Category: Personal Identity

Introduction

Generally, it is easier to predict the behavior of people based on the nature of social group they closely interact with. The interaction with each other is vital in shaping personal perceptions. The aspect of being in a group has raised a number of question concerning the impact such involvement have on the individual’s identity. Generally, people have different personalities, which are significantly influenced by parental figures and other relevant factors including the general environment. However, people have the ability to change and adapt to the behaviors portrayed and embraced by the community. In other words, how individuals are raised in society is essential in facilitating the ability to predict the conduct and even future roles within the group. Factors such as education, norms, relationships, church teachings, and gender are critical aspects of society that enable the community to influence an individual’s character.

Main Discussion

Generally, schools play a vital role in influencing the perception and shaping the self-identity of people in society. In other words, individuals usually develop their characters mainly from learning institutions. When people attend schools, they are more likely to build effective relationships and discipline needed for better coexistence. “In any given day, we interact with a multitude of other humans, whether we encounter them in person, virtually, or symbolically, intimately or simply in passing,” (Kang and Bodenhausen 548).

Based on Kang and Bodenhausen, the continuous interaction enables people to acquire unique behaviors. The knowledge gained through schooling has the potential to impact general conduct, thus making the facet essential for determining and influencing the required attributes. In such a situation, the social group will automatically impact the behavior of any person within the society and makes them believe and appreciate the importance of education and its outcome.

Similarly, culture as an aspect of the community is fundamental in shaping the perspective of an individual in society. The community values that are embraced and respected are more likely to be adopted by the people in the society (Gkargkavouzi et al. 154).

In other words, some common characteristics such as love and friendliness, can be harnessed based on how the community views them. When people in a given social group value one another and have an effective relationship, such features will be viewed as core reasons that promote peaceful coexistence. Therefore, it becomes easier for an individual to value and acquire such characteristics. When the community embraces a particular behavior, the likelihood of people in the vicinity practicing the same is high, thus making it becomes part of the public. In such cases, the community contributes to the development of personal identity.

Furthermore, communities that value their people are likely to enhance the aspect of self-respect. In most cases, the experience a person has is essential in influencing how they treat each other. A system that encourages respect will make the people in such surrounding to as well establish similar attributes (Gkargkavouzi el al. 148). In other words, the individuals will perceive themselves as respectful and thus value others as well. In such a scenario, it is the picture that the community creates about the aspect of respect that impacts the public’s perception.

In addition, the community having the aspect of shared interest is capable of shaping the identity of its members in a positive manner. For instance, people will be encouraged to explore their potential and aim higher to achieve their individual goals. Therefore, in such cases, individuals develop the will to perform exceptionally from the societal construct (Wang, et al). It can be noted that the motive and drive as factors that prompt people to take a given action are obtained majorly from the individual’s surroundings. Hence, the community has the power to enable a person to shape the character and determination necessary for personal development.

Moreover, the value that the community places on gender has a significant impact on the perception of personal identity. For instance, if society values women, then it is more likely that females in society will develop a sense of belonging, which will make them highly integrated into all aspects of the social group. The same case applies to the degree they accord males in the community. When there is an effective relationship between the two genders and emotional development, any person in society will embrace such aspects and develop relevant attributes that support the conduct (Kang and Bodenhausen 555). In other words, people will have a positive attitude towards each gender and thus treat them accordingly. When the community creates normative expectations on particular gender roles, society promotes a picture that depicts all aspects that are necessary for self-identity.

Even though the community is capable of influencing the identity of people in a positive way, it is can further create a negative impact on individual behavior. For instance, a social group that does not value women will raise people who do not accord the necessary respect to females. In other words, it will be a norm in such a setting that women are inferior to men. Young ladies will grow with such notions the same as boys; thus, the circle will continue over generations. It might be challenging to reverse such belief because people grow up having a fixed mind.

Furthermore, the aspect of social status has the potential to create a negative impact on the identity of people in the community. According to Kang and Bodenhausen (551), race and gender are defined on the perspective of order of social class. “The interactive dynamics of race and gender are further complicated by a higher-order interaction with socioeconomic status,” implying that people will likely to associate based on where they belong in the society (According to Kang and Bodenhausen 551).

The persons without the ability to fit in a given category will feel isolated from the setting and thus become insignificant (Hope et al. 69). The conduct is not appropriate and has the potential to create an unhealthy relationship between the two classes. The rich in society might opt to disrespect the poor because that is what the facet of social class cultivates in the community. In other words, young children will mature; having the notion that being poor makes people unworthy.

In addition, society, through specific cultural beliefs, has the potation to impact the viewpoint of people negatively. For example, when the community believes and values the marriage institution, it will create a perception that discriminates the single parents and individuals who have chosen not to be engaged in marriage (Wang et al.) In other words, such environment will make individuals to involve in the practice even if they do not feel interested.

Conclusion

Based on the argument, it is evident that communities significantly influence one’s identity. People are more likely to develop behaviors that are predominant in the society. For instance, values and cultures that are practiced by the social group can be used to determine and influence the perception of individuals. Furthermore, the aspect of education as a key part of society is vital in instilling relevant attributes that shape the conduct of people. Therefore, interacting with different persons in the community enables people to have perspective aligned to the individuals they frequently associate with.

Works Cited

Gkargkavouzi, Anastasia, George Halkos, and Steriani Matsiori. “Environmental Behavior in a Private-Sphere Context: Integrating Theories of Planned Behavior and Value Belief Norm, Self-Identity and Habit.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, vol. 148, 2019, pp. 145-156. Web.

Hope, Elan C., et al. “Engaged Against the Machine: Institutional and Cultural Racial Discrimination and Racial Identity as Predictors of Activism Orientation among Black Youth.” American Journal of Community Psychology, vol. 63, no. 1-2, 2019, pp. 61-72. Web.

Kang, Sonia K., and Galen V. Bodenhausen. “Multiple identities in social perception and interaction: Challenges and opportunities.” Annual review of psychology, vol. 66, no. 1, 2015, pp. 547-574. Web.

Wang, Xiao, et al. “I am vs. We are: How Biospheric Values and Environmental Identity of Individuals and Groups Can Influence Pro-Environmental Behaviour.” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 12, 2021. Web.

Human life is a complex process that lasts on the background of other processes on the Earth. It is evident that all those processes and events influence and correlate to each other making life almost a ceaseless phenomenon. Our task is to learn the trouble distinguishing personal identity from perception of reality on the example of different artworks.

