or in the United
States, see themselves differently, possessing very Images of Flags taken from www.google.com
different life experiences.

Nationality combines with ethnicity to further define a person's identity within his or her larger
community. Filipinos have a distinct identity of being hospitable, making sure that something is
offered to visitors in the house (Garcia, 2015). In Mediterranean countries, people consider you
unkind if you avoid touching someone’s arm when talking to them or do not greet them with kisses or
a warm embrace (Pitta, et. Al, 1999). In the Philippines, when introduced to a person we just met,
we sometimes tap their backs to show acceptance but do this to someone who is not a family
member or a good friend in Korea will keep them uncomfortable. In the country, we can pat a child
on his or her head even if we are a stranger to them. In Thailand, the head is considered sacred
- patting a child on the head is a big NO (Pitta, et. Al, 1999).
Finally, our socio-economic class significantly influences one’s self-identity. Simply, it determines
where we live, the benefits and shortcomings we experienced during our upbringing, the kind of
education that we have, the kind of language that we learn, and even the choice of social groups.
In truth, our socio-economic class contributes to the development of one’s self-confidence, that
gives them the feeling of either superiority or inferiority in relation to others who belong to a
different class.
EVALUATE
Worksheet 1
Through the Years
A. Reflect on your developmental stages through the years and answer the following questions
as truthfully and as briefly as possible.
How has your family

influenced your
development as a
person?
Cite an instance or
instances when you
felt you were your
true self.
What makes you say

that this was or these
were your real self?
How has your age,

gender, ethnicity and
nationality influence
your identity?
Describe an instance
or instances when you
felt you were your
fake self.
Why do you think you

had to wear a mask
to show something
that you are not?
Identify the factors
that might have
influenced you to show
a fake self.
Have you overcome

this mask? If so,
explain how.
If you are to change

an aspect of your
self, what would it be?
Why?
Worksheet 2
My Timeline
Reflect on your developmental stages through the years.

Were you a hyperactive baby, a curious toddler, a creative
little kid, an adventurous teenager or an opposite version
of these? Briefly give a description of yourself in each
stage using the Timeline template provided on the next
page to trace how the various factors of socialization
influenced your sense of self. You may use drawings, bullet
points, and the like to make your timeline more creative. https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=developmental+stages&rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767&source=lnms&tbm=is ch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiv09-
D0OPaAhWIa7wKHeIhAakQ_AUICigB&biw=1366&bih=662#imgrc=O_vqnACqiv9aMM:
https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=timeline+template&rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj-pN7Bu-PaAhXKxbwKHSvqDTMQ_AUICigB&biw=1366&bih=662#imgrc=F7K5e3h7D1bY5M:
What did you discover about yourself through the years? How will you describe yourself based on your timeline?
REFERENCES
Banaag, L. & Cruz, M. (2016). Socio-Anthro: An Integrated and Interdisciplinary Approach to the
Study of Society, Culture and Politics. Mandaluyong: Books Atbp. Publishing Corp.
Cooley, C. (1998). On Self and Social Organization. Ed. Schubert Hans-Joachim. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
David, R. (2015). Nation, Self, and Citizenship: An Invitation to Philippine Sociology. Department of
Sociology, College of Social Sciences and Philosophy, University of the Philippines.
Diels-Kranz (1987). The Hellenistic Philosophers, Vol. 1, 238. Cambridge, Ma: Cambridge.
Fiske, S., Cuddy, A., Glick, P. & Xu, J. (2002). A Model of (Often Mixed) Stereotype Content:
Competence and Warmth Respectively Follow From Perceived Status and Competition. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology. American Psychological Association. 82 (6): 878–902.
Gillespie, A. (2006). Becoming Other: From Social Interaction to Self-Reflection. Information Age
Publishing.
Haig, D. (2004). The Inexorable Rise of Gender and the Decline of Sex: Social Change in Academic
Titles. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 33 (2): 87–96. doi:10.1023/
B:ASEB.0000014323.56281.0d. PMID 15146141. Archived from the original (PDF) on 15 June 2012.
Heggertveit-Aoudia, S. (2012). Culture, Values and the Impact at Work. Retrieved from
http://www.diversityjournal.com/9823-culture-values-and-the-impact-at-work/ last October 2017.
James, P. (2015). Despite the Terrors of Typologies: The Importance of Understanding Categories of
Difference and Identity. Interventions: International Journal of Postcolonial Studies. 17 (2): 174–
195.
Landy, T. (2017). Family, Marriage & Gender Roles. Retrieved from https://
www.catholicsandcultures.org/philippines/family-marriage-and-gender-roles last January 2, 2018.
Locke, J. (1689). An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, in Kenneth P. Winkler (ed.), pp. xix
(Editor's Introduction) and 33–36 (Book II, Chap. I, 1–9). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing
Company
Macionis, G. & John, L. (2010). Sociology 7th Canadian Ed. Toronto, Ontario: Pearson Canada Inc.
Mead, G. (1934). MIND, SELF and SOCIETY. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Mead, G., & Morris, C. (1967). Mind, self, and society from the standpoint of a social behaviorist.
Chicago London: University of Chicago Press.
Miller, D. (2009). George Herbert Mead: Self, Language, and the World. University of Texas Press.
Operario, D. & Fiske, S. (2003). Stereotypes: Content, Structures, Processes, and Context, in Brown,
R. & Gaertner, S. Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology: Intergroup Processes. Malden,
MA: Blackwell.
Pitta, D., Hung-Gay, F. & Isberg, S. (1999). Ethical issues across cultures: managing the differing
perspectives of China and the USA. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 16 (3), 240-256. MCB
University Press.
Richard, U. (1994). The Nature of Gender. Demography. 31 (4): 561-573. doi:10.2307/2061790.
Sedikides, C. & Spencer, S. (2007). The Self (eds.). New York: Psychology Press
Shoemaker, D. (2015). Personal Identity and Ethics. section "Contemporary Accounts of Personal
Identity. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2016 Edition).
Smith, W. (1898). A Concise Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, in Cornish, F. Warre, ed.
London: Spottiswoode and Co.
Stevens, R. (1996). Understanding the Self. California: SAGE Publications.
Ritzer, G. (2008). Sociological Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
(No Author, ___). What do we mean by "sex" and "gender"? World Health Organization. Archived
from the original on 30 January 2017. Retrieved last November 26, 2016.
LESSON 3
THE PSYCHOLOGY OF THE SELF
Lesson Objectives:
a. Evaluate the various concepts of the ‘self’ as define by psychology.
b. Explore how the distinct psychological factors contribute to the development of the ‘self.’
c. Form one’s own self-construct.
ACTIVATE
Let’s explore your thoughts and feelings. Open-up and share them to your classmates.
Complete the worksheet below in the way that feels right to you. This will help you get an idea of
your general outlook on life and see how things change over time.
Sentence Completion Worksheet

