Category: Self-Concept

Thinking about the self as social means understanding ourselves from the descriptions and perceptions of other people. When we approach the self this way, we miss other crucial aspects of the self which include the spiritual self, the material self and the pure ego. Thinking about the self as social can give a wrong impression of ourselves and in some cases; it may make us fail to understand our ourselves correctly.The social self is just one aspect of the self and it is therefore wrong to conceptualize the self just as social because such a conceptualization would imply that the other aspects of the self are not important, which is very wrong. This paper discusses the four aspects of the self named above and how they relate to each other as discussed in the reading materials provided.

The concept of self has been defined differently by different scholars of philosophy and psychology. One of the scholars who have attempted to define the concept is the renowned Philosopher William James. He published many books on various topics like psychology of religious experience, educational psychology and the philosophy of pragmatism (James 23).

According to him, the self comprises of four components namely the material self, the social self, the spiritual self and the pure ego. The material, the social and the spiritual selves largely reflect what is referred to as ‘me’ while the pure ego reflects the ‘I’. He argued that the material, the social and the spiritual selves can be studied and verified empirically through research but considered pure ego as abstract and therefore difficult to study empirically (James 28).

James argued that the material self constitutes our bodies, family members, our possessions and our wealth. material self thus constitutes what can be seen physically but excludes those family members who are deceased because once people die; they are no longer physically present to be experienced by their living family members.

The spiritual self comprises basically our belief system. It has to do with our spiritual convictions and what motivates us to believe in one belief system and not in another. Spiritual self is intertwined with the material self because it affects our self esteem through nourishment of our souls. Having strong spiritual beliefs enables people to lead happy and fulfilling lives. (Hermans and Harry 23).

James put emphasis on the power of the will and faith. He argued that faith plays a very important role in shaping and influencing our beliefs in something or on someone. His main thesis was that it was in order for our passion to shape and influence the actions of others. Even though passion may be subjective, it plays a big role in determining how strongly we believe in something or someone. James put the argument that some emotions such as pity, empathy, or disgust are very important ingredients for our passion, which he argued could determine our actions especially when the issue at hand cannot be decided using intellectual criteria alone(James 45).

On religion, he argued that religion is only useful if it provides some form of utility to human beings and therefore people should disregard all those beliefs which promise them good life after death because no one has an evidence of the nature of life after death.

The social self refers to ourselves based on other people’s expectations of us. The way others describe us matters a lot and also shapes our understanding about who we are.

The pure ego refers to our actual feelings, thoughts or perceptions about the world. With the pure ego, the concept of ourselves is based on our own feelings and biases. James argued that we keep on perceiving different things using our senses. These perceptions are distinct and actually form separate identities. But since we keep on perceiving, the collection of the perceptions which succeed each other can be used to define the “self”.

To put it another way, when we do not perceive, we are either asleep or dead and the self is not present. Although the perceptions are different, they are united by their qualities which give us our identity. According to James, the pure ego is what makes us ascribe our identity to those perceptions simply because we always perceive and when we do not, we cease to exist and the self is therefore lost. He also argued that the mind is like a theater, in which various perceptions “successfully make their appearance, pass, re-pass, glide away and mingle in an infinite variety of postures and situations”, which according to him, gives us our identity

The pure ego and the social self are always in conflict. When the pure ego overpowers the social self, we tend to have unrealistic expectations from others. For example, we may want everybody to think the way we do. We may also want everybody to respect our opinions on all issues. This is the tendency to control and dominate everybody irrespective of the differences in culture, education and traditions. On the other hand, when the social self overpowers the pure ego, we are able to respect the concept of others about ourselves. We are also able to rationalize our feelings to be in line with what others expect of us.

Works cited

Hermans, Hurbet, and Harry, Kempen. The Dialogical Self: Meaning as Movement, New York: Academic Press, Inc., 1993. Print.

James, William. Psychology. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1892. Print.

How a person views themselves is known as self-perception and identity. While the article “The Science of Solitary Confinement” by Joseph Stromberg heavily relies on how a person’s mind is affected while being forced into solitary confinement, the article “Self-Concept” by Saul Mcleod reflects on the self-concept facet. The two authors provide crucial information about personality development, with Mcleod providing his work in bullets that make it easier to read. Stromberg takes the traditional approach of writing his article in a point-by-point format, capturing the reader’s attention and effortlessly conveying the information. In both pieces, the writers speak about people’s personalities and the various factors affecting their development. They differ because Mcleod wrote about how people control their self-perception while having the ability to change it, whereas Stromberg focuses on how the prison system breaks down a prisoner’s mental state and shapes their identity, causing effects that can last a lifetime. Mcleod and Stromberg’s work shows the dangers of solitary prisons on inmates’ self-identity, self-esteem, and ideal self.