It should be born in mind that “the problem of personal identity over time is the problem of giving an account of the logically necessary and sufficient conditions for a person identified at one time being the same person as a person identified at another” (Noonan, 2). Thus, to outline the distinguished personal identity, one should take into account historical conditions of the world a person lives in and his/her own perception of reality. In psychology there exist two ways of reality perception: imagining a thing and trusting in its existence and assuming the proposition and submitting its truth.

If we want to create rules of acceptable evidence for truth of existence in order to build our worldviews, we will need a better understanding of the relationship of truth to reality. Those worldviews become our personal representations of reality and our standards of reference for truth (Stark, 212).

Stark also emphasizes that “our perceptions of reality are filtered by our personal worldviews as we estimate reality” (212). In what way does it happen we are going to observe on the example of several artworks.

The play of Arthur Miller Death of a Salesman is a brilliant example of how perception of reality influences personal identity.

Willy Loman is a person who because of harsh life circumstances begins to live two lives: real and imagined. Imagined life gives him a vision of his young years with endless opportunities and possibilities. Unfortunately, real life picture is different. Willy is old, weak physically and mentally and, as a result, not popular and successful. May be work of a salesman was not a perfect variant for him but his perception of reality based on the dreams led to fatal decisions and the tragedy in the end of the play. Of course, it must be mentioned that his perception of reality was influenced by the general philosophy of American Dream. It is a paradox but dream at the beginning turned into horror in the end.

According to Floyd’s point of view, “emotionally healthy people are able to face reality whether it is pleasant or unpleasant. They cope with the problems they encounter instead of escaping and retreating to drug misuse or overindulgence in food or sex” (32). Analyzing the situation with Billy, we can assume that he was mentally ill because of perfectionism syndrome.

The reaction of American viewership to this play was also understandable.

They were seeing themselves not because Willy is a salesman, but the situation in which he stood and to which he was reacting, and which was reacting against him, was probably the central situation of contemporary civilization. It is that we are struggling with forces that are far greater than we can handle, with no equipment to make anything mean anything (Griffin, 35).

Another eminent example of reality perception and personal identity is described in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest film by Milos Forman. It is the screen version of the novel of the same name by ken Kesey.

Randle Patrick McMurphy came to the mental institution in order to avoid being in the jail. Before his coming to the asylum his life perception and attitude were different. He was a criminal penalized for statutory rape. He did not care about any strict moral principles and lived a life he wanted. At the mental institution he saw a different reality. Quite different, full of cruelty, and violence. Nurse Ratched is supposed to be treated as the embodiment of totalitarian system. However, it is she who was the key factor influenced McMurphy’s life perception. He felt himself to be unacknowledged leader able to reveal real life and freedom to patients.

His quest is to guide this small group of mental defectives in finding the means to save themselves from a wicked ward nurse and an indifferent medical system by getting them to laugh at the absurdity of their lives and environment (Ferrel, 76).

As Floyd points out, “emotionally healthy people realize that nothing is absolute or unchangeable. Adaptable people deal with life as they find it and do not expect it to change at a whim (32). Here we can see that in pursuit of his aim achieving McMurphy became also mentally ill though he was quite an adequate person at the beginning of the film. Inability to find out his personal identity due to existing circumstances led to the tragic end.

The third work to discuss is the novel Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov.

Lolita is a complex work which presents a love story, a parody, a psychological study of obsessional behavior, an evocation of certain aspects of American life, a book that makes for morality or immorality its pretensions and achievements (Clegg, 16).

Regarding our question about life perception and personal identity on the example of this novel we can say that it is based on the perverted attitude to life and environment because of some psychological traumas obtained by the main hero in the childhood. As a result, he felt the affection only to the very young girls.

The psychological condition of young Lolita was also stressed. Her personal identity was influenced by the environment and inappropriate family atmosphere. This led to her own understanding of life, preferences and decisions. In any case, all dramatical events of her life are quite explicable regarding the premises and consequences of her thoughts and intentions.

In conclusion I would like to agree with the opinion of Floyd.

Though individuals often become secure in familiar situations and environments, emotionally healthy people adapt to changing circumstances when necessary. They have a continuous and positive interest in what goes on around them. They realize that the world is a special place to inhabit – even though it can stand some improvement (Floyd, 32).

Personal identity directly depends on personal reality perception. The one important thing here is to separate real things from desirable and not to go far in one’s own dreams.

Bibliography

Clegg, Christine. Vladimir Nabokov: Lolita. Palgrave Macmillan, 2000.

Ferrel, William K. Literature and Film as Modern Mythology. Greenwood Publishing Group, 2000.

Floyd, Patricia A. Personal Health: Perspectives and Lifestyles. Cengage Learning, 2007.

Griffin, Alice. Understanding Arthur Miller. University of South Carolina Press, 1996.

James, William. The Principle of Psychology. Courier Dover Publications, 1950.

Noonan, Harold W. personal Identity. Routledge, 2003.

Stark, Lames W. Rebuild Your Worldview to be Reality. Trafford Publishing, 2004.

The main reasons behind involvement in deviant behaviors have fascinated sociologists and scientists alike. This is in view of the fact the term “deviance” is relative and depends on what society perceives as out of line with the norm. Becker (1963) has however used statistics to define deviance by stating that “The simplest view of deviance is essentially statistical, defining as deviant anything that varies too widely from the average”. In an attempt to understand the perspectives of acts that are considered deviant, Chambliss has effectively carried out a comparative analysis of the saints and the roughnecks – two groups of young deviant boys at Hannibal High School. Chambliss (1973) summarizes that external factors that would contribute to the group being labeled as deviant include bias, visibility, demeanor, and reinforcement.

Deviance is a sociological term that describes behaviors that violate cultural norms. It is therefore a violation of social norms and failure to conform to these norms that are entrenched in the culture of the society. Goffman’s idea about stigma has its roots in Greece where it was originally referred to as body markings that identified people as criminals, traitors or society villains. In modern times, Goffman has positively identified three types of stigma that are directly related to deviant behavior. These include body abnormalities which include physical deformities. The second deformity is the character blemishes and the third is the stigma associated with religion, race or nationality. According to Goffman (1986), “stigma is something that detracts from a person and that normal people cannot ignore it; it is something that makes them less than human, and normal people construct a theory to explain their inferiority and the danger they present to them.” In addition to the above, stigmatized people may at times feel normal in their own understanding and demand a fair chance in society just like everyone else.