1. My best friend is...
2. Sometimes I wish I could...
3. The thing I fear most is…
4. Today I would like to…
5. I feel my future is…
6. I gain strength from…
7. I would never…
8. I get angry when...
9. I secretly enjoy...
10. I don’t like to admit...
We have understood the philosophical, sociological and anthropological perspectives of the self
in the previous lessons. As discussed, each discipline has their own representations and
conceptualizations of the self. Similarities and differences may have been identified but then again,
one cannot deny the fact that there are cognitive and affective aspects of one’s identity that can
still contribute in the development of one’s self rather than just pointing out to the relation of the
mind and the soul, or of the society or culture to the ‘self.’
This lesson provides a brief overview of the psychological theories that explains how the concept
of the ‘self’ is formed.
EMPOWER
Psychology is the scientific study of the human mind and its functions, especially those affecting
behavior in a given context (Source: English Oxford Living Dictionaries). In this lesson, we will explore
the ’self’ using the perspective of the mental, emotional and spiritual aspects of one’s personality.
The ’self’ has been defined several times as one’s personal identity that characterizes who we
are as a human being (Jhangiani & Tarry 2014). Other definitions say that the ‘self’ entails an
individual’s conscious and unconscious aspects, his or her personality, cognitions or thoughts and
feelings. All these traits or aspects combine together into the person's core identity (Myers, 2009).
In psychology, the sense of self is defined as “the way a person thinks about and views his or her
traits, beliefs, and purpose within the world” (Dash & Tripathy, 2012).
JAMES
William James, known as the “Father of American Psychology,” was
one of the first to propose a theory of the ‘self’ in the Principles of
Psychology (James, 1983). According to James, the self has two
aspects: the “I Self” and the “Me Self.” The ‘I Self’ is a reflection of
what people see in one’s actions in the physical world (e.g., recognizing
that one is reading, running or drinking). The ‘Me Self,’ on the other
hand, represents an individual’s reflections about himself or herself (e.g.
branding oneself as risk-taker, intelligent, kind).
Basically, the ‘I Self’ is the thinking, acting and feeling self whereas
the ‘Me Self’ constitutes the physical and psychological capabilities that
make who you are (Gleitman et. Al., 2011 and Hogg et. Al, 2010). https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=william+james&rlz=1C1CHBD_
enPH767PH767&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjlpPqw5eP
aAhUMh7wKHXSoBuoQ_AUICigB&biw=755&bih=711#imgrc=qJhxoj0YH4f
6pM:
rogers
Can you say that you are the same person now as compared to when
you were six years old? You might probably say that you are, in some
ways, because you may still have the same hobbies or interests as before.
But there might be a part of you that tells you that you are not entirely
the same simply because as you grow, do does your sense of self.
Carl Rogers is a Humanist Psychologist who contributed a great deal
about the development of the self. He believed that there are three
contributing components to the development of the sense of self:
self-image, self-esteem and the ideal self (Rogers, 1959).
How we view ourselves talks about our self-image, which includes
personality traits and physical descriptions. For example, are you tall or
https://www.google.com.ph/imgres?imgurl=https://upload.wikimedia.
org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/36/Carlrogers.jpg/220px-Carlrogers.jpg&I short? Are you loyal, confident, aggressive or maybe all three? Self-image
mgrefurl=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Rogers&h=321&
w=220&tbnid=VKamZ-00m7eFQM:&tbnh=186&tbnw=127&usg=_
_B-CNimWAlRapGLkTFKS-ALCGgmw%3D&vet=10ahUKEwipzen also includes one’s social roles. Perhaps you are a working student, an SK
9rOXaAhVLHJQKHXePBv0Q_B0I9AEwCg..i&docid=0bbipBUa
gNmn0M&itg=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwipzen9rOXaAhVLHJQKHXe
PBv0Q_B0I9AEwCg member, or the youngest in the family. Regardless of the characteristics
that you have for yourself, or the roles that you play, they all contribute to your self-image. Note
that a person's self-image is not always true. A person suffering from bulimia may have the
self-image that they are extremely overweight, even if they are not in reality.
Do you believe in yourself? Do you love who you are? Do you want to be more good-looking or
more intelligent? Perhaps, there are times when you wish you were someone else. How you answer
these questions is an indication of how much value you put on yourself. If you are the type of
person who believes that ‘the grass is greener in other’s pasture’ or that the glass is half-empty
(instead of half-full), then you may have a low self-esteem, often experiencing feelings of
uncertainty and insecurity. On the contrary, if you
feel confident and believe that you are doing
something positive to the world, then you most likely
have high self-esteem, feeling worthy of the kind of
life that you have.
The ideal self is the person that you aspire to
be (McLeod, 2008). While self-esteem and
self-image influence the development of the self,
the ideal self is what urges us forward. It is an “How much
idealized image that we have developed over time
for the
mirror?”
on the basis of what we have learned and
experienced. It can even include components of https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=how+much+for+the+mirror+cartoon+stock&rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767&source=lnms
&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjruY3hveXaAhVFHJQKHR5KDdIQ_AUICigB&biw=1517&bih=681#imgrc=8guGIY3BHcjlIM:
what our parents have taught us such as what we

