PHILOSOPHICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL SELF 

1. Philosophical Self
The history of philosophy is replete with men and women who inquired into
the fundamental nature of the self. Along with the question of the primary
substratum that defines the multiplicity of things in the world, the inquiry on
the self has preoccupied the earliest thinkers in the history of philosophy:
the Greeks. Raphael’s Fresco, The School of Athens – situated in Ancient
Greek, Agora or today, Anagora which is a marketplace but during the
ancient time, this is a place where thinkers gather to dialogue, talk to one
another and where citizens go to hear civic announcement and master
military defense. The Greeks were the ones who seriously questioned the
myths and moved away from them in attempting to understand reality and
respond to perennial questions of curiosity, including the question of the
self. The different perspectives and views on the self can be best seen and
understood by revisiting its prime movers and identifying the most
important conjecture made by philosophers from the ancient times to the
contemporary period.
A. Philosophers
Medieval Period
- St. Thomas and Augustine = who founded their doctrines and
philosophies in presocratic and socratic philosophers
Modern Era
- Rene Descartes = the father of modern philosophy; who gave primacy to
reason or intellect; known for his philosophy Cogito Ergo Sum (I think,
therefore I am)

1. Socrates and Plato

Prior to Socrates, the Greek thinkers, sometimes collectively called the Pre-
Socratics to denote that some of preceded Socrates while others existed
around Socrates’ time as well, preoccupied themselves with the question of
the primary substratum, arché that explains the multiplicity of things in the
world. These men like Thales, Pythagoras, Parmenides, Heraclitus, and
Empedocles, to name a few, were concerned with explaining what the
world is really made up of, why the world is so, and what explains the
changes that they observed around them. Tired of simply conceding to
mythological accounts pronounced by poet-theologians Homer and Hesiod,
these men endeavored to finally locate an explanation about the nature of
change, the seeming permanence despite change, and the unity of the
world amidst its diversity.
 After a series of thinkers from all across the ancient Greek world who were
disturbed by the same issue, a man came out to question something else.
This man was Socrates. Unlike the Pre-Socratics, Socrates was more
concerned with another subject, the problem of the self. He was the first
philosopher who ever engaged in a systematic questioning of the self. To
Socrates, and this has become his life-long mission, the true task of the
philosopher is to know oneself.
Plato, a student of Socrates, claimed in his dialogs that Socrates affirmed
that the unexamined life is not worth living. During his trial for allegedly
corrupting the minds of the youth and for impiety, Socrates declared
without regret that his being indicted was brought about by his going
around Athens engaging men, young and old, to question their
presuppositions about themselves and about the world, particularly about
who they are. Socrates took it upon himself to serve as a “gadfly” that
disturbed Athenian men from their slumber and shook them off in order to
reach the truth and wisdom. Most men, in his reckoning, were really not
fully aware of who they are and the virtues that they were supposed to
attain in order to preserve their souls for their afterlife. Socrates thought
that this is the worst that can happen to anyone: to live but die inside.
For Socrates, every man is composed of body and soul. This means that
every human person is dualistic, that is, he is composed of two important
aspects of his personhood. For Socrates, this means all individuals have an
imperfect, impermanent aspect to him, and the body, while maintaining that
there is also a soul that is perfect and permanent.
For Socrates, there was a soul first before man’s body. Man’s existence
was first in the realm of ideas and exists as a soul or pure mind. The soul
has knowledge that is stored in the mind. However, once he came to the
material world, or the world of senses, he forgot most of what he knew.
This resulted in lack of knowledge or ignorance which causes problems to
man. But, knowledge can be restored through the process of dialectic
method – a sort of intellectual midwifery trying to painfully coax knowledge
out of man. This process, which is also known as Socratic Method, is an
exchange of question and answer that ultimately aims to make the person
remember all the knowledge that he has forgotten.
Plato, Socrates’ student, basically took off from his master and supported
the idea that man is a dual nature of body and soul. In addition to what
Socrates earlier espoused, Plato added that there are three components of
the soul: the rational soul, the spirited soul, and the appetitive soul. In
his magnum opus, “The Republic”, Plato emphasizes that justice in the
human person can only be attained if the three parts of the soul are
working harmoniously with one another. The rational soul forged by reason
and intellect has to govern the affairs of the human person, the spirited part
which is in charge of emotions should be kept at bay, and the appetitive
soul in charge of base desires like eating, drinking, sleeping, and having
sex are controlled as well. The rational soul must governed the spirited and
appetitive soul to attain the ideal life. When this ideal state is attained, then
the human person’s soul becomes just and virtuous.
2. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas
Augustine’s view of the human person reflects the entire spirit of the
medieval world when it comes to man. Following the ancient view of Plato
and infusing it with the newfound doctrine of Christianity, Augustine agreed
that man is of a bifurcated (divided by two) nature. An aspect of man dwells
in the world and is imperfect and continuously yearns to be with the Divine
and the other is capable of reaching immortality.
The body is bound to die on earth and the soul is to anticipate living
eternally in a realm of spiritual bliss in communion with God. This is
because the body can only thrive in the imperfect, physical reality that is
the world, whereas the soul can also stay after death in an eternal realm
with the all-transcendent God. The goal of every human person is to attain
this communion and bliss with the Divine by living his life on earth in virtue.
Thomas Aquinas, the most eminent thirteenth century scholar and stalwart
of medieval philosophy, appended something to this Christian view.
Adapting some ideas from Aristotle, Aquinas said that indeed, man is
composed of two parts: matter and form. Matter, or hyle in Greek, refers to
the “common stuff that makes up everything in the universe.” Man’s body is
part of this matter. Form on the other hand, or morphe in Greek refers to
the “essence of a substance or thing.” It is what makes it what it is. In the
case of the human person, the body of the human person is something that
he shares even with animals. The cells in man’s body are more or less akin
to the cells of any other living, organic being in the world. However, what
makes a human person a human person and not a dog, or a tiger, is his
soul, his essence. To Aquinas, just as in Aristotle, the soul is what
animates the body; it is what makes us human.
3. Rene Descartes
Rene Descartes, Father of Modern Philosophy, conceived of the human
person as having a body and a mind. In his famous treatise, The
Meditations of First Philosophy, he claims that there is so much that we
should doubt. In fact, he says that since much of what we think and believe
are not infallible, they may turn out to be false. One should only believe that
since which can pass the test of doubt. If something is as clear and lucid as
not to be even doubted, then that is the only time when one should actually
buy a proposition. In the end, Descartes thought that the only thing that one
cannot doubt is the existence of the self, for even if one doubts oneself,
which only proves that there is a doubting self, a thing that thinks and
therefore, that cannot be doubted. Thus, his famous, cogito ergo sum, “I
think therefore, I am.” The fact that one thinks should lead one to conclude
without a trace of doubt that he exists. The self then for Descartes is also a
combination of two distinct entities, the cogito, and the thing that thinks,
which is the mind, and the extenza or extension of the mind, which is the
body. In Descartes’ view, the body is nothing else but a machine that is
attached to the mind. The human person has it but it is not what makes
man a man. If at all, that is the mind. Descartes says, “But what then, am I?
A thinking thing. It has been said. But what is a thinking thing? It is a thing
that doubts, understands (conceives), affirms, denies, wills, refuses; that
imagines also, and perceives."

Both Socrates and Plato believed in the duality of the self. The body is
imperfect while the soul is perfect. Plato’s rational soul is a reminder that
the human person is more than just about feelings and urges. The rational
soul, powered by the intellect, must take control in order for the human
person to attain the good life.
The concept of the soul was developed by the great medieval philosophers,
Augustine and Aquinas. For them, the soul must return to its own source,
the Divine. The finite physical body must be governed by this soul since it is
through the soul that the Divine reaches to the human person. Thus,
heeding the voice of the Divine is the surest way to for the soul to reunite
with the Source.
Though Descartes has his discussion on the Divine, he instead focused his
philosophy on the power of the human intellect or the mind. Through the
intellect, man has become the measure of all things. Because of the
rational ability of the human person, it is no longer nature who dictates
man, man dictates nature.
 

2. Psychological Self 
“Know thyself” is one of the fundamental commands that aim at human
strength and happiness – Erich Fromm
Self-identity – composed of personal characteristics, social roles and
responsibilities, as well as affiliations that define who one is.
Self-concept – image of oneself. What comes to your mind when you are
asked about who you are.
