UNIT 1:

THE SELF FROM

VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES

“Who Am I?”
3 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

INTRODUCTION
Distance Please!
A group of brilliant Filipinos went to the United States as exchange students. They were
hosted by a prestigious pubic university in Illinois. During the orientation, the students were
introduced to a huge buffet canteen of the university, and they were supposed to have lunch in that
canteen for the duration of their stay in the US. After their first session in the morning, over excited
to take their first American meal in the buffet canteen at the adjacent building, the exchange
students rushed to the hall, almost running and went straight to the food line while clutching on
one another and everyone else in the line. Perhaps irritated by the clinging Asians too close to him,
on american gentleman turned his back and said firmly to the Filipino students: “Distance please!”
In an instance, the Filipino exchange scholars realized that they were in a totally different
environment. The normally accepted practices they have in the Philippines may not be necessarily
acceptable in other cultures. In this example, too much closeness and almost always clinging to
one another as friends are traditionally expected among Asian cultures. However, in the western
practice where individuality is highly emphasized, psychological distance will have to be
respected.
This section deals with the Anthropological perspective of understanding the self.
Anthropology is generally defined as the study of human kind in all times and places. There are
many branches of anthropology: this includes archaeology, primatology, cultural anthropology,
linguistic anthropology and many other applied anthropology. This section however, will only deal
with the modern trends in anthropology especially in understanding the human kind in relation to
their culture. Let us begin our study with the recognition of our own unique cultural practices.

OBJECTIVES:
At the end of this learning module, you are expected to:
1. Define anthropology
2. Explain culture and the mechanisms of enculturation
3. Synthesize anthropological perspectives on self-awareness and self-reflexive conduct
4. Show appreciation of one’s cultural identity through practice of one’s cultural values.
ANTHROPOLOGY
Anthropology is the study of all aspects of human condition. This includes human history,
the present human condition, and even the future possibilities. It also examines the biology,
interactions in the society, language and especially culture (Kottak, 2009). Anthropology explores
the interconnectedness and interdependence of human cultural experiences in all places and ages.
The kind of broad and holistic perspective of anthropological inquiry equips the anthropologists
the ascendancy in explaining human nature (Haviland, et. al., 2014).
How does anthropology explain human nature? What is the anthropological concept of the
self? The self is both a biological and cultural entity. The traditional anthropological understanding
of the self is that the self is an animal species, which underwent the process of biological evolution
and has shared characteristics with other living animals, the hominids in particular. The self is
believed to have evolved from apes some 33 million years ago and in the evolutionary process the
self-traced his/her origin from hominid species ‘homo sapiens’. Since the self has better
development in terms of brain with billion neurons, and adaptation to the environment for survival,
the self develops a culture resulting in behavioral changes.

The self is a living animal but superior to other animals due to certain factors:
a. Physical Aspects (self as the only animal with a larger brain capacity making him a
rational animal; the only animal that can stand straight allowing him to have better mobility in
doing things, etc.,
b. Social Aspects (Self uses language and symbol in dynamic complicated and yet
systematic manner allowing him to communicate, and preserve history, knowledge and culture,
etc.; can cooperate with others in a systematic manner in larger cooperation; and invents new things
for survival)
Now, let us examine the two very important concepts in anthropology before we discuss further
about the self. These concepts are culture and enculturation.
Culture is traditionally defined as systems of human behavior and thought. This covers all
customs, traditions and capabilities of humans as they function in society. In other words, cultures
are those complex structures of knowledge, beliefs, arts, religion, morals, law, language, traditional
practices and all other aspects needed by humans to function in society.
Culture is symbolic. When our ancestors learned to use tools and symbols to originate
meaning of significant events in life and in society, those tool and symbols become an integral part
of the culture. The burial sites, ancestral homes, landmarks of significant and historical events, the
rituals, customary actions and even some natural phenomena are all part of one’s culture. In other
words of Geertz, C. (1973), culture is “a historically transmitted pattern of meanings embodied in
symbols, a system of inherited conceptions expressed in a symbolic form by means of which men
communicate, perpetuate, and develop their knowledge about their attitudes toward life”. The
“embodiment in symbols” of cultural elements describes both an attitude of our body to
incorporate techniques and social devices, and a creative vocation to invent and incorporate new
and different expressive operative ways. (Thomas Csordas, 1999)
Culture therefore, is learned and is very much integrated in one’s customs and beliefs. It
is engrained in the patterns and systems of one’s life. Hence if culture considers all aspects and
elements of the self, people must be on guard that culture can be adaptive or maladaptive. On the
other hand, communities shall continue to assess whether the practices, rituals and customary
actions are still relevant and still beneficial to the development of the community. Adaptive culture
shall continue to manifest the key, central values that the individual and the community want to
demonstrate. On the other hand, communities may also try to get rid of the cultural practices that
will only extinguish the identity and good will of the community.