admire in others, what our society promotes, and what we think is in our best interest.
The interrelationship between these three components is vital as it can influence the outcome of
your life. For instance, you have always seen yourself as the President of the Student Council of
your school, but you lack the academic excellence necessary to qualify for the position. You have
high self-esteem and you believe that you have what it takes to be the President of the student
body. In addition to these, you also have a positive self-image and are confident that you can win
because you have the leadership skills and you have many connections in the school community.
Having this self-esteem and self-image coupled with the vision of your ideal self inspires you to
exert more effort and excel academically in order to satisfy the criteria for the position that you
want.
Remember that your ideal self is not always consistent with your real self (McLeod, 2008). This
is who you actually are and not who you strive to be. It is how we think, feel, look, and act. The real
self can be seen by others, but because we have no way of truly knowing how others view us, the
real self is our self-image. In the example above, you may always strive to study harder to meet
the academic requirements for the said position in the Student Council and never become the
President. To someone with low self-esteem or self-image, this is a failure. But for someone with
high self-esteem and self-image, this mentality could lead you to an entirely new perception of
yourself and possibly a new ideal self like perhaps, you may end up being the President of a course
organization or the boss of a company that you single-handedly put up.
While other theories assert that the ‘self’ is also characterized as self-view, self-image, self-
schema, and self-concept, it is essential to note that these are basically your knowledge (the
personal characteristics (such as your name, age, hobbies, interests), social roles and
responsibilities, or affiliations) about who you are. In short, it is something that comes to your mind
when you are asked who you are (Elmore, et. Al, 2012).
Also worth taking note is the fact that the ‘self’ is not fixed in one time span. When asked to
describe yourself, you probably can say, ”I was a Class President in 4th grade,” or “I am a first
year college student,” or “I am the future Senator of the Philippines.”
Again, as you grow and embrace the changes that take place around you, your self-view (self-
image, self-schema and self-concept) also changes and can dynamically form your identity. As a
result, it affects how you picture everything around you — how you see, feel, act and think about
things.
More and more psychologists, especially during the earlier development of Psychology, tried to
postulate theories about the development of the ‘self’ since it actively shapes one’s personality.
FREUD
Among the most influential psychologists who theorized about the
self is Sigmund Freud, founder of Psychoanalysis (a clinical method for
treating psychopathology through dialogue with the patient). He
postulated that there are three layers of self within us all: the id, the
ego and the superego (Stevens, 1996).
According to Freud, the first part of the self to develop is the id,
known as the seat of all our desires and wants. In a nutshell, id is a
collection of urges that need to be fulfilled. This part of the self has no
awareness other than it wants what it wants. There is a need for
instant gratification as it deals more on a person’s instincts. The
problem is, it does not care about morals or societal norms. As they
say, id is the little devil on everyone’s shoulder.
Imagine a baby who just starts to cry when he or she is hungry.
For teenagers like you waiting for your class to finish before taking
https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=sigmund+freud&rl
z=1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767&so urce=lnms&tbm=isch&s
a=X&ved=0ahUKEwi9y_PQv-XaAhXFXLwKHcAjDksQ_AUICigB&bi
your lunch break, you simply take a look at your watch and realize that
w=1517&bih=681#imgrc=KPyNp9Y-BsB0pM:
there is still one hour before you can satisfy your hunger. But to a baby who has no consciousness
of time, he or she will only cry to say ’feed me now’ no
matter how inconvenient it gets for the person who can
hear the baby’s cry. Since the infant does not have the
capacity to reason that food is all that matters at the
moment, he or she will continue to cry out loud until
somebody feeds him or her. Just the same, our id, which
holds our unconscious collection of urges, does not reason.
It just wants what it wants and that is all there is to it.
Most certainly, as the baby advances into childhood, he
or she begins to understand that not every need can
immediately be met. As the child matures, he or she also https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=id,+ego+and+superego&rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH767P H767&source=ln
s&tbm=I sch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwidoIP21eXaAhUBjLwKHVIPBc0Q_AUICigB&biw=1517&bi h=735#imgr
c=sBUbwHHOIu_59M:
realizes that there are some needs that should not be met,
especially if those needs are illegal or immoral. This realization forms another layer of the self
known as the ego (Carducci, 2015).
According to Freud, ego is the part of us that functions in reality. While the id is totally
irrational, the ego has the capability to distinguish what is right or wrong based on the given
context. Using the previous example, the ego is at work when a teenager decides to wait for the
right time to eat, rather than cutting class to eat or violate the rule of eating something inside the
classroom, which can spoil his or her appetite.
This leads us to our superego. Freud asserts that the superego seeks to attain the ideal of a
perfect ego. If the id is the little devil on everyone’s shoulder, the superego is often portrayed as
the little angel whispering on our shoulder that plagues us with shame and
guilt when we fail to meet its standards. Take note, the superego,
according to Freud, can be rigid and punishing as it is irrational in its views
of perfection. In other words, no one can ever live up to the standards
of the superego. Interestingly, Freud believed that the superego is
formed by the repressive rules of our parents. Using our example
above, the superego would shame you even for the idea of wanting to eat
immediately before waiting for the right time. For the superego, it would
be a shame if you do not control your appetite even for a single hour.
Because of the rigidity of the superego and the uncontrolled passions
of the id, the ego somewhat acts as the gatekeeper for both, which
maintains the balance between the two. In short, a mentally healthy ego
https://www.google.com.ph/search?
q=id,+ego+and+superego&rlz=1C1 CHBD_enPH767PH76
7&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKE widoIP21eXaA-
knows when it is right to give in to id’s desires but makes judgments when
hUBjLwKHVIPBc0Q_AUICigB&biw=1517&bih=735#imgr
it is time to give the floor to superego. Since most psychological theories define the self as mental
constructs, we will examine other perspectives on the ‘self’ as a product of social interaction. This
way, we do not discount the other forces in the formation of who we think we are.
Multiple vs. unified self