Human beings naturally exhibit unique identities and perceptions about themselves that are shaped by contributing life elements, such as a person’s environment. For example, persons with anorexia often believe that they are fat due to influences from parents, friends, or the media, according to Mcleod (1). Stomberg maintains that prisoners’ environment affects their identity significantly. Being confined to a small space makes many inmates display depression signs and suicidal thoughts, with many no longer feeling like they have control over their minds. Stromberg states that “We are all social beings and people in environments that deny the opportunity to interact in meaningful ways with others begin to lose a sense of self, of their own identity” (2). Accordingly, locking inmates inside solitary cells denies them the natural need to heal through socialization, leading to distress and severe character obliteration.

Intimidating settings, such as solitary prisons, distort people’s self-image by promoting the worthlessness view among individuals. Mcleod notes that people enjoying freedom generally have a positive view of self. The aspect emanates from the fact that being free implies living uprightly and social acceptability. Morse and Gergen (1970) shows that self-image may change rapidly in uncertain or anxiety-arousing situations. The study involved participants waiting for a job interview in a room with two different types of people, ‘Mr. Clean’ and ‘Mr. Dirty’. Mr. Clean dressed officially with a briefcase, while ‘Mr. Dirty’ wore an old T-shirt and jeans, and carried a sex novel. Morse and Gergen (1970) finds that participants placed with ‘Mr. Clean’ developed low self-esteem, with those in the room with the dirty alien increasing (Mcleod 3). Therefore, solitary prisons, just like the room with the intimidating being, make many inmates view themselves as worthless persons, thus challenging their rehabilitation potential.

Lack of adequate research on solitary prisons’ impact on inmates jeopardizes investigations regarding their real effects on humans. In his article, Stromberg stresses that research is very limited in the prison system compared to other instances. The scholar states that “Huda Akil, a neuroscientist at the University of Michigan, is interested in the neurological impacts of isolation, but is limited by the fact that no U.S prison is willing to allow its isolated prisoners to take part in the research” (2). Stromberg insists that researchers investigating the matter must rely on indispensable findings on how stimulation and social interactions affect the brain and hypothesize its possible effects on a prisoner in isolation (3). Consequently, scholars’ significant ignorance on the solitary prisons’ effects on humans’ personality and well-being promotes the erroneous correction philosophy that causes harm instead of rehabilitating offenders.

Mcleod and Stromberg focus mainly on self-perception and identity concepts despite taking dissimilar approaches. For instance, the two sources reflect on the topic through people’s general experiences’ considerations. Throughout Mcleod’s article, the researcher breaks down how persons see themselves through the definitions of others. Mcleod believes that self-concept has three different components, including self-image, self-esteem, and the ideal self (1). Stromberg takes the same approach to detail how the prison systems’ use of solitary confinement causes negative impacts on inmates. For most of the article, Stromberg references Craig Haney, a psychologist at UC Santa Cruz who takes several decades studying the mental effects of the prison system. Stromberg says, “Most prisoners spent at least 23 hours per day in this environment, devoid of stimuli (some are allowed in a yard or indoor area for an hour less daily), and are denied physical contact on visits from friends and family, so they may go years or decades without touching another human, apart from when they are placed in physical restraints by guards” (2). Stromberg then goes on to use supporting evidence by adding that this sort of treatment takes a toll on inmates, based on surveys conducted by Haney and his colleagues over 500 inmates (Stromberg 2). Therefore, Mcleod and Stromberg provide quintessential information regarding personality development worth implementation.

Solitary prisons worsen inmates’ psychological conditions other than improving them. Stromberg reiterates that solitary confinement can easily breakdown a person’s mind to the point of requiring psychiatric help to recover, especially due to the paradigm’s long-term effects on the brain. Being lonely for extended periods without access to natural sunlight or interaction with other people can cause a person to lose self-concept, suffer severe psychological stress such as chronic depression, and withdrawal from social contact because of anxiety (Mcleod 2). Mcleod thus maintains that how people think about, evaluate, and perceive themselves is strongly influenced by their surroundings and upbringing. He details how the reaction and comparison to others, social roles, and identity play a role in how humans view themselves as worthy or worthless beings. Furthermore, Mcleod mentions that “A person’s ideal self may not be consistent with what actually happens in life and experiences of the person” (4). The claim confirms that a person’s environment plays a crucial role in how they perceive themselves. Accordingly, the solitary prison option of correcting offenders hardly works and should be abolished to help offenders realize real reintegration.