According to the preliminary conceptions, “Society establishes the means of categorizing persons and the complement of attributes felt to be ordinary and natural for members of each of these categories” Goffman (1986). This defines the key concept of stigma theory in understanding the aspects of deviant behavior. Stigma and social identity are interrelated aspects of deviant behavior that are greatly influenced by social settings. The daily routines of social interactions within our settings allow us to deal with strangers in a completely different way without paying attention or thought (Goffman, 1986).

The limitations of normals in society refer to the possession of stigma in undesired levels on what the society anticipated of them. “We and those who do not depart negatively from the particular expectations at issue are referred to as the normals” Goffman (1986). The attitudes we “normals” project on a stigmatized individual is benevolent in society. In practice, we believe that stigmatized people in society are lesser human beings. This assumption precipitates discrimination that has been pointed as a major cause of reduction in the life chances of stigmatized individuals. According to Merton (1938) “we construct a stigma-theory, an ideology to explain this inferiority and account for the danger it represents, sometimes rationalizing an animosity based on other differences, such as those of social class.” These are characterized by the application of stigma terms such as cripple, moron as sources of discrimination against these people. This theory holds in the analysis of deviance in that some stigmatized people opt to ignore their stigmatized situation and successfully develop social relationships with the normals while others remain isolated. These latter groups may attempt to force social acceptance and search for recognition that may lead to deviant behaviors.

The key concept of discredited vs. discreditable is defined by Goffman (1983) in stating that “discredited stigma include deformities, gross physical handicaps, and other manifest disabilities and are forced to deal with their stigma in virtually all interactions while discreditable stigma includes criminal history, sexual deviance, epilepsy, homosexuality, and other invisible conditions.” These determine their interaction strategies are which are different. While the discredited have stigma that is easily visible, the discreditable are composed of individuals who may opt to tell other people of their stigma or keep them concealed. This may involve revealing their conditions to a small social group or letting the society have full knowledge about their stigma. A good example as illustrated by Merton (1938) includes the fact that “to most epileptics, the strategy of selective concealment is pursued in preference to total secrecy in that one function of disclosure is therapeutic: the individual can overcome some of his/her feeling of isolation by sharing information”.

In the context of Merton’s theory of Anomie, the interest was a search on the kind of societies that would easily generate deviant behavior. According to Merton (1938) “the societies most prone to deviant behavior would be those in which the greatest emphasis was placed on achieving specific goals (e.g. monetary success) but in which legitimate means for reaching those goals were unavailable to some sectors of society (Legitimate means include education, working hard, making wise investments.)”. Within this context, it can therefore be argued that deviance draws its foundations from the competing universal cultural desire for success and the limitations in the opportunities available. Merton, therefore, defines anomie as the state of confused mind inherent in individuals who are unable to balance between the parameters that define success in society and the limitations in the available opportunities.

As the state of anomie increases, the likelihood of a crime being used to achieve the desired objectives increases (Goffman, 1986). According to Merton’s anomie, there are five general responses to goal attainment which include the conformist, innovationist, ritualist, retreats, and rebellion mode.”The conformist is the individual who accepts both the legitimate cultural goals of success and the institutionalized or conventional means for reaching these goals while the innovationist is the individual accepts the goals but employs illegitimate means for attainment” (Merton, 1938). The latter refers to the desire to achieve culturally valued things but does not agree with the social norm of arriving at the goal of their attainment. “Ritualists abandon the goals entrenched and advocated for by the society but continues to operate within institutional norms in their desire to achieve the culturally valued things” (Merton, 1938). A good example as illustrated by Merton (1938) is a “poorly paid clerk who never misses a day of work – he has given up on the goal of success, but continues to follow appropriate means”.

My autobiographical deviant behavior will form the basis of this analysis in regard to reasons as to why one may opt to participate in acts of deviance. My biggest deviant behavior involved a row I had with my Algebra teacher. In my second year in high school, I missed approximately one-fourth of the classes in algebra. This was not because I had any dislike for the teacher; I just did not understand how alphabetical letters and mathematical numbers could be mixed up to create what is referred to as algebra. I was the only girl in the class with the highest number in absenteeism from the class during that particular period. The pressure exerted on me at that particular time in my life pushed me into planting sharp-pointed steel hooks on the road every morning I knew Mr. Chris would pass in his old Volkswagen. This was to punish him and seek vengeance for giving an E grade in Algebra. I succeeded in approximately 80% in my attempts till Mr. Chris abandoned his car and opted to use the train to school.

The root cause of my deviant behavior was the pressure exerted on me in excelling in my academic which was the culturally demanded goal of success. In failing to live up to the standards of the society, I opted for the rebellious mode of goal attainment by withdrawing total allegiance from the demands of the society. I, therefore, viewed my failure in Algebra as unjust and sought to seek revenge by punishing the individual responsible for my failure. Within the functionalist approach, deviance is described as a functional product for society. It is my belief that Durkheim’s assertion in regards to crime and deviant behaviors remains relevant to date. It has therefore been ascertained that deviant behaviors draw their foundations from the systems within the society. Whereas this paper has analyzed the root causes of deviant behaviors in relation to Goffman’s idea about stigma, it, however, cannot capture all the detailed aspects of deviant behavior.

References

1. Becker, H.S. (1963). Outsiders: studies in the sociology of deviance. New York: Free Press.
2. Chambliss, W.J. (1973). The Saints and the Roughnecks. Journal of Sociology. Vol. 11, No. 1.
3. Goffman, E. (1986). Stigma: notes on the management of spoiled identity. New York: Simon & Schuster.
4. Merton, R.K. (1938). Social Structure and Anomie. Journal of American Sociology. Vol 3, no 5.

Introduction

The question of personal identity has been discussed for centuries and will likely never receive a completely comprehensive answer. However, the discussion itself can prove to be beneficial by creating new perspectives of what describes the continuity of personality between the present person and their future self. This paper will outline the ideas of John Locke and Thomas Reid on the matter and provide an argument that they are still relevant, despite some questionable aspects of their philosophies.