Many young individuals like you are in the process of establishing your
roles, responsibilities, and your sense of self. Given the fact that changes
are inevitable, your self-identity is also not stable as it keeps on growing
one way or another.
Theorists, such as Descartes and Locke, view the self as unified — an
individual, including the things that the he or she thinks, wants, hopes, and
so on and so forth, are all part of a unified being. The unified self theory https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=multiple+self+image&rlz=1C1C
HBD_enPH767PH767&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=D2T6qUT6R
states that the identity of a person develops in a continuity of

Aj0PM%253A%252CPQO_frF_99nF2M%252C_&usg=__uAH
xV5gbSTe7yKOPbRshzT4VZoc%3D&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiYh
I6y5ufaAhXBppQKHQz_BU4Q9QEINTAD#imgdii=5c9UpKaj9cbjDM:&
consciousness. What makes me ‘me’ is the network of memories, hopes, imgrc=u7UcoqvEJzIq4M:
expectations, fantasies, convictions, and other thoughts that comprise my own consciousness. In
other words, we think of ourselves as one person, whose thoughts, hopes, expectations and feelings
are just a part of who we are (Baumeister, et. Al., 2011).
The question is, is there just one ‘self’ in each person or are we really consist of many different
selves? As our sense of personhood continuously transforms, seeking new areas of growth, and even
our self seems to be stable, the self can still branch out and find new areas to develop. This might
not be apparent to us but when we are faced with the most challenging of tasks, we encounter new
problems that shake our stability and move us to growth. When we feel depressed or angry at life,
fearful or being frozen in our actions, our core self tends to change. There are times when you
believe that you can accomplish difficult tasks easily but there are also times when you might
withdraw from them because of the feeling that you cannot handle it. This changes a part of our
self-concept. How can we take back the self from this limitation, for example? Part of the answer
to this question is to understand that the self is not one thing, but a complex of multiple definitions
and parts — in short, we develop a divided self or a multiple self. Remember that our sense of
identity has developed out of our past experiences. Other parts of our ‘self’ may even be hidden or
masked. For instance, we might behave in one way when we are with our friends but we might
behave differently when we are with strangers. Part of your ’self’ might even consist of dreams or
wishes that guide us at times. When you drink to excess occasionally and then act rude, then your
core self is in conflict with the other parts of your ‘self.’
According to Sedikides & Spencer (2007) and Katoch & Katoch (2017), some describe the multiple
self as having separate domains: the experiential self (the part of you that ‘disappears’ when you
enter a deep sleep and flashes on and off as you dream and then come back again as you wake
up), the private self (the ‘interpreter’ part of your being that narrates and makes sense of what is
going on), and the public self (the persona that you attempt to project to others, which in turn, in-
teracts with how other people actually see you).
True self vs. false self