Overall, the two articles by Stromberg and Mcleod provide essential information about the effects of solitary prisons on individuals. Both authors express how an individual’s surroundings and environment impact self-perception. Stromberg stresses that solitary confinement ultimately ruins the possibility of positive outcomes in a prisoner’s mindset after being released, thus defeating the rehabilitation purpose. Equally, Mcleod provides evidence that human lives are guided by positive and negative factors that determine how people views themselves and identify with society. Therefore, the two sources reiterate the harmful effects of solitary imprisonment on people’s psychological well-being, suggesting the system’s removal.

Works Cited

Mcleod, Saul. “Self-Concept.” 2008.

Stromberg, Joseph. “The Science of Solitary Confinement.” 2014.

Researches, studies, and even stipulations of the spiritual books have all pointed out that the human being is made up of more than the physical appearance seen from outside. It has been found out that apart from the physical body, the real human being is an inner person that is pure and free from environmental formations. The self is therefore the identity or an individual’s own being as portrayed by a conscious reflection. It is an identity that is separate from the environment. To have a clear picture of what ‘the self’ means, several ways have been designed. Among the most common and widely used ways of self, the approach is self-esteem and self-concept. self-esteem refers to how an individual views himself from an emotional or affective aspect. This refers to how an individual feels about himself and also how the individual values himself. This can also be referred to as self-worth. On the other part, self-concept refers to the way an individual views himself from a thinking or cognitive aspect. Purkey, (1988) refers to it as, “…the totality of a complex, organized and dynamic system of learned beliefs, attitudes, and opinions that each person holds to be true about his or her personal existence.”

While self-esteem and self-concept are slightly different, they are so closely related that some authors even use them interchangeably. In addition, they work so closely that one directly affects the other. Franken (1994) clearly points out that good self-esteem directly corresponds with a favorable self-concept. He further points out that an individual can maximize outcomes if he clearly knows himself because this can assist him to know his strong points and his weaknesses. It is from the self-concept that one develops his motivated behavior. This is because behavior motivation basically depends on the possible selves which are directly dependent on the self-concept. What does this mean to an individual’s behavior and vision? From this, it is possible to rule out that the way an individual views the world and his reaction towards the view dictates the boundaries from which he can estimate his possibilities.

How is self-concept developed? As mentioned in the definition of self-concept by Purkey, it is evident that the self-concept develops from a “complex system of learned beliefs.” This means that self-concept develops through learning from self and from others. When an individual takes an action, he later looks back to reflect on what he has done. In addition, other people around him make their comments concerning the action taken by the individual. However, “self-concept” cannot be considered an innate phenomenon because it is a product of the individual’s environmental interactions and the reflections construed from the interaction. From the reflections of the interaction, one is able to ascertain the level of his capability. In addition, the individual is able to combine his own expectations and the expectations of others and the abilities and accomplishments characterized by others. Basing on this characteristic of self-concept, it is justified to purport that self-concept is changeable and modifiable (Franken, 1994, p. 443).

Franken (1994, p. 443) goes ahead to argue that self-concept, though changeable, is not changed by an individual’s will but can be changed through the individual’s self-reflection. In his view, an individual, through reflection, can acquire a new way of self-viewing that is better than the initial one and through this, he is able to discover possible selves.

Finally, the self-concept is made up of several components. There is the physical component that defines the concrete aspects like the individual’s height, sex, looks, the house that the individual lives in, the type of car he drives, etc. secondly, there is the academic component that defines the individual’s learning abilities. This is divided into overall learning abilities and the strength as portrayed by the individual’s abilities in a given area of study. For example, the individual might be good in mathematics, sciences, languages, arts, etc. thirdly, the social self-concept component is created from the individual’s ability to relate with others and finally, the fourth component is the transpersonal self component which describes the ability of the individual to relate to the unknowns and the supernatural (Marsh, 1992).

These concepts can be clearly applied to my own life. For example, I am able to enter any music concert in the world. This is because I have confidence in myself. I have learned through actions and thus I can reflect on the same actions and also from other people’s comments and their actions to know that I am good at singing. This happened after I started singing in my bathroom. I felt that I have a good voice. My brothers, sisters and friends also heard me signing from the bathroom and kept encouraging me to try going public. So, when the church announced for music competition during Christmas, I reflected on my singing abilities and the comments from friends and relatives. From the reflections, I developed expectations of excelling. My expectations were also based on my friends’ and families’ expectations and thus I gave it a try. I won! Since then, my expectations have been raised. I believe that I can even compete for the best singer in the world.