In confidence or in an attempt to avoid further analytical discussions, a lot
of people say, “I am who I am.” Yet, this statement still begs the question “if
you are who you are, then who are you that makes you who you are?” As
mentioned earlier, there are various definitions of the “self” and other
similar or interchangeable concepts in psychology. Simply put, “self” is “the
sense of personal identity and of who we are as individuals.”
A. Psychologists 
1. Carl Rogers 
Other concepts similar to self are identity and self-concept. Identity is
composed of personal characteristics, social roles, and responsibilities, as
well as affiliations that define who one is. Self-concept is what basically
comes to your mind when you are asked about who you are.
Self-identity, and self-concept are not fixed in one time frame. For example,
when you are asked about who you are, you can say “I was a varsity player
in 5th Grade” which pertains to the past, “a college student” which may be
the present, and “a future politician” which is the future. They are not also
fixed for life nor are they ever-changing at every moment. Think of a
malleable metal, strong and hard and can be bent and molded into other
shapes. Think about water. It can take any shape of the container, but at its
core, it is still the same element.
Carl Rogers captures this idea in his concept of self-schema or our
organized system or collection of knowledge about who we are. Self =
Family + Hobbies + Religion + Nationality. 
The schema is not limited to the example above. It may also include your
interests, work, course, age, name, and physical characteristics, among
others. As you grow and adapt to the changes around you, they also
change. But they are not passive receivers, they actively shape and affect
how you see, think, and feel about things.
For example, when someone states your first name even if they are not
talking about you, your attention is drawn to them. If you have provincial
language and you hear someone using it, it catches your attention. If you
consider yourself a book-lover, a bookstore may always entice you out of
all the other stores in a mall.
Theories generally see the self and identity as mental constructs, created
and recreated in memory. Current researches point to the frontal lobe of
the brain as the specific area in the brain associated with the processes
concerning the self.
TWO SUB-SYSTEM OF SELF
Real Self and Ideal Self. Real self consists of all ideas including the idea of
What I am and what I can do. Ideal self is the idea of what one should be or
wanted to be that include one’s goal and ambitions in life.
Normal (Congruent) – the closer the ideal self to the real self, the more
fulfilled and happier the individual becomes.
Neurotic (Incongruent) – the farther the ideal self to the real self, the more
unhappy and dissatisfied a person is.
2. Sigmund Freud 
Several psychologists, especially during the field’s earlier development,
followed this trend of thought, looking deeper into the mind of the person
theorize about the self, identity, and self-concept, and in turn, one’s
personality. The most influential of them is Sigmund Freud. Basically,
Freud saw the self, its mental processes, and one’s behaviors as the
results of the interaction between the Id (pleasure seeking side), the Ego
(the “I” controls the id and can delay pleasure; the one who decides based
on the situation), and the Superego (conscience or moral judge of conduct;
strives for perfection rather than pleasure.).
However, as mentioned earlier, one cannot fully discount the effects of
society and culture on the formation of the self, identity, and self-concept.
Even as Freud and other theories and researchers try to understand the
person by digging deeper into the mind, they cannot fully discount the huge
and important effects of the environment. As in the above-mentioned
definitions of the self, social interaction always has a part to play in who we
think we are. This is not nature vs. nurture but instead a nature-and-nurture
perspective.
B. Psychological Concepts
1. Self-Awareness
There are times, however, when we are aware of our self-concepts; this is
also called self-awareness. Carver and Scheier identified two types of self
that we can be aware of: (1) the private self or your internal standards and
private thoughts and feelings, and (2) the public self or your public image
commonly geared toward having a good presentation of yourself to others.
Self-awareness also presents us with at least three other schema: the
actual, ideal, and ought self. The “actual” self is who you are at the
moment, the “ideal” self is who you like to be, and the “ought” self is who
you think you should be. An example is that you are a student interested in
basketball but is also academically challenged in most of your subjects.
Your ideal self might be to practice more and play with the varsity team but
ought to pass your subjects as a responsible student. One has to find a
solution to such discrepancies to avoid agitation, dejection, or other
negative emotions. In some instances, however, all three may be in line
with one another.