Another discussion on the concept of the ‘self’ is given by
an English psychoanalyst, Dr. Donald Winnicott and his idea of a
true self as opposed to false self in his article entitled, "Ego
Distortion in Terms of True and False Self" (1960). According to
Winnicott, the true self is rooted from early infancy. The
baby’s spontaneous, non-verbal gestures are derived from his
or her instincts — his sense of ‘reality.’ If the mother responds
to the baby, then the true self may continue to develop. The
idea is that, infants depend on their primary caregiver not only
to meet their most basic needs for survival, but also for
https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=true+self+vs+false+self&rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767&source=
lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiX0_fX-efaAhVBNJQKHT0PCowQ_AUICigB&biw=151
reliable, accurate, and empathic emotional responses. When

7&bih=681#imgrc=D76HrAkK2TBZKM:
these emotional needs are either unmet, or met unreliably, the infant gradually learns not only not
to trust the environment, but also not to trust the self. If good parenting is not in place, the
grown-up baby’s spontaneity is in danger, which results to developing the need to comply with the
parents’ expectations. This causes the creation of the false self, where other people’s
expectations can become too overriding or contradicting with the original sense of self. In the end,
the person develops a false set of relationships, trying to conceal what is true and real.
Simply, the true self (or the authentic self) is consist of thoughts, beliefs, words, and actions
that come from a deep-seated place within ourselves, with a unique combination of a multitude of
talents, skills, interests and abilities. There is no disparity between values and lived values because
the ‘self’ is genuine.
Conversely, the false self is when a person puts on a façade with others that may result in an
internal sensation of being depleted, drained or emotionally numb. One’s actions may feel forced,
alienated or detached, and there are possible tendencies to turn to mood-altering substances in
order to feel ‘different.’
How does this apply to us as adults? To Winnicott, the false self may serve many adaptive
purposes. Admit it or not, we all struggle from time to time to project what we believe to be the
“true” or “authentic” self. In many ways, wearing a social mask in becomes a solution to keep our
authentic selves from being scrutinized. When we protect our true self, we avoid being rejected or
hurt. The downside is, we may miss out on the opportunity to have genuine connections with other
people.
While there is a clear distinction between the true self and the false self, our awareness of our
social masks and our core values is essential. When we are aware of the many sides of ourselves,
we are able to own our identity. When we are in control of what part of ourselves we choose to
show, the social mask we use becomes integrated with our sense of self. Hence, we are whole.
EVALUATE
Worksheet 1
Let’s take a selfie
Take a picture of your real self and another of your false self. Paste your pictures below and
then, compare and contrast the two. What do you think are the factors that influence you to be
your real self? What could be the possible aspects of your life that make you turn into your false
self? Write your reflections below your pictures.
Real Self False Self
Reflection:
Worksheet 2
My Own Eulogy
A eulogy is a speech given at a memorial or funeral service (Webster’s Dictionary). It can be

delivered by a family member, close friend, priest, or celebrant and it commemorates and
celebrates the life of the deceased. To examine how well you know yourself and how well others
know you, let us try to think about how others will remember us after death. Your task is to imagine
that you are to die tomorrow. You are to write a eulogy that you would like be read at your own
funeral.
References:
Baumeister, R. & Bushman, B. (2011). "The Self." Social Psychology and Human Nature. 2nd ed.
Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.
Carducci, B. (2015). Psychology of Personality. New Jersey: Wiley Publications.
Dash, B. & Tripathy, G. (2012). Essentials of General Psychology. New Delhi: Wisdom Press.
Elmore, K., Smith, G. & Oyserman, D. (2012). Self, Self-Concept and Identity. Handbook of Self and
Identity (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.
English Oxford Living Dictionaries Retrieved from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/

