Self, Identity and Identification
The key consequence of consciousness is a sense of self and identity .Self is a result from self-consciousness joined with physicality, a recognition that ‘’I’’ experience and its my experience, ‘’I am’’.
The two perspectives of looking at self and identity we will be using and examining is the sociological one as well as the psychological. The sociological perspective is interested in social contexts within which selves develop as well as the processes by which the self is affected. Psychologists on the other hand, focus on the intra-psychic (occurring in the psyche, mind or personality) processes as well as the consequences of self- phenomena for behaviour.
picture by Felicia Buitenwerf from unsplash.com
Definitions and Distinctions
In order to define the self, we must also define and distinguish between concepts of: self; self-concept ; identity ;personality.
The concept of self is a process of reflexivity according to G.H.Mead(1934) it emanates from the interplay between I and Me. Reflexivity also known as self-awareness is the ability to be both subject and object to yourself. In a way, it’s a special form of consciousness of oneself which is considered the ultimate feature of the human condition.
Self-concept is the sum total of the individual’s thoughts and feelings about himself or herself as an object (Rosenberg 1979). Please note that the word object is in no way identified to the word objectification and has no negative connotations merely neutral explanatory one.
Self-concept is composed of various identities, attitudes, beliefs, values, motives and experiences along with their evaluative and affective components (eg self-efficacy or self- esteem) in terms of which each individual define themselves.
Identity refers to who or what one is and the various meanings attached to oneself by self and others. From a sociological perspective, the concept of self -identity refers to the self- characterizations individuals make in terms of group memberships, social roles and categories as well as the various character traits an individual displays and other attribute to them on basis of her/his conduct. To put it in a nutshell, identity is the most public aspect of self.
Personality, in general refers to the various psychological traits, motivations, dispositions and patterns of thinking and feeling. ( Singer and Kolligian 1987).
The self is then a part of personality that is aware of itself and defines itself in terms of these qualities. Please note that we will not delve here into depth of personality theory or clinical psychology but rather the social structure and personality is selected of higher importance.
picture by Mathieu Stern from unsplash.com
Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy is the most direct expression of self-concept as a social force. It refers to the perception or experience of oneself as a casual agent in one’s environment. With that being said, there is a motivational component associated with self-efficacy, people typically seek to enhance their experience of self as effective. This concept has its significance as we look at the diverseness in attempting to explain and evaluate the concept of self as well as below mentioned identity and identification. Research on self-efficacy has found consistently to have beneficial ramifications for individual functioning and well-being. Particularly in overcoming certain behaviours related to phobias, anxieties, eating disorders, alcohol and smoking addictions as well as recovery from illnesses or injuries. (Bandura, 1986). Through the writings of pragmatists, particularly Mead (1934), we see clearly the importance of action and its consequences as a critical development of meaning, self and society (reflexiveself).
The emphasis on the active self is increasingly displayed and congruent with our Western( and American) priority of mastery, individualism and self-reliance whereas such a concept may not be as important to the mental and physical health in cultures which are more communal, less individualistic and ones that place more importance on cultural influences.
Identification and Identity
The process of identification as a basis for the theory of motivation was set by Foote(1951) and ‘’self-dynamics’’. According to Foote, individuals have multiple identities and these identities are in fact active agents which influence one’s behavioural choices. They thus provide behaviour with meaning, goals and purpose.
Stone(1962) distinguishes between identification of vs identification with.
Identification of- is to distinguish between various persons and positions in society identification with– to take on an identity. Thus the notion of self and identity are separate. Identity is not a substitute word for self but rather a situatedness of the person in terms of standing in the context of a particular relationship or group.
Another important term is role-identity, where the character and role an individual constructs being as an occupant of a particular social position; the social structures to people. The multifaceted nature of self (each being an identity) is tied to a multifaceted nature of society (McCall and Simmons, 1966).
Lastly, social identity theory developed by Tajfel(1981) emphasise how group membership and belonginess have consequences for interpersonal and intergroup relations. In the process of searching for a positive sense of self, people compare their group with relevant other groups and act to create a favourable distinction between the groups, this can be at times with negative consequences for intergroup relations (for example conflict/discrimination). We search for the self in others and others in self, as Wilder(1986) argues, groups which we categorize others have relevance for our own social identity. All in all, self-conceptions are the products of various imminent processes (those that directly infringe on us) with socializing consequences such as : learning of social roles, values and beliefs; language acquisition; commitment to identities or adjustment of identity loss and the processes of social comparison, self-attributions and reflected appraisals.
picture by Ashlez Baty Betm from unsplash.com
Self-Defences and Deceptions
When the self is as a motivational system, the important consequence which follows is the emergence of various distortions and deceptions one participates in, in order to maintain valued self-conceptions. This can be reflected in three main areas: self-presentation and impression management; operation of cognitive biases; self-deception.