In order to do this, we have to understand the

concept of enculturation. Broadly defined,
enculturation is the transmission of culture from one
generation to the next. Unlike biological hereditary
transmission, cultural transmission is done through
observation, use of language, adaptation to
environment, rituals, and formal and informal
education. Every member of the community will then
distinguish themselves from other communities,
because of the differences in the way people do things
in their lives.

The Self and Person in Contemporary Anthropology

The anthropological self takes a holistic dimension of the individual person. It considers
both the biological and environmental aspects of the person. The genetic component plays a
significant role in the cultural development of an individual. Anthropologists even suggest that the
genes of the person living in a particular community are already a necessary component for the
enculturation of the person. In the same way, environmental exposure is also a vital component in
the creation of the cultural self. Some anthropologists claim that environmental exposure starts
soon after birth. However, contemporary anthropologists suggest that the environmental exposure
starts during conception. The child inside the mother’s womb already hears the language, tastes
the food and feels the mother’s emotions. These experiences then are solidified as soon as the child
is born.
The growing years of the child is very crucial in anthropological perspective. This is the
time when the child develops the psychological construct of dependency or interdependency. In
many western cultures where independence is the cultural emphasis, the child is usually provided
with a room and is trained to be independent by giving less physical contact from the parents. On
the contrary, in most part of Asia and Africa, children are reared in close contact with parents,
especially the mother, thus developing the sense of dependence on significant others and the
immediate community (like the family).
These rearing practices are the key to the development of the neuromotor functions of the
child and this neuromotor circuitry is fundamental in the formation of self-awareness.

Self-awareness
Anthropology defines self-awareness as “that which permits one to assume responsibility
from one’s own conduct, to learn how to react to others, and to assume variety of roles” (Haviland,
2003). It has been observed that a child starts to conceptualized much earlier by children sleeping
with parents and are exposed to a variety of stimuli like touch and the like. Stimulation is
maximized when the child is in close contact with the mother and all the other members of the
family. This develops the neural circuitry or hard wiring of the brain faster than with the children
with less stimulation. This is particularly advantageous for us Filipinos because most of the time
our cultural practice is to sleep with our parents until at least school age.
Following the faster process of enculturation and self-awareness is the importance of
attachment of positive values to one’s self. The child must be able to get the culturally correct
values necessary for adult life. Parents, immediate family and the community play a vital role in
the development in the child’s values. What the child observes from what the adults are doing or
thinking will more likely be adapted and imitated by the child. However, in the continued process
of self-awareness, the child will eventually develop his/her own identity. This identity is further
intensified by a practice common to all cultures- the naming ritual.
Naming individualizes a person. It gives a person his/her own unique traits, experiences,
personality, identity and status. The latter, however, gives person’s name its place in the group.
The person’s name is also a symbol of one’s status in the community. It either gives you honor or
stigma. The person’s name is at the same time a project in progress. The self that bears the name
continues to establish an identity of the name of the community.

Self and Behavioral Environment

In order to strengthen the identity of the self,

one must be able to grasp the different
behavioral orientations. These are concepts
that will help situate the self in different
behavioral conditions.
The four environment orientations:
1. Object orientation- positions the self in relation to the surrounding objects. The self should
be able to act responsively to the cultural objects around. Take for example the T’boli, an
indigenous group from South Cotabato. They learn to respect the trees, the lakes, the falls
the animals of the forest. They believe in the spirit of the forest hence they consider the
woods as a holy ground where no leaf shall be turned as one walks through.

2. Spatial Orientation- provides the self with personal space in relation to other people or
thins. In our earlier example, the individualistic society where independence is of utmost
importance, personal space is also emphasized.
3. Temporal Orientation- endows the self with the sense of time. Time is truly relevant to
cultural communities. In Filipino philosophy time is seen as spherical (unlike the western
concept of time as linear), where life events are repeated but may not be necessarily the
same. Routinary activities are not considered a repetition of previous activities because
these activities will be done at the “feel of time.” This is particularly true in the rural
communities where only the self or very few people are involved. In urban communities
where time is of the essence, and where the western linear concept of time is practiced, the
self must be able to adjust to this temporal orientation.

