TOMAS DEL ROSARIO COLLEGE
COLLEGE DEPARTMENT
UNDERSTANDING THE SELF
SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES ON THE SELF
Sociology views the self as a social construct, meaning it is shaped and formed through
interaction with others and within social groups and institutions. The self is not innate but
emerges through social processes.
• George Herbert Mead (Symbolic Interactionism): Argued that the self develops through
social interaction and language. He introduced the concepts of the "I" and the "Me."
o The "I" is the unsocialized, spontaneous, and impulsive aspect of the self.
o The "Me" is the socialized self, representing the internalized attitudes and
expectations of others, which we use to guide our behavior. The self arises from the
dialogue between the "I" and the "Me."
George Herbert Mead (1863–1931) was an American philosopher, sociologist, and psychologist,
widely regarded as one of the founders of Symbolic Interactionism. This sociological theory
emphasizes that the self and society are constructed through communication and the
exchange of meaning via symbols.
The Self in Symbolic Interactionism: A Social Product
Mead's core argument is that the self is not innate but emerges through social interaction.
Unlike earlier thinkers who saw the self as an internal, pre-existing entity, Mead believed that self-
awareness and consciousness are fundamentally social phenomena. You can't have a "self" in
isolation.
His key concepts related to the self are:
1. The "I" and the "Me"
Mead proposed that the self is composed of two distinct, yet interdependent, phases or aspects:
• The "Me": This is the socialized self. It represents the internalized attitudes,
expectations, and roles of others and society as a whole. The "Me" is what we learn from
our interactions; it's the organized set of attitudes that we adopt from the community. It's
the self that is aware of social rules, norms, and expectations, and it acts as a form of
social control and self-regulation. Think of it as the "conventional" or "conforming" aspect
of the self, always considering how others perceive us.
o Example: When you decide not to shout in a library, that's your "Me" at work,
internalizing the societal norm of quiet behavior in such a space.
• The "I": This is the spontaneous, unorganized, and unique aspect of the self. It's the
response of the individual to the attitudes of the community (the "Me"). The "I" is the
TOMAS DEL ROSARIO COLLEGE
COLLEGE DEPARTMENT
impulsive, creative, and unpredictable part of the self. It allows for novelty, innovation, and
sometimes, the defiance of social expectations. It's the part that acts before fully reflecting
on the social consequences. Mead emphasized that "It is only after we have acted that we
know what we have done... what we have said."
o Example: You might feel an impulsive urge to tell a joke during a serious meeting
(that's the "I"), but your "Me" might then filter that impulse, leading you to decide
against it or rephrase it. When you make a truly original or unexpected remark, that's
often the "I" shining through.
The self arises from the ongoing dialogue and dynamic interplay between the "I" and the "Me."
The "Me" provides the framework of social expectations, and the "I" responds creatively within or
against that framework.
2. The Development of the Self: Stages of Role-Taking
Mead argued that the ability to form a "self" develops through a series of stages, all centered on the
concept of role-taking—the capacity to imaginatively put oneself in another's shoes and see
oneself from their perspective.
• a. Preparatory Stage (Birth to ~2 years old):
o Children primarily imitate others' behaviors and sounds without fully understanding
the meaning. They mimic gestures, words, and actions.
o At this stage, the self is not yet developed. There's no distinct "I" or "Me" as the child
simply copies without conscious awareness of "self."
• b. Play Stage (Ages ~2 to 6 years old):
o Children begin to take on the roles of significant others (e.g., parents, siblings,
teachers) one at a time.
o They engage in pretend play (e.g., "playing house," "playing doctor"), where they act
out roles and understand them from a single perspective. This allows them to see
themselves as others see them in specific, limited contexts.
o This is the emergence of the "Me" as the child internalizes specific attitudes from
these individual "significant others."
• c. Game Stage (Ages ~7 years old and onwards):
o This is the crucial stage for the full development of the self. Children learn to take
on multiple roles simultaneously and understand the complex rules and
expectations of an organized game (like baseball or soccer).
o They internalize the attitudes of the "generalized other" – which represents the
organized community or society as a whole. This is the abstract understanding of
societal norms, values, and expectations, rather than just those of specific
individuals.
TOMAS DEL ROSARIO COLLEGE
COLLEGE DEPARTMENT
o Understanding the "generalized other" allows individuals to function effectively in
society, anticipate the reactions of others in various situations, and develop a
coherent and stable sense of self that can operate across different social contexts.
Significance of Mead's Theory
• Social Construction of Self: Mead's work profoundly shifted the understanding of the self
from an internal, static entity to a dynamic, social product.
• Importance of Language and Symbols: He highlighted that language and shared symbols
are essential for the development of mind and self, as they allow for meaningful interaction
and the internalization of others' perspectives.