psychology
Gleitman, H., Gross, H. & Reisberg, D. (2011). Psycholgy (8th Ed.). Canada: W.W. Norton and Company.
Hogg, M. & Vaughan, G. (2010). Essentials of Social Psychology. Italy: Pearson Educated Ltd.
James, W. (1983). The Principles of Psychology (Vol. 1 & 2). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Jhangiani, R. & Tarry, H. (2014) Principles of Social Psychology. Retrieved from http://
pzacad.pitzer.edu/~hfairchi/courses/Spring2015/Psych%20103/Principles-of-Social-Psychology-1st-
International-Edition-1415042666.pdf last October 12, 2017.
Katoch, S. & Katoch, K. (2017). Understanding the Self. India: Shipra Publication.
McLeod, S. (2008). Self Concept. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/self-concept.html
Myers, D. (2009). Social psychology (10th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Rogers, C. (1959). "A theory of therapy, personality relationships as developed in the client-
centered framework.". In (Ed.) S. Koch. Psychology: A study of a science. Vol. 3: Formulations of
the person and the social context. New York: McGraw Hill.
Sedikides, C. & Spencer, S. J. (Eds.) (2007). The Self. New York: Psychology Press
Stevens, R. (1996). Understanding the Self. California: SAGE Publications
Winnicott, D. W. (1960). “Ego Distortion in Terms of True and False Self,” in The Maturational Process
and the Facilitating Environment: Studies in the Theory of Emotional Development. New York:
International UP Inc., 1965, pp. 140-152.
LESSON 4
THE WESTERN AND EASTERN THOUGHTS ABOUT THE SELF
Lesson Objectives:
a. Make a distinction about the idea of the ‘self’ according to the western and eastern thoughts.
b. Acknowledge the ‘self’ based on Asian thoughts.
c. Examine the Filipino ‘self’ and construct one’s own representation of the Filipino ‘self.’
ACTIVATE
Examine the characteristics of the western and eastern societies. Write five (5)
countries for each side and compare its characteristics in terms behavior, culture
and the people.
WESTERN EASTERN
COUNTRY CHARACTERISTICS COUNTRY CHARACTERISTICS
Summarize your discoveries of the western and eastern societies using the
Venn-diagram below.
West east
EMPOWER
The ‘self’ has been defined by in a variety of ways by European and American theorists that
have impacted the whole Western culture. In fact, most of the theories on the concept of the ‘self’
discussed from the very beginning of this course and the existing understandings of the self which
we traditionally consider can actually be traced back to Western philosophy. As mentioned in the
previous lessons, the ‘self’ based on the western thought is focused on individualism. People view the
‘self’ as autonomous relative to others and the environment, stressing their separateness from the
social world. Examine the illustration below:
Independent view of the ‘self’