4. Normative Orientation- provides the self with the grasp of accepted norms in the
community. Being on time is generally accepted norm in communal activities. In
communities where punctuality is considered a value, being on time is already a charitable
gesture. Likewise, the normative orientation is at the same time providing the self an idea
of behaviors which are not acceptable by the community. The self at a very early age must
have known that killing, stealing, hurting others and the like are behaviors that should be
avoided.

The Self Embedded in Culture

When the self is able to distinguish what is acceptable behavior and what is not, it only
follows that the self is able to recognize differences of one’s self and the other. This ability to
manage the differences between selves is that what makes the self-embedded in culture.
Psychological anthropologists recognize the thin line that distinguishes the cultural self and the
“actual self.” The latter includes all feelings, thoughts, experiences, biological and psychological
constitutions, language and memory. However, the actual self is also being shaped by all these
same elements and more. Therefore, what remains in this distinction is the solid identity of the self
in relation to anything else. The claim of the self as embedded in culture can only be embraced
when the self recognizes its relation to everything else. The complexity of cultural identities of
peoples, things, and events shall be recognized and respected by the self. The individual self must
remain reflexive of the similarities and unique differences of everything around it. This shows that
the self should not maintain the individualistic, independent and autonomous entity but that the
self should be able to maintain his/her solid culturally reflexive identity in relation to everything
and everyone else.
Anthropology recognizes the movement of this understanding towards plurality and
multiplicity of thoughts, beliefs, convictions and practices. Hence, this is exactly the contribution
of anthropology to the postmodern era. There is now the breakdown of grand narratives that subdue
the small voices in the peripheries. In other words, the anthropological movements at this time are
already geared toward recognizing the power of culture in influencing little gaps and interstices,
meaning intervening spaces between people. It is only when the self recognizes the power of
culture constituted by every system that we can have an effective shaping of social reality.
This can be illustrated by few examples. One perhaps is the attitude of some indigenous
people (IP), especially the IP students enrolled in big universities where they do not want to be
recognized as IP or they do not want to be identified as IP. This may only mean that these students
are not proud of their cultural identity. Eventually, this may lead to cultural degradation.
Cultural degradation or more horribly cultural genocide means the loss of a particular
culture due to assimilation or loss of interest. Assimilation happens when a dominant culture, the
Ilocano culture for example, is overshadowing the inferior culture meaning the culture possessed
by lesser population living within the Ilocano communities; the inferior culture will eventually
lose its identity. As a result, we will not be surprised when children do not know anymore how to
speak their indigenous dialect, or perform the rituals that were used to be performed by the elders,
or play traditional instruments that were played by the indigenous musicians, or to cook the
indigenous delicacies prepared by the traditional chefs to mention a few.
In a larger scale, culture is also lost through continued violence, genocide, inability to
respect traditions, religions, beliefs and the cultural community’s sense of pride, which are largely
the result of globalization. For many decades, the Moros of Mindanao for example are
continuously striving for the recognition of their cultural identity and self-realization. However,
history tells us that both the Moros and the dominant culture living in Mindanao are constantly
victimized by the unending violence perpetuated by various groups. In the end, many of the
cultural landmarks, meaning the identity of the people, are either prejudiced or lost forever.
An obvious example of cultural degradation is that brought about by excessive exposure to
media in various forms. Television for instance influences language, traditions, beliefs, knowledge
and even personalities. In judging beauty for media purposes, the following criteria:

• Face must be beautiful and unpimpled

• Hair must be black and silky
• Skin color must be fair and flawless
• Body must be slim and toned, etc.
 “Culture is not a force or a causal agent in the world, but a
context in which people live out their lives.”
- Clifford Geertz, 1973

SUMMARY
Anthropology liberates the self from the fallacies of dominant ideas. In this most liberating
science, the self is no longer seen as an entity with innate ideas, ready to face the world, and as if
programmed to respond to the demands of time. Likewise, the self is not seen as a “blank slate”
ready to encode all the details of everyday experiences, so that it becomes limited only to what is
written on that slate.
In anthropology, the self is recognized as:
(1) biologically attuned to his/ her environment,
(2) variably self-aware of the mechanisms of the elements of culture working within the
self; and
(3) self-reflexive of the uniqueness and differences of all older selves and everything else
around.
REFERENCES:

Villafuerte, S.L., Quillope, Al, Tunac, Rudjane, Borja, Estela(2018), Understanding the Self.
NIEME Publishing House, Co. Ltd.,Cubao, Quezon City.