• Foundation of Symbolic Interactionism: His ideas form the bedrock of this sociological
perspective, which remains highly influential in understanding micro-level social
interactions, identity, and the construction of reality.
In essence, for George Herbert Mead, the self is not something we are born with but something we
constantly develop and refine through our interactions with others and our ability to take on their
perspectives, ultimately integrating these social experiences into the dynamic interplay of our "I"
and "Me."
• Charles Horton Cooley (Looking-Glass Self): Proposed that our self-concept develops by
imagining how others perceive us, how they judge those perceptions, and then developing
feelings about ourselves based on those judgments. We see ourselves as if in a "looking-
glass" (mirror) of others' reactions.
Charles Horton Cooley (1864–1929) was an American sociologist, best known for his concept of the
"looking-glass self," which he introduced in his book Human Nature and the Social Order (1902).
Along with George Herbert Mead, he is considered a foundational figure in the school of thought
known as Symbolic Interactionism, which emphasizes how individuals develop their sense of self
through social interaction.
The Looking-Glass Self: How Others Shape Our Identity
Cooley's "looking-glass self" theory posits that our self-concept (how we see ourselves, our
identity, and our self-esteem) is not developed in isolation but is primarily formed by imagining
how others perceive and judge us. It's like using others as a mirror to see ourselves.
The process of the looking-glass self involves three principal steps:
1. We imagine how we appear to others.
o This is our perception of how we present ourselves to the world—our physical
appearance, our mannerisms, our actions, and our words.
o Example: You might imagine that your new haircut makes you look sophisticated to
your colleagues.
TOMAS DEL ROSARIO COLLEGE
COLLEGE DEPARTMENT
2. We imagine how others judge that appearance.
o We try to interpret the reactions (real or imagined) of others to our appearance or
behavior. This involves guessing what others are thinking about us.
o Example: You might notice a colleague's approving nod or a smile, and interpret that
as a positive judgment of your sophisticated look. Conversely, a raised eyebrow
might be interpreted as disapproval.
3. We develop some sort of self-feeling (pride, shame, etc.) based on these perceived
judgments.
o Our imagined interpretations of others' judgments evoke an emotional response in
us, which then shapes our self-concept.
o If we imagine positive judgments, we might feel pride, confidence, or satisfaction.
o If we imagine negative judgments, we might feel shame, embarrassment, anxiety, or
insecurity.
o Example: If you imagine your colleagues view your haircut positively, you'll feel
confident and proud. If you imagine they think it looks silly, you might feel
embarrassed and self-conscious.
Key Aspects and Implications:
• Social Construction of Self: Like Mead, Cooley firmly believed that the self is a social
product, not an innate or isolated phenomenon. It is continuously shaped and reshaped
through ongoing social interactions.
• Imagination is Key: It's important to note that Cooley emphasized the imagined
perceptions and judgments of others, not necessarily their actual ones. We act based on
what we think others see and think of us, even if our interpretation is incorrect.
• The Self is Dynamic: The looking-glass self is not a one-time process but a continuous,
lifelong one. As we interact with different people and in different contexts, our self-concept
can evolve and change.
• Importance of Primary Groups: Cooley also highlighted the critical role of primary groups
(like family, close friends, and play groups) in the early development of the looking-glass
self. The opinions of those closest to us typically hold more weight and have a more
profound impact on our self-image.
• Impact on Self-Esteem: The looking-glass self is a direct mechanism through which self-
esteem is formed. Positive reflections contribute to higher self-esteem, while consistently
negative perceived reflections can lead to low self-esteem and even mental health
challenges.
TOMAS DEL ROSARIO COLLEGE
COLLEGE DEPARTMENT
• "Metaperception": Some contemporary analyses of the looking-glass self refer to it as
"metaperception" because it involves "perception of perceptions" – our perception of how
others perceive us.
Contrast with Mead:
While both Cooley and Mead were symbolic interactionists and emphasized the social nature of the
self, a subtle difference lies in their focus:
• Cooley's Looking-Glass Self primarily focuses on how the individual's self-concept is
formed through their interpretation of others' judgments. It's about how external
perceptions are internalized.
• Mead's "I" and "Me" provides a more detailed explanation of the process of self-
development through role-taking, particularly emphasizing the internalization of the
"generalized other" and the ongoing internal dialogue between the spontaneous "I" and the
social "Me." Cooley's concept can be seen as a fundamental aspect that feeds into Mead's
more comprehensive theory of self-development.
In summary, Charles Horton Cooley's "looking-glass self" provides a powerful metaphor for
understanding how our sense of who we are is profoundly influenced by the reflections we imagine
we see in the minds of others. It underscores the deeply social and interpretive nature of human
identity.
