Lesson 2.

Sociology Clifford Geertz (1973)

-believes that the struggle for ones
The social aspect of the self is explored in
individuality is only possible in modern
many ways, in which social situation
society where religio-theological traditions
influence one’s view of self. The self is not
are gradually replaced by rational and
created in isolation, and people are not born
scientific calculations; and the intimate
with perception of oneself as good in sports,
personal affiliations are replaced by
make-up artistry, dancing, or business.
urbanized way of life. Modernization or the
Such perceptions are identified through
destruction of the traditional way of life
observations, or interactions with other
“delocalizes” the self. This poses certain
people.
Problem as:

“Am I beautiful?” “ Do my eyebrow look like 1. The newfound freedom

Liza Soberano na?” These questions can be threatens the very authenticity of
answered by looking at those people the self (e.g. love).
around. The self has meaning only within 2. Alienation (Marx) – human
the social context, and it is wrong to say that beings haunted by the very
the social situation defines our self-concept images they have created
and our self-esteem. We rely on others to 3. Objectification of the body’s
provide a “social reality”- to help us ( e.g. medical practice)
determine what to think, feel, and do 4. dehumanization of self
(Hardin & Higgins, 1996). Solution: for the individual to discover the
1. SOCIOLOGICAL VIEWS OF THE “true” and “authentic” part of himself/herself
SELF to realize his/her potentials, there is a need
to abolish repressive social constraints.
1.1 The Self as Product of Modern
Society Among Others
1.2 Self as Necessary fiction
With modernization, the self becomes a
“delocalized” self which is free to seek its Self for Nietzsche
own identity; defining religion, theological -is the sum of individual’s action, thoughts
tradition; free from customary constraints and feelings. Self is nothing more than a
hence, deviating from the traditional way of metaphor, a representation of something
life. Stability one’s self-identity is no longer abstract; symbolic.
based on pre-given traditional broad -It is possible for us to remember something
definition of the self. even if we have not experienced it.
-Self has continuity even if it is only in Social Construction of the Self
memory i.e, either heard or witnesses which
Self is not discovered;
did not happen to you. A true given self is
-it is made through the socialization
not what unites these experiences, but it is
process. BUT, individual are not just
presumed unity of these experiences that
hapless victims of socialization.
gave rise to a concept of the self.
The individual - is an active strategizing
agent that negotiates for the definition of
1.3 Post-modern View of the Self
himself. (Ikaw ang gumagawa ng kung ano
Self is a narrative, a text written and ka”) self is acquired socially through
rewritten. language, like symbols.
Self is a story. It is dynamic. We construct ourselves based on our social
Self is a product of modern discourse that is roles through socialization agents – family,
historically and socially imprisoned by what school, community, etc.
is acceptable by norms, etc. self in post
modernity is complicated by electronic 1.4 Rewriting the Self as an Artistic
mediated virtual interaction of cyber self Creation

such as change in appearance (in the Nietzsche states that the unity of the self is
cyberspace). not pre-given but accomplished through
conscious effort – transform self through
According to N. Green beautiful work art.
-self is “digitalized” in cyberspace, a virtual
version of who we are. The self is seen in Individual must fashion, care for and
websites or social media- face book, twitter, cultivate themselves. We can recreate
instagram, etc. ourselves to get hold of the present, forgive
The following are the manifestation: the past and plan the future.

1. information technology dislocates

the self, thus, self is “digitalized” in Rorty: contingencies of selfhood – conceal

cyberspace the “ugly” reinterpreting the overall aesthetic

2. Global migration produces contours of the self. This does not mean

multicultural identities. that by rewriting narrative of herself she will

3. Post-modern selves are “pluralized” discover something deep about herself…

selves redescribing one’s self is just a way of

reinterpreting and redescribing one’s past.
1.5 Self Creation and Collective Identity Beyond Self Creation