I have also developed positive self-esteem based on the physical component of self-concept. Having been born from a good family that is wealthy, the physical aspects of my life make me develop a positive emotional view of myself. Living in a good house in a posh estate in Phoenix and owning a beautiful Hyundai sports car has made me develop a good relationship with other people because I don’t view myself as a failure and a beggar who is not worthy of meeting other people. On their part, the other people readily accept to associate with me, a phenomenon that makes me feel wanted. All these contribute to my development of a favorable self-concept and self-esteem.

In conclusion, it is clear that the environment that people live in and the success or failures in an individual’s endeavors act as the basis from which the individual forms his expectations. If the individual meets success in a given field, he tends to raise his expectations. In addition, if from his success the people around discover that he is good at that thing and start praising him about it, he continues having high expectations. This was evident in my singing ability which was developed from the success in my actions and the expectations from other people.

References

1. Franken, R. (1994). Human motivation (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
2. Marsh, H. W. (1992). “Content specificity of relations between academic achievement and academic self-concept.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 35-42
3. Purkey, W. (1988). An overview of self-concept theory for counselors. ERIC Clearinghouse on Counseling and Personnel Services. Michigan: Ann Arbor.

Many people do not understand the meaning of self-knowledge. Perhaps this is the reason why some people term it a misleading idea full of danger and difficulty. Other people go as far as suggesting that self-knowledge is a mere social convention whose real legitimacy exists not. Nevertheless, before discussing the two statements, it is imperative to explain the real meaning of self-knowledge.

Many literature materials define self-knowledge as the ability to know the person in you confidentially. Self-knowledge therefore involves recognition of personal thoughts and feelings, especially on how they develop, and how they influence individual behavior. In most cases, self-knowledge is all about understanding your beliefs, inspirations, desires, principles and wants. It is a philosophy of self.

However, due to different perceptions on self-knowledge, most philosophical definitions of self-knowledge appear in first person for example, Descartes, Hume and Locke. For instance, definitions of self-knowledge from third person point of view only give the notion of objectivity and operationalism hence, misleading.

This is where many people find self-knowledge a misleading idea. To another person, self-knowledge occurs when an individual demonstrates personal discourse and conduct. Thus, according to those who believe that self-knowledge is a misleading idea, it is hard to determine the person’s intentions unless inferring the person indirectly. Up to this point, they think that the concept of self-knowledge is dangerous and difficult as it is not good to infer to other people’s affairs or intentions (Brie, p.1).

Another group of people believes that self-knowledge is a mere social convention with no legitimacy. By this, they imply the concept of self-knowledge does not exist at all. During the heyday of behaviorism, many philosophers differed on whether self-knowledge is a philosophical concept or just a mere social convention.

Some philosophers such as Aquinas suggested that self-knowledge is the ability to observe self-behavior hence, a social convention. He also criticized the idea that self-knowledge involves a distinctively unswerving epistemic process. Aquinas also retorted that if at all self-knowledge is undeviating; no one would be in a position to seize the higher-order mental condition hence, regress (Justyna, p.1).

Diverse criticisms on self-knowledge started during the philosophical days of Descartes, Locke, William and others. Nevertheless, these criticisms depend on one’s view of self-knowledge.

It is imperative to note that the difference of views on self-knowledge emanate from psychological and philosophical viewpoints. According to myself, the idea that self-knowledge is misleading and exhibits difficulty or danger is ill motive. To me, self-knowledge emanates from creating relationships with people around you so that you learn their intentions and characters.

For instance, you can learn people’s gestures, dress codes, the way they talk, their obsequiousness or condescension. To me, this is how self-knowledge exhibits in a person. In addition, self-knowledge comes when a person is able to understand self and recognize his or her deeds. Perhaps the major reason why many people think that self-knowledge is a mere social convention is that they know little about their minds.

They do not understand that their minds differ from ordinary minds and each person is unique. Consequently, these persons lack self-knowledge sometimes characterized by cripplingly low self-esteem. Without understanding your personal mind, it is impossible to identify yourself as gifted and once this occurs, it becomes difficult to incorporate your identification into personal senses. Eventually, people end up with assertions that self-knowledge is a misleading idea full of difficulties and dangers (Stephanie, p.1).

Self-knowledge is not a disingenuous idea since it helps an individual to understand the person in him or her. Whenever people understand themselves, they are in a position to manage and take care of their personal lives. In so doing, it is easier to make life turn out for you instead of having life ensue for you.

Self-knowledge is not a mere social convention because it makes us comprehend our external physical universe over and above the inner metaphysical world surrounded by us. Moreover, through self-knowledge our mind turns out to be the interface for both experiences.