• Erving Goffman (Dramaturgical Approach): Viewed social interaction as a theatrical
performance. Individuals are "actors" who present different "selves" or "roles" depending on
the social "stage" and "audience." This suggests that the self is fluid and context-
dependent.
Erving Goffman (1922-1982) was a Canadian-American sociologist, often considered one of the
most influential sociologists of the 20th century. He is a key figure in Symbolic Interactionism,
focusing on the micro-level of social interaction and how individuals manage and present their
"selves" in everyday life. His most famous contribution is the Dramaturgical Approach, detailed in
his seminal work, The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (1959).
The Dramaturgical Approach: Life as a Stage
Goffman's central metaphor is that social interaction is like a theatrical performance.
Individuals are "actors" who present "characters" or "roles" to an "audience" (other people) on
various "stages" (social settings). The goal of this performance is impression management – to
control or guide the impressions others form of us.
Key Concepts of the Dramaturgical Approach:
TOMAS DEL ROSARIO COLLEGE
COLLEGE DEPARTMENT
1. Impression Management:
o This is the conscious or unconscious process by which individuals attempt to
influence the perceptions of others about themselves.
o We strategically present information about ourselves to construct a desired image.
This involves managing our appearance, manner, and setting.
o Example: Dressing smartly for a job interview, smiling and making eye contact, and
speaking confidently are all part of impression management.
2. Front Stage (or Front Region):
o This is the public area where the performance takes place. It's where individuals
are "on stage," aware that they are being observed by an audience.
o In the front stage, individuals carefully manage their behavior to align with the role
they are performing and the expectations of the audience.
o It includes:
▪ Setting: The physical layout or backdrop of the performance (e.g., a
classroom, an office, a restaurant).
▪ Appearance: What the performer looks like (clothing, grooming, props like a
doctor's stethoscope).
▪ Manner: How the performer acts (demeanor, gestures, tone of voice).
o Example: A waiter in a restaurant presenting a polite and efficient demeanor to
customers. A student acting attentive and studious in class.
3. Back Stage (or Back Region):
o This is the private area where performers can relax, drop their role, and prepare
for their front-stage performance. It's out of sight of the audience.
o In the back stage, individuals can be their "true selves" (or a less managed self),
rehearse their roles, or engage in behaviors that would be inappropriate or
undermine their front-stage performance.
o Example: The kitchen of a restaurant where waiters complain about customers or
relax. A student gossiping with friends in the hallway between classes.
4. Off Stage:
o This refers to moments or places where an individual is not engaged in any
particular performance, or where they are simply "out of character" and not
interacting with an audience for whom they are performing. It's often where the
individual is truly alone.
TOMAS DEL ROSARIO COLLEGE
COLLEGE DEPARTMENT
5. Roles and Scripts:
o Individuals perform various social roles (e.g., student, teacher, child, parent, friend,
employee). Each role comes with a somewhat pre-defined "script" or set of
expected behaviors, norms, and attributes.
o We learn these scripts through socialization and adapt them to specific situations.
6. Audience:
o The people observing the performance. The performer's actions are heavily
influenced by who the audience is and what their expectations are.
o Audience segregation: We often present different "faces" or "selves" to different
audiences to avoid embarrassment or conflict (e.g., how you talk to your boss vs.
your best friend).
7. Maintaining "Face":
o For Goffman, "face" is the positive social value a person effectively claims for
themselves by the line others assume they have taken during a particular contact.
We constantly engage in "facework" to maintain our desired image and avoid
embarrassment for ourselves and others.
Implications for the Self:
• The Self is Fluid and Context-Dependent: Goffman's theory implies that there isn't a
single, fixed, "true" self that we carry around. Instead, the self is a collection of various
roles and performances that we enact depending on the social situation and the audience.
• Impression Management as Core to Identity: Our sense of self is deeply intertwined with
how we present ourselves to others and how we believe others perceive us.
• Everyday Life as Ritual: Goffman highlighted the ritualistic nature of everyday interactions,
showing how we constantly engage in social performances to maintain social order and
mutual understanding.
• The "Real" Self is Elusive: If we are always performing, the question arises: where is the
"real" self? Goffman suggests that perhaps the "real" self is less about an essential core
and more about the sum total of our managed impressions and backstage preparations.
Critiques:
• Overemphasis on Performance: Critics argue that Goffman's approach might
overemphasize the performative aspect of human interaction, potentially reducing genuine
emotions, spontaneity, and authenticity to mere acts.
• Neglect of Power Structures: Some argue that Goffman's micro-sociological focus on
individual interactions sometimes overlooks the broader societal power structures and
inequalities that shape these performances.