John Locke’s Account of Personal Identity

Before John Locke, the continuity of personality was seen through only two opposing viewpoints. The first stated that the continuity of personality is reliant on the sameness of the body, while the opposing view proclaimed that only the sameness of the soul could signify the sameness of a person. John Locke’s approach was revolutionary at the time, and I believe that it is still valid for the most part, especially with the technological advances that may be developed in the following years. Locke’s account of personal identity stated that only the sameness of consciousness could truly ensure the sameness of personality. Consciousness consists of the person’s memories, thought process, and other cognitive functions. The person can be considered the same if they have the same memories as they did before (Strawson 25). Similarly, if the consciousness of a person could be swapped with the consciousness of another person, they would still be themselves, despite having a different body.

Before the nature of constantly changing organic matter was understood by scientists, John Locke was able to find a solution to the fact that human bodies technically consist of constantly changing organic material while not changing as people. This is the primary argument that I have for his theory being valid even in the modern era. Moreover, theoretically, consciousness can be transferred to a new vessel if people achieve a complete understanding of brain function. Currently, neuroscience is not capable of this, but it is only a matter of time when this becomes a possibility.

Another important aspect of John Locke’s account of personality is how he saw crime as being committed by a person whose memory is unreliable. John Locke believed that since memory is an essential part of consciousness, when the memory of the event is absent from the person who committed the crime, they stop being responsible for the crime itself. While this is an extreme position that would not be seriously considered in the court of law, lawmakers eventually came to a similar conclusion. People with a mental illness that affects their decision-making are not treated the same way in court as those that are mentally healthy. Often the action caused by the disease is punished by different means, including forced hospitalization with the purpose of therapy. I believe that this is a fair position to take in such cases, and it shows the relevance of John Locke’s position.

Brave Officer Problem and Possible Responses From Locke

John Locke’s ideas have been examined over the years, and a variety of issues have been brought up. One of the most famous arguments against his account of personal identity was provided by Thomas Reid. Reid did not share Locke’s view that consciousness is the sole signifier of personal identity, and instead, it can be attributed to objects with continued existence. Reid did not agree that personal identity should be defined by such fleeting things as consciousness because people are prone to forget and misremember (Strawson 53). It is impossible to say whether Locke would respond to this in the same fashion that he responded to the breakfast problem. However, a similar counter-argument could be made to this statement. The breakfast problem questioned Locke’s account by saying that if a person does not remember what they ate for breakfast, then why are they still the same person later. Locke responded that while their personal identity may be different, they are still the same person as the majority of their memories are still the same. I will expand this thought after the brave officer problem is discussed.

To illustrate his argument, Reid created a scenario that showcases an issue with Locke’s account. A young boy steals apples from a neighbor’s garden and gets flogged for it. Then years later, he becomes a heroic army officer that steals the enemy flag. Decades later, he is a retired General. The General remembers stealing the enemy flag but cannot remember stealing apples from the garden. The officer still remembers stealing the apples, however. According to the transitive property of identity, the boy and the officer are the same because they hold the same memories. Therefore, the General and the officer are the same because they also have the same memories. John Locke’s idea contradicts the transitive property of identity, however, because it states that the boy and the General cannot be the same person because they do not hold the same memories.

This is a major issue for John Locke’s account, and despite my personal belief in his views, I have to admit that if his account is taken as is, it does not allow for the boy and the General to be the same person. There are multiple solutions to this issue, however. They can be achieved by thinking about the way that Locke addressed the breakfast problem.

The first solution is similar to his original response. While the boy and the General do not have the same identity, they are still the same man. By examining this statement further, it is possible to understand its reasoning. The personal identity of the General is much different from that of the boy. He has lived for decades, made millions of decisions, and changed his mind on his personal beliefs many times. His thought process, motivations, and preferences are not the same as those of the boy who stole apples from the garden. Despite having the same DNA as the boy, the way he sees himself is different. The following question may be asked during this explanation: why are the officer and the boy still the same? They share the same personal identity for the same reason that General does not. The consciousness of the officer is still informed by his experiences as a child. In a certain way, he is still the boy who stole apples because he still thinks as that boy did. Arguably, even his actions are motivated by the experiences of his boyhood. As a child, he stole apples, and as a young man, he stole a flag.

This is not the only way that this question can be answered, however. It is possible to have a slightly different interpretation of John Locke’s account. While he states that consciousness is the criterion that defines personal identity, the question of what defines consciousness is sometimes omitted. I believe that John Locke could address this issue by discussing how a person’s consciousness forms. It is often shaped by people’s environment and experiences. This is why memory is such an important aspect of it. People may choose to forget certain things because they see them as unimportant to their personal identity. As the previous example of the breakfast problem, the memory of breakfast would not have any effect on the identity of the person, so we choose to forget it, perhaps unconsciously. The same could be said of the memory of stealing apples and the General. While for the officer, the memory of stealing apples as a boy might have had great importance, the General replaced it with the memory of his officer days. Consciousness is often created by the person and changes over time. This is why an older person may not act the same as they did as a child. In this scenario, personal identity is not just continuous but evolving and self-defining.

Conclusion

The continuity of personal identity is not an easy question to answer. Discussion of it, however, often leads to new ways to understand humanity. John Locke was far ahead of his time in this respect, as his ideas are proving to be relevant today and perhaps will be used to solve complex ethical questions of consciousness transfer in the future. There are sound arguments against his account, which also need to be addressed in order to have a relatively cohesive theory. However, an examination of his beliefs can bring possible answers to light.

Work Cited

Strawson, Galen. Locke on Personal Identity: Consciousness and Concernment. Princeton University Press, 2014.

Nowadays, it became a commonplace practice among many psychologists to suggest that the act of ‘identification’, which Hollway defines as “imagining oneself in another person’s place”¹, is capable of altering the qualitative subtleties of one’s sense of self-identity. This suggestion does appear thoroughly legitimate. After all, there is indeed a plenty of empirical evidence as to the fact that, as people live their lives, they grow increasingly aware of what would account for the age-related circumstantially appropriate behavioral stances (capable of affecting one’s sense of self-identity), on their part.

It is understood, of course, that the acts of ‘identification’ play an important role, within the process’s context – while addressing life-challenges, people do tend to reflect upon how others proceed with doing the same. This, of course, has a strong effect on the manner, in which individuals perceive the surrounding reality and their place in it. However, it would be wrong to suggest that the acts of ‘identification’, on a particular person’s part, affect the innermost constituents of how he or she is being genetically ‘preprogrammed’ to react to the externally induced stimuli. It appears that, instead of being referred to as the agent of ‘identity change’, the act of ‘identification’ should be discussed as one among many strategies, deployed by people on the way of trying to maintain the integrity of their deep-seated/unconscious understanding of who they really are. In this paper, I will explore the validity of the above-stated at length.