The idea of self-knowledge starts from the mind. In most cases, the manners in which we think dictate our lives and influence our human experience. Thus, by changing our perceptions about the surroundings, we can change our worldview on certain issues such as self-knowledge. Paradoxically, the moment we change our perceptions and think in the right way, the surrounding world adjusts as well.

Thus, we cannot define self-knowledge as a mere social convention yet through it, we are in a position to change the world. It is never difficult to change the world, and we are not involved in a dangerous process to change the world. Needed of us, is the ability to alter our thinking that produce our self-knowledge, and the world will automatically change (Amie, pp.2-4).

The fact that humanity lives in a participatory universe where people’s values, beliefs and thoughts influence what happens around them is a surety that self-knowledge is not a mere social convention and is never a misleading idea. Noticeably, the happenings in the physical world replicate the rich contents of our self-knowledge hence, building our own destiny. Thus, self-knowledge evades us from being casualties of circumstances, and instead makes us heirs of our destiny (Timothy and Dunn, pp.13-15).

In conclusion, I believe that self-knowledge is neither a misleading idea nor a social convention because it makes us to recognize our fault in thinking and helps us to alter it. In addition, self-knowledge helps us to enhance our spiritual, mental, physical and emotional faculties with an aim of defining our destiny.

Works Cited

Amie, Thomasson. Self-Awareness and Self-Knowledge. 2006. Web.

Brie, Gertler. Self-Knowledge. 2008. Web.

Justyna, Japola. Aquinas on Self-Knowledge. Web.

Stephanie, Tolan. Self-Knowledge, Self-Esteem and the Gifted Adult. 2007. Web.

Timothy, Wilson, Dunn, Elizabeth. Self-Knowledge: Its Limits, Value, and Potential for Improvement. 2004. Web.

Abstract

Philosophers and psychologists have for a long time been engaged in efforts that seek to study and understand the self. The paper explains the complex concept of self from both the psychological and philosophical perspectives which are actually closely related. The development of self concept in individuals is discussed in detail.

The relationship between self concept and self-esteem is clearly pointed out in the paper. Furthermore, the paper elaborates the role played by self esteem in shaping behavior and self presentation in the social context. The paper concludes that self concept/self-esteem plays a major role in determining how people perceive and behave individually and collectively.

Introduction

Human beings are endowed with the ability to have ideas, awareness, and attitudes about themselves. The understanding of the self in relation to a multitude of characteristics has been studied by researchers in various fields. Most researchers in psychology and philosophy have come up with their understanding of the “self” as a concept and how it influences an individual’s character in general (Huitt, 2009).

This paper provides a definition of self concept and how it is developed. It discusses how an individual’s self-esteem and behavior is influenced by the perception of the self. The paper also explains how self concept greatly determines how a person presents himself or herself.

Definition

The self as a term has been defined by many psychological and philosophical researchers. A general perspective of the self refers to the reflective awareness by an individual as the object under consideration (Fiske, 2010).

The philosophy of self is the understanding of salient characteristics that distinguish an individual from the rest. Philosophers regard the self as the ultimate source of an individual’s awareness as a unitary being. The self is believed to be responsible for a person’s ideas and resultant actions that are characteristic of the individual.

Psychologists, on the other hand, understand self as a mental and affective perception of oneself (Huitt, 2009). Psychological researchers regard the self as having a great influence on a person’s motivation, affection, knowledge, as well as an individual’s identity in social contexts (Bandura, 1997).

Self-concept

The self plays a major role in the development of other distinct characteristics of an individual. Self-concept, for instance, refers to the general perception that a person has about himself or herself in relation to such defining characteristics as gender roles and sexuality, cultural identity, and so on (Fiske, 2010). Self concept, therefore, can be defined as the actual content of a person’s self, their unique character and being.

A related term, self awareness, refers to the process where an individual deliberates or contemplates about oneself. Self concept and self awareness are central in the development of our individual identities through the thoughts, personal convictions, and understandings that we have about our self (Bandura, 1997).

Development of Self-concept

Researchers in psychology of self have come up with explanations of how self concept is developed. They have identified some mental structures which are responsible for the organization of information about our self awareness (Bandura, 1997). The structures are referred to as self-schemas.

They dictate what an individual notices or commit to memory depending on how it is related to him or her. According to recent research, individuals are naturally inclined to commit to memory that which relates to their self (Huitt, 2009). This tendency is referred to as the self-reference effect.

Experiments conducted by psychologists have indicated that self concept is developed as one interacts with the surrounding and doing frequent introspections (Fiske, 2010). Introspection refers to the process of examining and evaluating one’s self relative to some set standards with the aim of making amends where necessary.