Memories (photographs, video) The quest or search for self-

- play significant role in creating the identity -is a product of modern society but
self and identity. this is complicated by the socio-cultural
-Memory and forgetting are most sensibilities of postmodernity, new
important in recreating a person’s information technologies and globalization,
identity. Such memories of the past reconfiguring ourselves as to gender, sex,
include pain, triumph, etc. Such experience ethnicity, and creating one’s style,
of the past can be linked with social signature.
transformation. Yet the project of self creation is
Another important aspect of this embedded within imagined communities.
view of self is that creation is formed within The self constantly live in this paradox: to
“imagined communities”. Selves obtain their pursue self creation pre-given, not willfully
nature from cultural traditions embodied in chosen social circumstances.
various social institutions. These are
preserved in a collective narrative which 2. Mead’s Theory of Self
becomes the reservoir for the project of self-
George Herbert Mead (1863-1931)
creation. Self creation along cultural lines
-is an American sociologist best known as a
must be done in maximum cultural
founder of American pragmatism, a pioneer
recognition of differences among and
of symbolic interaction theory, and as one of
between individual and cultural groups.
the founder of social psychology.
Mead’s theory of the self maintains
1.6 Self Creation and the struggle for
that the conception a person holds of
cultural recognition
himself/herself in his/her mind emerges
This is a challenge of self-identity
from social interaction with others. This is, in
amidst recognition of racial and ethnic
effect, a theory and argument against
identities.
biological determinism because it holds that
Self creation -is necessarily grounded on
the self is neither initially there at birth nor
collective solidarities. We create ourselves
necessarily at the beginning of a social
by struggling with cultural hassles then
interaction, but is constructed and re-
owning the created self. We hide the ugly
constructed in the process of social
part of our cultural nature. We learn to
experience and activity.
adjust.
The self, according to Mead, is made of two The “me” is the accumulated understanding
components: of the “generalized other,” i.e how one
1.) the “I” and thinks one’s group perceives oneself.
2.) the “me”.
The “me” represents the expectations and The “I” is the individual’s impulses. The “I” is
attitudes of others (the “generalized other”) self as subject; the “me” is self as object.
organized into a social self. The “I” is the knower , the “me” is the
- The individual defines his or her own known.
behavior with reference to the generalized
attitude of the social group(s) he/she The mind, or stream of thought, is the self-
occupies. When the individual can view reflective movements of the interaction
himself or herself from the standpoints of between the “I” and the “me” these
the generalized other, self- consciousness dynamics go beyond selfhood in a narrow
in the full sense of the term is attained. sense, and from the basis of a theory of
-From this standpoint, the generalized other human cognition.
(internalized in the “me”) is the major
instruments of social control, for it is the For Mead the thinking process is the
mechanism by which the community internalized dialogue between the “I” and
exercises control over the conduct of its the “me”
individual members.
Understood as a combination of the “I” and
The “I” is the response to the “me”, or the the “me”, Mead’s self proves to be
person’s individually. noticeably entwined within a sociological
-It is essence of agency in human action. existence.
So, in effect, the “ me” is the self as object, For Mead, existence in a community comes
while the “I” is the self as subject before individual consciousness. First one
(Crossman, 2017). must participate in the different social
positions within society and only
In other words, the “I” is the responses of an subsequently can one use that experience
individual to the attitudes of others while the to take the perspective of others and
“me” is the organized set of attitudes of become self-conscious (Boundless, 2016).
others which an individual assumes.
2.1 Mead’s Three Stages of Development Stage 2: The Play Stage
of Self
From about age two to six, children are in
Stage 1: The Preparatory Stage the play stage.
The first stage is the preparatory play stage -children play pretend and do
stage. not adhere to the rules in organized games
The preparatory stage like patintero or basketball (Rath,2016).
-starts from the time we are born Playing a game with children of this age is
until we are about age two. far easier to just go will any “rules” they
-In this stage, children mimic come up with during the course of the game
(imitate) those around them. This is why than trying to enforce any “rules” upon
parents of young children typically do not them. Playing the never-ending Chinese
want you to use foul language around them garter with girls still do not actually have one
(Rath,2016). specific set of rules the same as last time
played, and yet they still play the game
-If a two-year-old child can “read” what he or while adhering to these rules. During this
she has most likely done is memorized the stage, children play “pretend” as the
book that had been read to him or her. In a significant other. This means that when they
noontime TV show, Vic Sotto, Allan K., Jose play “bahay-bahayan”, they are literally
Manalo, use quite foul language like “bwisit” pretend to be the mommy or the daddy that
“bastos” “siraulo” and so is the language of they know.
a child who hears them. Does he or she Stage 3: The Game Stage
idea of what he/she is saying or doing? No. The third stage is the game stage, is
He/She is mimicking. He/She is in the from about seven onwards.
preparatory stage. If he/she had been an - In this stage, children can begin to
older child, the scenes in the segments of understand and adhere to the rules of
the show would cease to have any humor. It games. They can begin to play more
works because he/she doesn’t understand formalized games because they begin to
the meaning behind his/her words, actions, understand other people’s perspective- or
or tone of voice. the perspective of the generalized other. In
this stage, when children play “pretend” they
may still play “bahay-bahayan”, but are
pretending to a mommy or a daddy
independent of the one that resides in their
home. The generalized other refers to the bacwkground, or more formally in terms of a
viewpoint of the social group at large. The physical or psychological diagnosis.
child begins taking this perspective into
account during this stage (Rath 2016). The labeling bias occurs when we are
labeled, and other’s views and
expectations of us are affected by that
2.2 The Looking-Glass self: Our Sense of
Self is Influence by Others ‘Views of Us labeling (Fox & Stinnett, 1996).
For example:
The concept of the looking –glass
if a teacher knows that a child has
self states that part of how we see
been diagnosed with a particular
ourselves comes from our perception of
psychological disorder, that teacher may
how others see us (Cooley, 1902).
have different expectations and
explanations of the child’s behavior than he
According to the American
or she would if not aware of that label.
sociologist Charles Horton Cooley (1864-
Where things get really interesting for our
1929), the degree of personal insecurity you
present discussion is when those
display in social situations is determined by
expectations start to become self-fulfilling
what you believe other people think of you.
prophecies, and our self-concept and even
-Cooley’s concepts of the looking glass self,
our behavior start to align with them. For
states that a person’s self grows out of a
example, when children are labeled in
person’s social interactions with others. The
special education context, these labels can
view of ourselves comes from the
then impact their self-esteem (Taylor,
contemplation of personal qualities and
Hume, & Welsh, 2012).
impressions of how others perceive us.
If we are repeatedly labeled and
Actually, how we see ourselves does not
evaluated by others, then self-labeling
come from who we really are, but rather
may occur which happens when we adopt
from how we believe others see us
others’ labels explicitly into our self-
(Isaksen,2013).
concepts. The effects of this self-labeling
Sometimes, the influence of other
on our self-esteem appear to depend very
people’s appraisals of ourselves on our self-
much on the nature of the labels.
concepts may be so strong that we end up
eternalizing them. For example, we are
often labeled in particularly ways by others,
perhaps informally in terms of our ethnic
 Labels used in relation to diagnosis of negative label into their self-concept in order
psychological disorder can be detrimental to to reclaim it can sometimes undermine the
people who then internalize them. stigma attached to the label.
For example, Moses (2009) found that
adolescents who self-labeled according to 2.3 Social Comparison Theory: Our
diagnoses they had received were found to Sense of Self Is Influenced by
Comparison with Others.
have higher levels of self-stigma in their
self-concepts compared with those who Self-concept and self-esteem are