Before I proceed, I will need to establish a discursive premise, upon which the consequent discussion of what account for the actual relationship between the notions of identity and ‘identification’ will be based. This premise can be formulated as follows. Due to being primates (in the biological sense of this word), the representatives of Homo Sapience species are essentially ‘hairless apes’. In its turn, this presupposes that, regardless of what happened to be the qualitative characteristics of their sense of self-identity; they may have only three true purposes in life, justified by the Darwinian laws of evolution – spreading genes (sex), making money (nutrition/survival) and striving to attain a social prominence (domination).

Biologically speaking, one’s existence is solely concerned with establishing the objective preconditions for the spatial preservation of his or her DNA. As Dawkins pointed out: “We are survival machines – robot vehicles, blindly programmed to preserve the selfish molecules known as genes”.²

This, of course, suggests the legitimacy of the ‘instrumental’ outlook on the significance of how one goes about constructing its sense of identity – hence, implying that there is indeed nothing ‘phenomenological’ about the notion in question. Apparently, the manner in which people react to the challenges of life (commonly assumed reflective of their identity), cannot be discussed outside of what accounts for the measure of their ‘existential fitness’. Therefore, contrary to what many psychologists believe, rather than connoting the notion of ‘uniqueness’, the term ‘self-identity’ in fact connotes the notion of ‘survival’.

Discursively speaking, just about any person can be compared to an automaton, which is being preprogrammed to adequately react to whatever happened to be the environmental circumstances at the time.

The main aspect of the process in question is that there is a spatial continuity to it, which in turn creates the illusion that, as time goes on; one’s identity never ceases to undergo a qualitative transformation. This illusion is explainable, because the very passing of time brings about the conditional changes to the surrounding social reality – hence, causing people to try to adjust their behavior to remain fully observant of them, which formally justifies the assumption that the flow of time does have a strong effect on a person’s sense of self-identity. According to Erikson, cited in Hollway’s article: “A person’s identity changes over the course of a lifetime because of the conflict produced by ordinary life circumstances”.³

The mentioned assumption appears fully consistent with the idea (promoted in Hollway’s article) that, after having given birth to a child, women acquire nothing short of a completely new identity: “They (these women) are thus simultaneously ‘self-as-mother’, ‘self-as-child’ and, therefore, ‘mother-of-self-as-child’”.⁴ In its turn, this is being commonly regarded as the proof that by identifying ourselves with others, we cease being what we used to be in the past. Nevertheless, even though there is indeed a good point in referring to life in terms of an everlasting struggle/conflict, which induces the observable changes to what happened to be one’s conflict-‘fueled’ identity, the idea that these changes affect the unconscious workings of the concerned individual’s psyche, cannot be referred to as such that represents an undisputed truth-value.

The rationale behind this suggestion can be formulated as follows: As the recent breakthroughs in the field of neurology indicate, the spatially observable alterations to one’s sense of self-identity do not quite reflect the process of this individual growing emotionally detached from what he or she used to be in the past. Rather, they reflect the degree of an environmental adaptability, on the part of what happened to be the concerned person’s ‘true-self’ (or ‘soul’, as religious people refer to it) – something, solely defined by the constituents of his or her DNA-makeup.

While addressing life-challenges, throughout our lives, we naturally adopt different approaches to doing it, which is often seen as being yet another confirmation of the validity of the specifically ‘relativist’ outlook on how one’s sense of self-identity is being formed and maintained.

Yet, there are many good reasons to think that the qualitative essence of these approaches remains the same, regardless of what happened to be the affiliated external forces of influence, which in turn presupposes the existence of ‘true-self’ (unaffected by the flow of time) in just about any person. Allegorically speaking, as they go through life, people do wear different ‘masks’. However, the actual force that makes the ‘identification’-triggered replacement of these ‘masks’ possible, does not undergo any transformation.

In her article, Hollway mentions the case of Liyanna, who in the aftermath of having given birth to her daughter, has gained the sudden awareness of what the identity of a ‘mother’ stands for.⁵ The author interpreted as the indication that the process of ‘identification’ does in fact results in the affected individual becoming a ‘new person’. However, there are also many cases of women abandoning their newly born infants out on the street – obviously enough, the changeover into ‘mothers’, on these women’s part, did not have any effect on how they position themselves in life (their sense of self-identity), whatsoever. We can well come up with the speculative, but nonetheless discursively legitimate explanation for this – even though, physically speaking, these women were fully capable of becoming pregnant/giving birth, whatever happened to be their deep-seated sense of ‘true-self’, did not have anything to do with the notion of ‘motherhood’ – pure and simple.

The same line of argumentation can be deployed, when it comes to explaining the phenomenological aspects of homosexualism – specifically, the fact that many ‘queer’ men do experience the overwhelming desire to live up to the socially upheld conventions of what the notion of ‘normal sexuality’ stands for. This explains why, while striving to suppress their homosexual leanings consciously, many ‘hidden gays’ apply a great effort into becoming affiliated with the so-called ‘masculine virtues’ – these men’s externally displayed behavioral ‘machismo’ is nothing but the extrapolation of their deep-seated ‘femininity’.

Obviously enough, when trying hard to radiate the very spirit of ‘masculinity’, these men expect that it will indeed help them to overcome what their unconscious psyche deems as ‘deficiency’ (from the evolutionary point of view, homosexualism is indeed a deficiency, because it does incapacitate the affected person rather substantially in a variety of different ways). However, as practice indicates, the undertaken act of ‘identification with masculinity’, on the part of ‘hidden gays’, is rarely capable of restoring their perceptual/behavioral adequacy – they simply cannot help being drawn towards men. This, of course, once again suggests that the claim that personal identity changes, as a result of acts of ‘identification’, is conceptually fallacious.

I believe that the earlier deployed line of argumentation, in defense of the idea that ‘identification’ does not change the identity (‘true-self’) of an ‘identifier’, is fully consistent with the paper’s initial thesis. Apparently, the very fact that humans are in essence ‘gene-vehicles’, creates the objective preconditions for this to be the case. To think otherwise, is to be utterly arrogant, as to how the Darwinian laws of evolution actually work.

References

Dawkins, R., The Selfish Gene, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1976.