Self-concept and Self-esteem

Research findings have revealed that there is a close relationship between self concept and self esteem. Self esteem has been defined by psychologists as the measure of how an individual gauges his or her overall value and is usually ascribed to the cumulative personal gifts and abilities in relation to one’s failures (Huitt, 2009).

The understanding of oneself as a separate being from the environment is central in the determination of a person’s self-esteem. Psychologists have distinguished self esteem from self concept as being more of emotional or affective as far as self worth is concerned. However, some writers use these two terms alternately to mean the source of all human motivation.

According to Fiske (2010), the attitudes and ideas that a person has about the world and how he or she relates to that perception sets out the boundaries and situations within which the individual frames out his or her vision as far as possibilities/capabilities are concerned. Self concept has been associated with the development of self esteem, where people with good self esteem can do their best since they are aware of their potentialities and limitations (Bandura, 1997).

Self-esteem, Behavior and Self Presentation

The strong relationship that exists between self concept and self esteem has raised questions of how one’s identity determines and shapes behavior. Individuals have been known to gauge their self with environmental indicators, the people’s opinions, and the existing culture.

These signals significantly influence a person’s perception of one’s self (Bandura, 1997). Research findings by prominent psychologists have confirmed that individuals’ efficacy in the utilization of abilities and skills are largely influenced by self esteem versus gifts and innate potentials. This shows that the rating/value which an individual assigns their self regulates how he or she presents himself or herself in the social arena.

Conclusion

The paper has explained the complex concept of self from both the psychological and philosophical perspective. The development of self concept in individuals has been discussed. The relationship between self concept and self-esteem has been clearly pointed out.

Furthermore, the paper has elaborated the role played by self esteem in shaping behavior and self presentation in general. It can be concluded that self concept plays a major role in determining how people behave individually and collectively.

References

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-esteem and Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Fiske, S. T. (2010). Social beings: comprehending motivations in social psychology (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Sons.

Huitt, W. (2009). Understanding self-concept and self-esteem: an analysis (4^th ed).

Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University Press.

Abstract

Self concept is made up of different self aspects and has the following characteristics: Central vs. Peripheral; Salient vs. Non-salient; Conscious vs. Automatic; Actual vs. Possible vs. Ideal. This paper discusses self aspect belonging to different self concepts, i.e. Personal, Relational, and Collective. One self aspect for each of the two self concepts, i.e. Personal and Relational, is separately discussed along with their above mentioned characteristics. All these aspects and concepts are discussed with reference to social psychology.

Aspects of Self-Concept

Self concept is a very important part of personality and reflects many personality traits in a person. According to Fox, self concept is a “self-description, whereby a series of statements are used such as ‘I am make’, ‘I am student’, to formulate a multifaceted personal picture” (Fox, 1990). Self concept may reflect a person’s personal, relational, or collective identity (Sedikides & Brewer, 2010). The self aspects belonging to the Personal and Relational self concepts are discussed below.

Personal Self-aspect: The aspect of my personality which reflects my personal identity is that I am an organized person. This is a central part of my personality as I have always associated it with achievement. Keeping things in place and organizing my activities give me some sense of control and motivates me achieve my short term goals, which I believe is the salient characteristic.

This aspect is both conscious and automatic as I am aware of my habit but since I have been practicing it for a while it has become somewhat automatic. But I do not believe that it’s chronic but is actually a part of my personality which is very important to be because I see it as an advantage. As self representation is dependent on interpersonal comparison (Markus, 1977) I view my organized nature as one of my traits that differentiates me from other.

Relational Self-aspect: One common aspect in all my familial and social relationships is that I always like to know everything about the other person. I like to communicate on another level and discuss different topics. It is very important for me to know what is going on in the life of people I am close and always try hard to help.

I always make sure that they know they can always as me for help, which is a conscious effort. This makes me feel more close to people around me and gives a sense of belonging and closeness. This is not the most central part of my personality but it is important for me to have a healthy relationship with my family and friends.

The possible reason for this may be that I do not like to be isolated and always am more comfortable when I am emotionally connected with people around me. I believe that my relational self concept is healthy as I always try to protect, enhance, and maintain a healthy relationship with other people (Brewer & Gardner, 1996).

Both these aspects of my self concept are not as visible as I would like them to be. The reason I want people to know about these self aspect of mine is that they are an important part f my personality and and so they differentiate me from others as it is said that “distinctive characteristics help define our self-concept” (Bordens & Horowitz, 2002, p. 59).

I often make an effot to let people know about my organized nature as being unorganized makes me feel a little uncomfortable and so does not being close to important people in my life. The concept of self verification may be applied here. When the situation demands I even present myself in a way which reflects my personal and relational traits and self presentation is is important for me.