In Western beliefs, people tend to think that we are separate and unique from each other.
What one person does or experiences is completely independent of other people and the world at
large (Wolter, 2013; Page & Berkow, 1991).
The question is, are we all different and independent? Are we separate from each other and
from the universe? Are all people part of one whole? The idea that people are separate entities
from each other and the world is not considered a reality in Eastern thought.
As discussed in Lesson 2, the ‘self’ in Eastern cultures is dominated by the ‘we’ idea, that the
self is part of a larger network of people who all help shape each other. Take a look at the
illustration below:
Interdependent view of the ‘self’
Taking into consideration that the majority of self-representations already discussed come from
the point of view of Western scientific research, we will emphasize the conceptualization of the ‘self’
from the perspective of the Eastern philosophy, stressing on the religious and political beliefs that
contributes in the formation of one’s self and culture.
To help you understand the eastern representation of the ‘self’ better, we will look at how the
following religious traditions view the ‘self’ (Ho, 1995; Sias, 2015).
hinduism
Hinduism is a major religion common in the south
Asian countries like India and Sri Lanka. Just like
Christianity, Hinduism has many different branches with
varying principles. To help us understand the Hindu view
of the self, two important concepts must be
recognized: the Brahman (considered as the sacred, the
god spirit or the universe) and the Atman (which is the
human soul or the self). Hinduism teaches that the
Atman is basically a fragment of the Brahman, or the
universe. Imagine a single drop of water coming down
https://listverse.com/2016/07/31/10-common-misconceptions-about-hinduism/
from the cloud way up in the sky. As it falls down in the form of rain along with the other drops
and makes it way to a river, it then mixes with the other drops. In time, this single drop of water
can no longer be distinguished from the other drops as it flows out to the ocean. Finally, it
evaporates and makes its way back to the atmosphere where it becomes part of the cloud again.
What does this have to do with the belief of the Hindus about the ‘self?’ To the Hindus, the
single drop of water is the Atman. The cycle of raining down, blending with the rest of the water in
the river, evaporating and then dispersing into the air, the earth or the water, is like reincarnation
(or the belief that people die and are reborn over and over again). The Hindu belief states that
each time a person dies and is reborn, it comes closer to the Brahman. Eventually, when the person
completes the cycle of reincarnation, they stop being reborn and are fully reunited with the
Brahman.
While we have the tendency to think about our ‘self’ today or tomorrow, the Hindus think in
terms of centuries and lifetimes. The self, in Hinduism, is just a part of a larger whole (the
Brahman), which embodies everything. The Atman or the self is tied to everything.
BUDDHISM
Buddhism is a common Eastern religion and philosophy where
the self is often thought of as an illusion. To Buddhists, there is
no such as thing as a ‘self’ at all. Like Hinduism and Christianity,
Buddhism has many different branches as well. There are two
concepts that are agreed on in most Buddhist branches: the ideas
of interconnectedness and a lack of a self.
Fundamentally, interconnectedness simply means that
everything is connected. Think about your favorite book. This
https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=BUDDHISM&rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767&so ur-
ce=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved =0ahUKEwia38eJvunaAhUDhrwKHctRC7sQ_AUICigB&biw=
1242&bih=602#imgrc=BYYHptHhlS1H7M:
book involves words and feelings being sent from the writer to
the reader. In principle, the writer shares his or her thoughts But note that there is more than
just to it: your favorite book is made of paper, which comes from trees. In order to come up with
a paper, the trees had to be cut down by lumberjacks. The components of the book are joined
together by the workers of the printing company. Using this scenario, you as the reader becomes
interconnected not only with the writer, but also with the lumberjacks, the workers and many other
people. One linkage in this chain is missing, then the book does not exist.
But how, you may ask, does this explain the idea that there is no self? To Buddhists, humans are
just a stream of consciousness and not a separate entity. Our interconnection with each other
eliminates the idea that there is us and there is others. Going back to our example about your
favorite book, it is made up of many components: your ideas, the paper, the trees, and so on.
Individually, each component does not make up a book, but together, they are one book. Similarly,
we, as humans, are just a single part of a larger whole. Alone, we are nothing but a thought,
interconnected with everything else. Since the self is an illusion, we should therefore forget about
the self, the cravings of the self, and its attachment to human-centered desires, which ultimately
cause suffering. In so doing, one can attain the highest state called Nirvana, a place of perfect
peace and happiness akin to heaven (Wolter, 2013; No Author, 2001).
CONFUCIANISM
Confucianism does not teach the worship of any particular
deity (Yao, 1996). Instead, it is focused more on human behavior,
causing many scholars to consider it more of an ethical system
or a code of conduct rather than a religion.
A human being is seen as a social being, whose personality
is not inherently existing, but is being formed through upbringing
and environment (Fung, 2014). In essence, the self will develop
through the practice of the virtues of compassion, righteous-
ness, propriety and wisdom to bring harmony to family, commu-
https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=confucianism&rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767&source
=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiVz-L-nuraAhUIw7wKHeEiBIEQ_AUICigB&bi
nity and empire . Hence, self—cultivation is our supreme goal
w=1242&bih=557#imgrc=B6lBXmzm-QHSEM:
— any person is a “gentleman” if his or her conduct is noble and selfish. This is the characteristic
of chun-tzu, a man of virtue or noble character (Ho, 1995).
TAOISM
Taoism is an ancient Chinese philosophy that stresses the
importance of living simply and honestly and in harmony with
nature (Ho, 1995). Due to its focus on harmony and proper way
to live, it is often referred to as the Way. Three of the most
important tenets of Taoism are the First Principle, the yin-yang
classification and the wu wei concept.
The First Principle, sometimes translated as ‘Oneness’
states that everything in nature is all part of the same whole.
Unlike Confucianism, Taoism does not regard the self as an
https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=taoism&rlz=1C1CHBD_enPH767PH767&so ur-
ce=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwibjvf5puraAhUKXrwKHdxxB6QQ_AUICigB&biw=1242&
extension of social relationships, but of the cosmos. The selfless
person leads a balanced life, in harmony with both nature and
bih=557#imgdii=zzTP0BlJEXoJ1M:&imgrc=Y6IVFypqkebMOM:
society.
Taoism also teaches the yin-yang concept, or classification (Lowe, 2003). Its
uber-popular black and white circular symbol, suggests the idea that opposites are
needed in order for harmony to exist. To put it simply, we all need balance in our
lives. Take a closer look at the yin-yang symbol: the black and white portions are
equal to one another — the black does not get more space than the white and vice
versa because they are equally important. Yes, they are opposites, but they are
both equal and needed. In other words, the opposites dark and light exist together in a perfect
Balance that keeps our world nicely humming along. In the same way, we as humans should seek
balance in our own lives. We should not lean toward extremes, nor should we live a life of avoidance.
We should be moderate in our approach. As they say, too much of even a good thing, is a bad
thing! The ideal ‘self’, therefore, is one that has a balanced-life.
It is important to note that the self is not the entire focus of these Eastern beliefs. Each
philosophy has its own perspective of the self that takes it within a bigger context. For
Confucianism and Taoism, to become a better person means to create a self that would benefit the
community and that would be in harmony with nature. For Hinduism and Buddhism, the self is
interconnected with everything.
To sum up the characteristics of the West and the East, let us take a look at the following table:
WESTERN CULTURE EASTERN CULTURE
Individualistic culture since their focus is Collectivistic culture since the group and
on the person and individual needs and social relations are given more
wants importance
Values competition and is Values cooperation and tends to go

straightforward when communicating around the bush when explaining things
with others to others
Emphasizes equality even if the individual Emphasizes on hierarchy as the culture

is seen to rise above everything else wants to keep things in harmony and in
order
It must be emphasized that these are the universal characteristics common to the Western and
Eastern cultures. In the Philippines, there are many factors that set us apart from our neighboring
Asian countries like the country’s colonization experiences. Within the country, provinces and regions
differ also due to geographical location and conditions. Again, how we present ourselves depends
on the kind of culture and environment that we have. Conflicting views may be present but an
understanding of where we are coming from unravels this diversity.
EVALUATE
Worksheet 1
Totoo ba? Is the Philippines really a collectivist society?
Examine the Philippines’ customs and traditions that make up our identity as a Filipino. Can you
say that we are an individualistic society or collectivist society? Cite specific situations that you
experience as a Filipino under each category and make a conclusion later on about the type of
society that we live in.
The Philippines is an The Philippines is a

INDIVIDUALISTIC society COLLECTIVIST society
CONCLUSION:
Worksheet 2
The Filipino Self
Examine the Filipino ‘self’. Using a concept map, construct a Filipino Self based on the Filipino
culture. Then, write a brief explanation of your work in not more than 10 sentences.
References:
Blaine, B., Trivedi, P. & Eshleman, A. (1998). Religious Belief and the Self-Concept: Evaluating the
Implications for Psychological Adjustment. Retrieved from http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/
abs/10.1177/01461672982410002 last December 5, 2017.
Fung, A. (2014). The Influence of Confucianism on Identity Formation of a Multi-Skilled Migrant: An