Hollway, W., ‘Identity Change and Identification’, in Bromley, S., Clarke, J.

Hinchliffe, S. and Taylor, S. (Eds.), Exploring Social Lives, Walton Hall, The Open University, 2009, pp. 251-289.

Footnotes

1. W. Hollway, ‘Identity Change and Identification’, in Bromley, S., Clarke, J., Hinchliffe, S. and Taylor, S. (Eds.), Exploring Social Lives, Walton Hall, The Open University, 2009, p. 255.
2. R. Dawkins, The Selfish Gene, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1976, p. 2.
3. Hollway, Identity Change and Identification, 2009, p. 257.
4. Ibid., p. 257.
5. Ibid., p. 255.

Personal identity and self-reflection agree well with narrative since it is through language that human beings co-exist. The relationship between personal identity and narrative originates from Hume’s theory, which claims that how we connect with ideas as a product of memory constructs our sense of self. While Hume does not talk about narratives, it is apparent that narratives are ideas that appear as product of memory constructs. Hence, narration is a key way of connecting reflections and offering a sense of identity.

Narratives connect many incidences to create an ideal object such as a historical event. Narration and the selves play a major role in the creation of these ideal objects, although this does not necessarily apply to the creation of all ideal objects. Tolstoy’s narration connects many incidences to explain to us about the death of Ivan Ilych. He starts by showing us the kind of life that Ivan Led.

Ivan led a life that was full of hypocrisy. He lived by the standards of the aristocratic society rather than using his individual reasoning to determine his life. Ivan married because the society expected a brilliant young lawyer with money to have a wife from a good family like Praskovya. “Ivan Ilych married…because his social circle approved of the match (Tolstoy par. 65).

He also purchased a house in the city so that he could have a symbol of material status, as dictated by the aristocratic society. As the story develops, we get to know more about Ivan through his self-reflection.

In the reflection, Ivan examined his past life and the values that he had lived by in all of his life. After self-scrutiny of his life, Ivan recognized the inevitability of death and the hypocritical nature of his past life. Following these realizations, he decided to defend himself but he realized that he had nothing to use for his defense. He had to admit that he had spent all of his life unrealistically and that his perception on life and death was a lie. Apparently, Tolstoy connects all these incidences to explain the death of Ivan.

We also argue that observers ascribe identity, as it is not intrinsic in the associated things. Ivan’s peers are the ones who recognize that than Ivan does not like associating himself with unpleasant things. Later in the novel, we see this aspect establishing itself as a central feature of Ivan’s personality. Ivan begins to exclude himself from indecorous elements of life. He leaves his expectant wife when her behavior begins to depress him.

“..Ivan Ilych hoped to escape from the unpleasantness of this state of affairs by the same easy and decorous relation to life that had served him heretofore” (Tolstoy par. 23).

He separates himself from his family and resorts to office life. He starts looking at his marriage life from a formal perspective. “And Ivan Ilych evolved such an attitude towards married life” (Tolstoy par. 45). He only required of it those conveniences. Similar to how he views his profession, he begins to see his marriage as a contract.

He makes sure that he keeps away from his wife by inviting friends whenever he is at home for dinner. Ivan begins playing games with his wife as he unable to handle his personal and emotional life. He strictly adheres to his professional duties and separates his personal life from is profession. However, Ivan is unable to direct his personal life fully.

Personal identity is indissoluble from self-reflection as the observer recognizes it during reflection and not through spontaneous connection of ideas in the mind. From this perspective, personal identity is a product of constant reflections as depicted by Ivan. Ivan was reflecting one day while staring at Gerasim’s face when he started to wonder whether he had lived a correct life. “Maybe I did not live as I ought to have done” (Tolstoy par. 108).

A few minutes later, he realized he had lived a life full of lies. All aspects of his life including his family life, as well as his professional and social life were all full of lies. “And his professional duties and the whole arrangement of his life and of his family, and all his social and official interests, might all have been false” (Tolstoy par. 126).

Following the realization, he decided to defend himself but he realized that he had nothing to use for his defense. He had to admit that he had spent all of his life unrealistically and that his perception on life and death was a lie.

This revelation compelled Ivan to seek for the truth. He approached the doctor together with Praskovya and asked them to tell him the truth about his life. What bothered him a lot was the thought that he might have had led all of his life in the wrong way. Even with the new revelations, Ivan did not wholly dismiss the hope that he might have led a correct life.

From the above discussion, we can see that there exists an in-depth connection between narration, personal identity and self-reflection. A narrative is an informative tool that communicates social expressions of the self. The self is not an object, but a being and a creation that reflects on itself to discover and restructure itself completely through symbols of self- interpretation.

It is only through narrative constructions of memories that we can understand our past because the past is indefinite. The way we connect with past ideas as a product of memory constructs our sense of self. Narratives are also ideas and therefore, a key way of connecting reflections and offering a sense of identity.

Works Cited

Tolstoy, Lev Nikolayevich. The Death of Ivan Ilych. Trans. Louise and Aylmer Maude. New York: Pennsylvania State University, 1886. Web.

Thesis Statement: Foucault suggests that the “deployment” of sexuality is closely connected with the deployment of integrity, which is the main principle of the social and political welfare of the state. This process reveals the formation of sexual identities through the emergence of political and legal rules and principles that greatly influenced the contemporary perception and understanding of this concept.

Introduction

We live in a society that is heavily saturated with sexual imagery – from sexually explicit films to ad campaigns primarily based on sexual titillation or innuendo and which now pervade almost every aspect of our lives. Sexuality has come to be regarded as an integral part of human nature. But how many of us have asked the question “what is sexuality?” or “how and why have we come to view our identity as inherently linked to our sexuality?” Perhaps far too few. Yet for Foucault, a French philosopher, historian, and sociologist, this question holds within it, a vital truth, crucial to the human experience.

In his book, The History of Sexuality, his main aim was to determine why and how sexuality has been so vigorously pursued as an object of knowledge, and more importantly, why we perceive it as possessing the power to reveal who we are and to liberate us. Foucault does not focus on the nature of sexuality per se, but rather on our pursuit of knowledge about sexuality, the kind of knowledge this pursuit has obtained, what we expect that knowledge to tell us about ourselves and the social power that it contains. Sexual proliferation is not primarily restricted, as it constructs subjects by means of incitement of desire and in the process of forming the identities. This means that the construction of subjectivity is the outcome of social practices. In particular, the knowledge proliferation on sexuality by means of rejection propelled the emergence of modern identities that as if rebel this rejection. This denial triggered the transformation of a sexually passive society into the revolutionary one. More importantly, this has become a means of a particular display of self-affirmation.