References

Bordens, K. S., & Horowitz, I. A. (2002). Social psychology. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Brewer, M. B., & Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this “we”? Levels of collective identity and self representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71 , 83-93.

Fox, K. R. (1990). The self-perception manual. Dekalb, IL: Northern Illinois University, Office of Health Promotion.

Markus, H. (1977). Self-schemata and processing information about the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35 , 63-78.

Sedikides, C., & Brewer, M. B. (2010). Individual self, relational self, and collective self. Partners, opponents, or strangers. Web.

Being yourself presupposes of the complicated mechanisms of self-concepts that play essential role in human lives. In everyday life, a person expresses different self-concepts in communication with people, certain actions, etc. Self concepts have various dimensions: physical concept, personality concept, social self, the concept of character traits, and the concept that covers skills and abilities.

Physical concepts reveal the way a person describes himself to others with respect to how he perceives himself in physical dimension. Physically, each person has sex, body constitution, and physical characteristics. For example, a girl may describes herself as a healthy young woman with a well figure, good stamina, tall stature and slim body.

Personality concepts describe people’s personality from psychological point of view. Each person has a certain biological characteristics that reveal the nature of her/his individual temper, intellectual abilities, and other things that help her to distinguish from others. A middle-aged man can perceive himself as a sanguine-charismatic, smart person, with optimistic mood, who leads active life.

The same person may have numerous social selves as he/she interacts with during people and performs the corresponding social functions. Owing to this, a human life resembles a network, where all people continuously interact and bound with each other. For example, a young woman may describe herself as a teacher in school, a daughter for her parents, a mother in her own family, an assistant for her children, a friend for some other people, etc.

A person has certain character traits that make him a unique social creature. During people’s lives they can change or preserve more or less unchangeable. In this context, the self-concept of a schoolboy may be the following: he is talkative, self-confident, kind and outgoing person, with certain positive and negative personal sides.

The self-concept of skills and abilities of a person reveal the personal opportunities and talents in certain spheres of the life. For example, a child may be good in drawing, but bad in writing. An old man can be considered as Jack-of-all trades, because he can do practically everything in a good way. An artist may be extremely creative, but impractical man. Nevertheless, all people have their advantages and disadvantages.

Every day of their life people demonstrate their five major self-concepts. Owing to salience of self-concept, each person considers a certain self-concept as the most essential one; hence, he/she dedicates extra time and effort to it. For example, a woman may consider her social self as a mother to be the most important in her life.

Introduction

It is not known exactly when man’s awareness of self developed. However, it is believed that the notion of self awareness has existed since the creation of man. Philosophers such as René Descartes were among the first to define self concept.

In the 20^th century, the concept of the self took a new turn with the emergence of behaviorism and other schools of thought on self concept. Modern thinking of self concept is varied. Humanistic psychology, spiritual concept of self and other theories constitutes modern thinking on self concept.

The History of Self Concept

The concept of self possibly dates as far back as the beginning of man. This is because there is no sufficient evidence on when man became aware of such intangible personal attributes self-esteem. However, studies in the development of self concept got a boost from the works of Rene Descartes in the 17^th century. Descartes suggested the existence of the ego (non-physical being).

The concept of the ego remained anonymous throughout the 17^th, 18^th and 19^th centuries. It is only during the early 20^th century that the concept of the non physical started gaining prominence (Rachlin, 1991: Plotnik, 2005). Some of the early philosophies explaining self concept include behaviorism. Behaviorism is a school of thought suggested by such renowned psychologists as B.F. Skinner and J.B. Watson.

Behaviorists concede that self concept can only be understood by carefully interpreting human behavior (Baum, 2005). Within the same period, Sigmund Freud developed psychoanalysis, the psychology of the study of the mind, which deviated slightly from behaviorism (Elliott, 2002). Humanistic psychology developed later in the mid 20^th century with concepts such as self actualization gaining prominence.

Famous humanist psychologists such as Carl Rogers proposed the idea of unconditional recognition, a concept in which the perception of oneself is motivated by unconditional self acceptance. Furthermore, Robert Burns suggested that self concept is a composition of personal attitudes and beliefs.

The concept of self has developed further with varied opinions constituting modern thinking. These include the spiritual based concept of self, whereby each of the major religions such Christianity, Hinduism, and Islam, suggest unique philosophies on self concept (Greenberg, 2008).