Anderson-Faye, E. P. 2012 Anthropological Perspectives on Physical Appearance and Body

Image. In: Thomas F. Cash, editor. Encyclopedia of Body Image and Human Appearance, Vol
1. San Diego Academic Press.p. 15-22

Batilla, V. S., Julia A. M., McHenry, M. P., Riva, M.P., & Banal D.T. (2013). Indigenous aeta
magbukun self- identity, sociopolitical structures, and self-determination at the local level in the
Philippines. Journal of Anthropology, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/391878

Cohen, A. P. (1995). Social Anthropology – Anthropology of the self: The individual in cultural
perspective. Journal of the royal Anthropological Institute, 1 (4) Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/ 2222217592=141440

Ethredge, Laura, Ed. 2010 Islamic History. Britannica Educational Printing, New York USA.
Ethnic Groups Philippines. (2011). Ethnic Groups in the Philippines.
http://www/ethnicgroupsphilippines.com/people/ethnic-groups-in-the -philippines/

Ferraro, Gary, Andreatta, Susan. 2012. Cultural Anthropology: an applied perspective:

Instructor’s Edition. Wadsworth. Cengage Learning. United States of America

Gow, D. D. (2002). Anthropology and development: evil twin or moral narrative? Human
Organization, 61(4), 299-313. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/201029236?accountid=141440

Havilland, William, Harald, Prince, Walrath, Dana McBride, Bunny. 2014. Anthropology: the
human challenge. Wadsworth, Thompson Learning Inc., 14th Edition, United States of America.

Havilland, William. 2003. Anthropology. Wadsworth. Thompson Learning Inc., United States of
America.

Hawkins, Nicole, et. al. 2010. The impact of exposure to the Thin-ideal Media image on Women.
Retrieved on August 17, 2010 @ https://doi.org/10/1080/10640260490267751

Kenny, Erin and Nichols, Elizabeth Gakstetter. Beauty Around the World (A Cultural
Encyclopedia) on Beautiful Bodies by Margo De Mello. 2014

Killborne, B. (1992). Anthropology—the anthropology of the self and behavior by Gerald M.

Erchak. Choice, 30(4), 659. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/225931610?accountid=141440

Kottak, Conrad Phillip. 2009. Cultural Anthropology, 13th Ed. McGraw Hill Higher Education.
New York, USA.

Lavenda, Robert H., and Schultz, Emily A. 2017. Anthropology: What does it mean to be
human, 4th Ed. Oxford University Press.
Learning How to Learn: Successful Transition Models for Educators Working with Youth with
Learning Disabilities (2014). Retrieved July 10, 2014 from https://www.ncwd-
youth.info/information-brief/learning-how-to-learn

Middleon, DeWight. 2002. The Challenge of human diversity: mirrors, bridges, and chasms,
2md Ed. Waveland Publication. Prospect Heights, Illinois, USA.

Sökefeld, Martin. (1999). Debating self, identity and culture in anthropology. Current
Anthropology, Vol. 40 No. 4 (August/October 1999), pp. 417-448. The University of Chicago
Press on Behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research.
https://jstor.org/stable/10.1086/200042

Van, D.B., Van Veldhuizen, T.S., Au, A.K., & C. (2015). Counter Cross-Cultural Priming and
Relative Deprivation: The Role of Individualism-Collectivism, Social Justice Research, 28(1), 52-
75. Doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11211-014-0230-6

Wallendorf, Melanie and Eric Arnould (1988), “ My Favorite Things: A Cross-Cultural Inquiry into
Object Attachment, Possessiveness and Social Linkage,”Journal of Consumer Research, 14
(March), 531-547.

Ying-yi, H. Ip, G., Chi-yue, C., Morris M.W., & T. Menon, T. (2011). Cultural Identity and
dynamic construction of the self: Collective duties and individual rights in the Chinese and
American cultures. Social Cognition, 19(3), 251-268. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/229660461?account=141440.

Zhang, J. (2004). Cultural Values reflected in chinese advertisements: self-construal and

persuasion implications (Order No. 3153479). Available from ProQuest Central (305201059)
Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/305201059?account=141440