Continuous research on self-presentation and impression management presents insightful analysis of ‘facework’( Goffman, 1959) and the various tactics used by individuals. These can be self-serving accounts, in the forms of excuses and justifications, for inappropriate behaviour that could damage the self-image(Mehlman and Snyder, 1985) as well as various other rhetorical devices used either to stage or to repair a certain self-image (Fine, 1987). Social interaction itself is highly selective and self-serving, people choose others who like them or groups as reference or comparisons to themselves, as such individuals engage in various strategies to protect their self-esteem. These strategies may even be self-handicapping, that is self-defeating actions(eg student not studying for an exam) before a performance so they will have a ready-made excuse for failure (Rhodewalt et al, 1991).
With regards to self-serving distortions a particularly interesting question is, does the self deceives itself in this process?. The condition of self-deception, defined as knowing something about oneself that is true and at same time believing it is not true, is a paradoxical and yet highly common condition. Sartre(1958) viewed self-deception to be a characteristic of life in modern society and at same time the major obstacle to being an authentic self. On the other hand, Freud(1938) regarded self-deception as an unavoidable by-product of the ego’s defences against the unconscious impulses of the id. Please note that, the id is the set of uncoordinated instinctual desires; the super-ego plays the critical and moralizing role; and the ego is the organized, realistic agent that mediates, between the instinctual desires of the id and the critical super-ego.
Another approach to self-deception is that it relates to forms of social organization. Swanson(1988) argues that the ego defences are a function of social interdependence and thus appear as means of maintaining social solidarity in the face of threats stemming from questions about the kind of person one is.
picture by Kalei Peek from unsplash.com
Who are you?
In his many talks and public appearances, J.Krishnamurti, Indian philosopher and writer, asks the question of hurt- who is hurt? Who are you? In between silence and probably inward questioning we start to wonder, we create a space perhaps to reset our patterns. He continues to address the issue of hurt as a ‘’process of thought’’ that is hurt. When one is unaware, one is separate, in separation we build walls and defences and keep the loop of pain, emotions and other imprints, not understanding the prison we create unconsciously. We create multiple images of ourselves with certain expectations of each, certain roles and personas, but is it possible to live without an image of ourselves? Such questions can be resolved through awareness and attention, through stepping out of our perceptual positions and taking a choice, giving a chance to experience something differently. The self is individual as it is collective, the self is aware as it is unaware, the self is an ongoing process and an invitation towards discovery of who one is independent of labels, stereotypes, identities and identifications.
(see more ‘I am more than my name’)
References:
- Cook, Karen.S.(1995). Self and Identity. Pp.41-59 in Sociological Perspectives on Social Psychology. Massachusetts: A Pearson Education Company.
- Mead, George.H.(1934). Mind, Self and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Rosenberg, Morris. (1979). Conceiving the Self. New York: Free Press.
- Singer, Jerome.L., and John Kolligan, Jr.(1987). Personality: Developments in the study of private experience. Annual Review of Psychology 38:533-574.
- Bandura, Albert.(1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
- Foote, Nelson.N.(1951). Identification as the basis for a theory of motivation. American Sociological Review 26:14-21.
- Stone, Gregory.P.(1962). Appearance and the self. In Human Behaviour and Social Processes, ed. Arnold.M.Rose. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
- McCall, George.J., and J.L.Simmons(1966). Identities and Interactions, rev. ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Tajfel,Henri.(1982). Social Identity and Intergroup Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Wilder, David.A.(1986). Social categorization: Implications for creation and reduction of intergroup bias. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 19: 293-355.
- Goffman, Erving.(1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday.
- Mehlman, Rick.C., and C.R.Snyder.(1985). Excuse theory: A test of the self-protective role of attributions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 49:994-1001.
- Rhodewalt, Frederick, C.Morf, S.Hazlett, and M.Fairfield.(1991). Self-handicapping: The role of discounting and augmentation in the preservation of self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 61:122-131.
- Fine,Gary.A.(1987). With the Boys: Little League Baseball and Preadolescent Culture. Chicago: university of Chicago Press.
- Sartre, Jean.P.(1958). Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology. H.Barnes, trans.London: Methuen.
- Freud, Sigmund.(1938). The Basic Writings of Sigmund Freud. A. A. Brill, ed. And trans. New York: Random House.
- Swanson, Guy.E.(1988). Ego Defenses and the Legitimation of Behavior. ASA Rose Monograph Series.New York: Cambridge University Press.