With the advent of capitalism and industrialization, sexuality was restricted and “carefully confined; it moved into the home” (Foucault 3). In this way, the concept of sex and sexuality was shrouded in secrecy. It also became the main instrument of social and political manipulation. Those restrictions triggered the emergence of a new temporal trend of social life– Victorian Puritanism, which forbade any displays of sexuality and imposed taboo and silence on the subject. It is understandable that the vision of sexuality was reduced to its minimized function of life reproduction, as the eighteenth century was the time “when labor capacity was being systematically exploited” and therefore, there was no place for dissipation and sexual pleasure (Foucault 6). The restriction imposed in the Victorian era implicitly influenced the contemporary outlook on the hypocrisy and rise of overt discussion on sex and sexuality. At this point, it is worth stressing that sex has become the key to the development of personal identity in contemporary society since our sexuality reveals our “ego” and, therefore, we always strive to have this concealed self-knowledge that engages us in the discourse on our sexuality.

Main body

In the first part of the book, Foucault tries to define the relationships between sex and politics and, thus, identify its main purpose. In particular, he intends to prove that sexuality is controlled by power; instead, power generates sexuality through the incentive to discourse. Sexuality was gradually transformed into discourse and arose out of the necessity to address this concept in the scientific world only. Foucault views the incessant discussions regarding sexuality and secrecy as paradoxical, as people were forced to constantly speak of sex as a forbidden subject, all the while, keeping it hidden. In this respect, this figurative “silence” and taboo on speaking about sex also became an inherent part of the discourse.

According to Foucault, the deployment of sexuality was a political necessity for integrity and cooperation. Hence, the initial goal of the government and upper layers of society was directly connected with sophisticated political intentions to organize a powerful hierarchy for controlling people. Indeed, this deployment of sexuality did not encompass the concept of sex as pleasure. Its dutiful designation was an effective means for suppressing the desires of humans and directing them in a leading ideological flow. However, the implementation of sexuality was not through the prohibition of pleasures and sex; this concept was used as a legally forbidden notion. In other words, the concept of sexuality was converted into a theoretical basis for discussions.

Foucault is more focused on the deployment as the process of intensification of the body and its excessive exploitation, and the instrument of consolidation and protection of power. Sex acquired another meaning: i, it acquired the features of taboo. Foucault explains the peculiar relationship of sex and power as follows:

We must not think that by saying yes to sex, one says no to power; on the contrary, one track along the course laid out by the general deployment of sexuality. It is the agency of sex that we must break away from if we aim—through a tactical reversal of the various mechanisms of sexuality—to counter the grips of power with the claims of bodies, pleasures, and knowledge, in their multiplicity and their possibility of resistance.”(Foucault 157).

A vigorous desire to learn the truth is explained by the fact that modern sexual identities “demand that sex speak the truth…and…demand that it tell [them] truth…” (Gutting 150). Sexuality and sex, thus, became the benchmark of the truth about selves.

Due to the fact that sexuality was the starting point of power relations between genders and generations, its influence spread over several oriented unities: women’s bodies, children’s sex, procreative behavior and perverse pleasure. When focusing on these realms of impact, Foucault argues that sexuality “is the name that can be given to a historical construct: not a furtive reality that is difficult to grasp but a great surface network” (Foucault 106). The above shows the mechanism of knowledge and power that fostered the emergence of those images thus converting sex into both an overt reality and historical construct.

In the book, the transformation of body pleasure is also seen through several stages as described in the book. These stages postulate the gradual transformation of sexuality into a legal concept. Hence, Foucault suggests that power is not based on exterior principles and their outlook on this phenomenon is presented as the “rule of immanence” and presupposes the introduction of ideological and political prohibitions that engage the concept of sexuality into a vigorous dispute (Foucault 98).

Foucault declares that “we must not look for who has the power in the order of sexuality (men, adults, parents, doctors) and who is deprived of it… but seek rather the pattern of the modifications which the relationships of force simply by the very nature of their process” (99). Social and political groups Society and political power used this knowledge as an instrument of consolidation and cooperation of labor power. Once again, this rule renders the concept of sexuality as an ideological unity so that “sex is no more real, primordial, or discursive than sexuality” (Grosz 154).

The principles of double conditioning and tactical polyvalence of discourses are closely connected with each other, as they cover dual notions participating in the deployment of sexuality as a political and social tool of manipulation. In this part, the author considers the contrastive concepts of “irreconcilable” and “overarching”, silence and discourse, subjection and resistance – all those dual pairs constitute the basis of a power mechanism, which was introduced in motion. This duality is also revealed in larger scales of power proliferation, namely, with the advent of restrictions on sex regarded as the function of reproduction and its proliferation of overt discussion on sexuality, which creates the illusion of permissiveness. Analyzing these rules and principles, the author makes a conclusion that self-orientation and individualization emphasize the prevalence of power over “the privilege of law with the viewpoint of the objective, the privilege of prohibition with the viewpoint of the tactical efficacy, the privilege of sovereignty with the analysis of multiple and mobile fields of relations” (Foucault 102).

Despite the fact that the capitalist era witnessed the deployment of sexuality as a solid veritable reason for discussions, it was not still repressed and limited. On the contrary, Foucault believes that the disputes about sexuality that emerged at that time were the only effective weapon of political power. Discourse also served as a means of proliferation and popularization and, therefore, it occurred in the form of confessions and rejections. What is more important is that the discourse was the only way to enhance control over people; the repression drove/forced people to openly discuss sexuality and sex and enjoy those discussions. The deployment of sexuality fostered the discussions regarding perversity, which was imposed by the political powers to make people think that this phenomenon was the reason for the sexual prohibition.

By advocating the discourse on sex and sexuality the powers managed to change for a cultural retrospective of the problem. Hence, the eighteenth-century society could not consider sexing anything but the object of knowledge (as opposed to sensual pleasure).