described their challenges in non- also heavily influenced by the process of

pathological terms. In these types of social comparison (Buunk & Gibbons,

situation, those who self-label may come to 2007; Van Lange, 2008).

experience internalized prejudice, which

occurs when individuals turn prejudice Social comparison occurs when we learn

directed toward them by others onto about our abilities and skills, about the

themselves. Internalized adjustment in appropriates and validity of our opinions,

members of various groups, including and about our relative social status by

sexual minorities (Carter,2012) and racial comparing our own attitudes, beliefs, and

minorities ( Szymanski & Obiri, 2011). behaviors with those of others.

In other cases, labels used by wider -These comparisons can be with people

society to describe people negatively can who we know and interact with, with those

be positively reclaimed by those being whom we read about or see on TV, or with

labeled. anyone else we view as important.

However, the most meaningful comparisons

Galinsky and colleagues (2013) we make tend to be with those we see as

-explored this use of self-labeling by similar to ourselves (Festinger, 1954).

members of oppressed groups to reclaim Social comparison occurs primarily on

derogatory terms, including “queer” and dimensions on which there is no correct

“bitch” used by dominant groups. answer or objective benchmark and thus

After self-labeling, minority group members on which we can rely only on the beliefs of

evaluated these terms less negatively, others for information. Answers to questions

reported feeling more powerful, and were such as “what should I wear to the

also perceived by observers as more interview?” or what kind of music should I

powerful. Overall, these results indicate that have at my wedding?” are frequently

individual who incorporate a formerly determined at least in part by using the

behavior of others as a basis of comparison.
We also use social comparison to help us
determine our skills or abilities – how good
we are at performing a task or doing a job,
for example. When students ask their
teacher for the class average on an exam,
they are also seeking to use social
comparison to evaluate their performance.