Self-awareness may be positive or negative depending on the
circumstances and our next course of action. Self-awareness can keep you
from doing something dangerous; it can help remind you that there is an
exam tomorrow in one of your subjects when you are about to spend time
playing computer games with your cousins, among others. In other
instances, self-awareness can be too much that we are concerned about
being observed and criticized by others, also known as self-consciousness.
At other times, especially with large crowds, we may experience
deindividuation or “the loss of individual self-awareness and individual
accountability in groups.” A lot of people will attune themselves with the
emotions of their group and because the large crowd also provides some
kind of anonymity, we may lessen our self-control and act in ways that we
will not do when we are alone. A common example is a mass
demonstration erupting into a riot.
2. Self-Esteem
Our group identity and self-awareness also has a great impact on our self-
esteem, one of the common concepts associated with the “self.” It is
defined as our own positive or negative perception or evaluation of
ourselves. 
One of the ways in which our social relationship affects our self-esteem is
through social comparison. According to the social comparison theory, we
learn about ourselves, the appropriateness of our behaviors, as well as our
social status by comparing aspects of ourselves with other people.
The downward social comparison is the more common type of comparing
ourselves with others. As the name implies, we create a positive self-
concept by comparing ourselves with those who are worse off than us. By
having the advantage, we can raise our self-esteem. Another comparison is
the upward social comparison which is comparing ourselves with those
who are better off than us. While it can be a form of motivation for some, a
lot of those who do this actually feel lower self-esteem as they highlight
more of their weakness or inequities.
Take note that this occurs not only between individuals but also among
groups. Thus, if a person’s group is performing better and is acknowledged
more than the other group, then their self-esteem may also be heightened.
3. Self-Evaluation
Social comparison also. Entails what is called self-evaluation maintenance
theory, which states that we can feel threatened when someone
outperforms us, especially when that person is close to us. In this case, we
usually react in three ways. First, we distance ourselves from that person or
redefine our relationship with them. Some will resort to the silent treatment,
change of friends, while some may also redefine by being closer to that
person, hoping that some association may give him a certain kind of
acknowledgement also. Second, we may also reconsider the importance of
the aspect or skill in which you were outperformed. If you got beat in a
drawing competition, you might think that drawing is not really for you and
you will find a hobby where you could excel, thus preserving your self-
esteem. Lastly, we may also strengthen our resolve to improve that certain
aspect of ourselves. Instead of quitting drawing, you might join seminars,
practice more often, read books about it, and add some elements in your
drawing that makes it unique among others. Achieving your goal through
hard work may increase your self-esteem, too.
However, in the attempt to increase or maintain self-esteem, some people
become narcissistic. Narcissism is a “trait characterized by overly high self-
esteem, self-admiration, and self-centeredness.” They are often
charismatic because of how they take care of their image. Taking care of
that image includes interpersonal relationships thus they will try to look for
better partners, better acquaintances, as well as people who will appreciate
them a lot. This makes them a bad romantic partner or friend since they
engage in relationships only to serve themselves.
Sometimes, there is a thin line between high self-esteem and narcissism
and there are a lot of tests and measurements for self-esteem like the
Rosenberg scale but the issue is that the result can be affected by the
desire of the person to portray herself in a positive or advantageous way. In
case you want to take the test and find a numerical value or level of your
self-esteem, try to be honest and objective about what you feel and see
about yourself. And though self-esteem is a very important concept related
to the self. Studies have shown that it only has a correlation, not causality,
to positive outputs and outlook. It can be argued that high or healthy self-
esteem may result in an overall good personality but it is not, and should
not be, the only source of a person’s healthy perspective of herself or
himself.
People with high self-esteem are commonly described as outgoing,
adventurous, and adaptable in a lot of situations. They also initiate activities
and build relationships with people. However, they may also dismiss other
activities that do not conform to their self-concept or boost their self-
esteem. There is also a possibility that they may turn into bullies and
experiment on abusive behaviors with drugs, alcohol, and sex.
This duality in the behavior and attitudes only proves the above mentioned
correlation. Baumeister, Smart, and Boden in their research on self-esteem
concluded that programs, activities, and parenting styles to boost self-
esteem should only be for rewarding good behavior and other
achievements and not for the purpose of merely trying to make children feel
better about themselves or to appease them when they get angry or sad.

CONCLUSION
Self-concept includes those aspects of one’s being and one’s experiences
that are perceived in awareness by the individual.