Nowadays, the deployment of sexuality has been deeply infused in our culture and developed has infiltrated various social spheres such as healthcare, politics, art and culture. According to Foucault, sexuality is nothing more than a social construct that has been used to exert political control over the human body. For a society so deeply preoccupied with sex, that’s quite a revelation. The history of our sexuality is a complex one, says Foucault, involving hundreds of years of viewing sex as a valuable social commodity and associating sexuality with the need to confess. The result? We have come to see our sexuality as something hidden deep within us and that requires deeper probing in order to comprehend its nature – or our nature, for that matter. At the same time, it reveals itself in every facet of our lives. We have inherited a notion, a “Logic of Sex”, which influences and defines our personalities and social conduct. Our fundamental identity has gradually become intertwined with our sexuality.

Conclusion

Our notions regarding sexuality have been so deeply penetrated by scientific discourse that we subconsciously believe it to hold the key to our true nature. Furthermore, the deployment of sexuality has been so thoroughly infused in our culture that we have come to see our liberation from sexual repression and perhaps our personal liberation and happiness in general, as being dependent upon the bourgeoisie conception of “healthy sexuality.” Foucault skillfully points out the irony that this very belief is a by-product of the power oppressing us. The answer? Foucault suggests that in order to resist this power, we should focus on the physical pleasures of the body, the Ars Erotica, rather than focusing on sexuality itself – as appropriated by the Scientia Sexualis or the discursive approach. His conclusion is that sexuality is not something we can intellectually discover and enjoy. Those seeking personal or sexual liberation need only refrain from thinking of sex, sexual pleasure, and our bodies, as a part of a “sexuality” that defines us.

Works Cited

Foucault, Michel. History of sexuality. US: Vintage, 1990.

Grosz, Elizabeth A. Volatile bodies: toward a corporeal feminism. US: Indiana University Press, 1994.

Gutting, Gary. The Cambridge Companion to Foucault. UK: Cambridge University Press, 1994.

Identity theft is the use of another person’s identifying facts to perpetrate a fraud. According to Saunders and Zucker (1999), some of the economic crimes perpetrated are opening bank account, leasing cars or apartments, applying for bank or departmental store cards and obtaining credit. Reported Fraud increased from 12,000 in 1992 to more than 500,000 in 1999 due to increased use of internet data base (Saunders & Zucker, 1999).

Identification information is made available to an organization as a means of authentication. Banks and other financial institutions use mother’s maiden name, phone number, driving license or social security number to authenticate an individual.

Perpetuators of Identity theft access these facts by pick pocketing, obtaining temporary employment in banks, collecting mails or collecting wastes containing the information from thrash bins (Saunders & Zucker, 1999).

Before 1998, laws which were available did not address the problem of identity theft adequately (Saunders & Zucker, 1999). Some legislation regulated collection and use of personal information by organizations while others like Truth-in-Lending Act of 1968 required sellers to disclose their credit to debtors.

Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act was introduced in 1997. It was passed and signed into law in 1998. The act recognizes private citizens as victims of identity theft and criminalizes the act.

The first objective of the act has not been achieved. This is because people involved are not always traced, found guilty due to poor evidence or do not have substantial income or assets to compensate their victims.

Secondly, sentencing commission is allowed to enact harsh penalties based on the level of involvement by perpetrator, amount of loss and composition of the commission.

Finally, the Federal Trade commission is mandated to educate the public, receive and document reports, coordinate complaints from consumers and establish procedures for public to file complains (Saunders & Zucker, 1999).

Lane and Sui

Lane and Sui (2010) conducted a study which examined identity theft from a geospatial perspective. The study provided a national scale analysis of identity theft patterns in the United States between 2002 and 2006. Results showed presence of regional trends across the United States.

They found out that cyber crimes can change traditional crime spatial barriers. They used data from the Federal Trade Commission and demographic data from the United States Census Bureau.

GIS mapping and spatial statistics analysis showed that results were consistent with media reports on the geography of identity theft. Highest per capita rates were recorded in southwestern states. The central States and upper New England recorded the lowest per capita rates. Areas with high Hispanic populations had higher demographic correlations (Lane and Sui, 2010).

Credit card identity theft showed similar trend to those of overall identity theft. Lane and Sui (2010) found out that government and employment related identity thefts were concentrated in southern states. Credit card and bank related identity thefts were concentrated in western states.

Overall value of Identity theft per capita was higher in western states in 2002. It had expanded to more states by the year 2006. Government related identity theft shifted gradually from western states to eastern states form 2002 to 2006.

Results of the study adhered to historic patterns of traditional larceny. Although, larceny is considered as traditional crime and identity crime is considered as a white collar crime, they both involve stealing valuables through non-violent methods.

Crime is a product of culture. This is why, there are different values of per capita in non-city areas. The form of government documentation and benefits of fraud have contributed to the increase in identity theft (Lane and Sui, 2010).

McCarthy

Honey pot intruders used Internet Relay Chat to communicate with friends in the past. This was observed by Honey pot operators. Through the observations, operators knew when an intruder wanted to attack. Intruders used automated tools to access information about a group called black hats (McCarthy, 2003).

Since Honey pot was not instrumental in data capture, intruders could be observed through packet capture network tariff. After entering Honey pot, the intruders downloaded a collection of tools called Cywing from cywing.com.

They used the tools to conceal their identities and continue communicating using Internet Relay Chat. After monitoring IRC tariffs for sometimes, Honey pot operators realized that credit card information was being shared. Communication was taking place between a software and a human being.

In 2003, DALnet banned listing channels because of shared information. Owners of such fraudulent websites used stolen credit card information to pay service providers.

They also applied some tactics after their fraud was discovered. They were sometimes taken offline forcing them to relocate. Researchers downloaded and studied the “bot” used from one site. It contained a Trojan Horse which attempted to compromise computer and install remote program to be used for control.

Human to human communication was also observed (McCarthy, 2003). They made announcements online. It was also noticed that not all credit cards information came from computers.

Channels conveyed messages to carders working at banks, hotels and restaurants who sell credit cards. People purchased such information with as little as $10. Communities inhibiting IRC and other websites do not portray themselves as criminals (McCarthy, 2003).

Works Cited

Lane, Gina W., and Daniel, Z. Sui. “Geographies of identity theft in the U.S.: understanding spatial and demographic patterns in 2002–2006.” GeoJournal (2010): Web.

McCarthy, Bill. Automated Identity theft. Azusa Pacific University, 2003. Web.

Saunders, Kurt M., and Bruce Zucker. “Countering Identity Fraud in the Information Age: The identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act.” International Review of Law Computers 13.2 (1999): 183-193. Print.