Autoethnography. The Qualitative Report, 19(50), 1-19. Retrieved from http://nsuworks.nova.edu/
tqr/vol19/iss50/1
Ho, D. (1995). Selfhood and Identity in Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, and Hinduism: Contrasts With
the West. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 25 (2). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/
j.1468-5914.1995.tb00269.x last December 5, 2017.
Jen, G. (2017). The Girl at the Baggage Claim: Explaining the East-West Culture Gap. New York:
Vintage Publishing.
Lowe, S. (2003). "Chinese Culture and Management Theory". In Alon, Ilan. Chinese culture:
organizational behavior, and international business management. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger
Publishers.
Page, R. & Berkow, D. (1991). Concepts of the Self: Western and Eastern Perspectives. Journal of
Multi-cultural Counseling and Development. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-
1912.1991.tb00625.x last October 8, 2017.
Sias, J. (2015). Buddhism, Confucianism, and Western Conceptions of Personal Autonomy. The
Downtown Review, 1 (1). Retrieved from http://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/tdr/vol1/
iss1/5 last December 8, 2017.
Wolter, D. (2013). In Search of the Self: Eastern versus Western Perspectives. Oglethorpe Journal of
Undergraduate Research, 1 (1). Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/ojur/vol1/
iss1/1 last September 2, 2017.
Yao, X. (1996). Self‐construction and identity: The Confucian self in relation to some western
perceptions. Asian Philosophy, 6 (3): 179-195. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/
publication/233128303_Self-construction_and_identity_The_Confucian_self_in_relation_to_some_
western_perceptions DOI: 10.1080/09552369608575442 last January 16, 2018.
(No Author, 2001). The concept "self" and "person" in Buddhism and in Western Psychology. NY:
Columbia Press.
(No Author, __). Conceptions of the Self in Western and Eastern Psychology. Chinese Buddhist
Encyclopedia.

PDF - file.PHILOSOPHICAL PERSPECTIVE-UNIT-1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PDF - file.PHILOSOPHICAL PERSPECTIVE-UNIT-1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

https://www.google.com.ph/search?

Box your answer

2. Why do you think you feel that way?

3. Do you really know yourself?

4. Do you want to know yourself?

SOCRATES Most of what we know about Socrates come from the

Thomas Aquinas, in his theory of self-knowledge, claimed that all

therefore, sharp. This is an impression and is wild because it is

Socrates Plato Augustine

Locke Hume Kant

Ryle Churchland Merleau-Ponty

Ayers, M. (1993). Locke: Epistemology and Ontology. New York: Routledge.

Carbone, M. (2004). The Thinking of the Sensible Merleau-Ponty’s A Philosophy. Evanston:

Hofstadter, A. (1951). The Journal of Philosophy, vol.48,No.9, pp.257-270. DOI: 10.2307/2021599

Maxwell, M. (2013). The Fundamentals of Education: A Socratic Perspective on the Cultivation of

Rozemond, M. (1998). Descartes’ Dualism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Schofield, M. (2006). Plato: Political Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

or about your life?___________________________________________________________________________

Self-Identity vs. Social Identity

are made about an individual. This can be

seen in a situation where an aviation

SENSE OF SELF AND SELF-SOCIALIZATION

individuals to communicate with and respond to each other, the self is

the social & cultural systems and the sense of self

themselves in different ways.

‘’I’ vs. ‘we’

the ’we’ idea, views the self in relation to

Family,, Age,,, and Gender

ETHNICITY,, NATIONALITY,, AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC CLASS

different life experiences.

How has your family

What makes you say

How has your age,

Why do you think you

Have you overcome

If you are to change

Reflect on your developmental stages through the years.

Richard, U. (1994). The Nature of Gender. Demography. 31 (4): 561-573. doi:10.2307/2061790.

Stevens, R. (1996). Understanding the Self. California: SAGE Publications.

Ritzer, G. (2008). Sociological Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Sentence Completion Worksheet

2. Sometimes I wish I could...

3. The thing I fear most is…

4. Today I would like to…

5. I feel my future is…

6. I gain strength from…

8. I get angry when...

10. I don’t like to admit...

what our parents have taught us such as what we

Multiple vs. unified self

states that the identity of a person develops in a continuity of

consciousness. What makes me ‘me’ is the network of memories, hopes, imgrc=u7UcoqvEJzIq4M:

True self vs. false self

reliable, accurate, and empathic emotional responses. When

Real Self False Self

A eulogy is a speech given at a memorial or funeral service (Webster’s Dictionary). It can be

Carducci, B. (2015). Psychology of Personality. New Jersey: Wiley Publications.

English Oxford Living Dictionaries Retrieved from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/

McLeod, S. (2008). Self Concept. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/self-concept.html

Stevens, R. (1996). Understanding the Self. California: SAGE Publications

COUNTRY CHARACTERISTICS COUNTRY CHARACTERISTICS

Independent view of the ‘self’

Interdependent view of the ‘self’