The modern thinking on the self

Grego (2007) argues that most of the modern theories on self concept borrow heavily from the works of Rene Descartes. Descartes’ works focus on dualism; the idea that human beings are dual in nature. Most of the modern self concept theorists build their philosophy on self concept around Descartes’ initial idea on the ego. The modern thinking suggests that human beings have an inherent need for motivation.

This implies that self concept is largely determined by motivation. There are various factors that determine motivation. Abraham Maslow proposes that an individual concept of self progresses in stages. These stages are equated to progressive levels of human needs.

The satisfaction of each level of needs motivates a person to acquire an improved concept about the self. As such a person’s self concept develops in stages. Other modern theories on the self concept include Sociometer and the terror management theories (Kernis, 1997).

While Sociometer theorists suggest that the development of self concept is motivated by one’s social needs and the ability to fit into social groups, terror management theorists propose that security issues (and more so those related to life and death matters), determines the development of a person’s self concept (Solomon and McGregor, 1997).

Moreover, humanistic psychology, which suggests that unconditional acceptance motivates self concept, also constitutes modern thinking.

Modern thinking suggests two types of self concepts: high and low self esteem. People with high self esteem characteristically love themselves unconditionally. They also recognize themselves and live comfortably, without letting the flaws affect them negatively (Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger and Vohs, 2003).

On other hand, people with low self esteem fail to recognize and accept themselves. They perceive themselves negatively and desire to change certain attributes about themselves.

The Spiritual concept of self

The spiritual aspects of the self concept are founded on James Hillman’s definition that psychology studies the human soul (Klemp, 2009). Based on Hillman’s psychology, the concept of the self show a relationship with a higher being, most commonly referred to as the creator of the universe. Modern theosophists such as Helena Blavatsky suggest that the spirit, other than being incorruptible, is above the human soul.

The human spirit deals with the non physical aspects of life such as virtues and vices. The spirit, thus, constitutes the self. The human soul can be attracted to the human spirit. If this happens, a person becomes overtly spiritual. The connection between the soul and the spirit forms a person‘s self concept (Creeger, 1994). Theosophists separate the soul and the spirit and argue that the human spirits transcends mortality.

Thus, people who are deeply spiritual perceive themselves as immortal; they will live beyond death. Such people live in permanent freedom. People who are overly spiritual characteristically detach themselves from physical cravings, since they consider such to be a hindrance to their self actualization.

As such, they concentrate in the spiritual aspects of life such as meditation, prayer and worship, and other aspects that guarantee joy and happiness. Due to their spiritual nature such people perceive themselves as closer to their supreme creator.

Major world religions have specific philosophies that explain the concept of the self. The Hindu concept of self is founded on the caste system. Hindus believe that a person’s progressively move towards self actualization, by meeting spiritual needs. The progress through the caste system signifies a person spiritual growth.

Similarly, Christianity proposes its own philosophy on the self concept that “man is created in Gods own image” (Hensley, n.d). In this regard, the Christian concept of self is based on positive self regard.

Conclusion

The development of self concept can be attributed to the works of René Descartes. However, behavior psychologists made significant contribution to the development of self concept. Behaviorists suggested that a person self concept is derived from studying personal behavior. It is imperative to state that behavior psychologist ignored spiritual aspect of the self.

Unlike behaviorists, theosophists focus on the spiritual aspects. They propose that the human being is made up of two distinct parts; the soul and the spirit. The soul is the physical, while the spirit is the powerful of the two and connects one to a higher power. The spirit, which constitutes the self, leads one to self actualization. As such, the self endures beyond death.

Similarly humanist psychologists suggest that the concept of self improves with the satisfaction of progressive human needs. Self actualization is the highest level of growth one can achieve.

While theosophist suggests that self actualization is only attained through the satisfaction of spiritual needs, humanists propose self actualization is met through satisfaction of human needs. Both theosophical and humanistic approaches are unified by life after death.

Reference List

Baum, W. (2005). Understanding Behaviorism: Behavior, Culture and Evolution. New Jersey: Blackwell Publishing.

Baumeister, R., Campbell, J., Krueger, J. and Vohs, K. (2003). Does High Self-Esteem Cause Better Performance, Interpersonal Success, Happiness, or Healthier Lifestyles?. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 4 (1): 1–44.

Creeger, R. (1994). Theosophy: An Introduction to the Spiritual Processes in Human Life and in the Cosmos. Hudson, NY: Anthroposophic Press.

Elliott, A. (2002). Psychoanalytic Theory: An Introduction. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Grego, R. (2007). Dualism, Consciousness and Self-Identity in Descartes and Sartre. Web.

Greenberg, J. (2008). Understanding the Vital Human Quest for Self-Esteem. Perspectives on Psychological Science. 3(48).

Hensley, M. (n.d.). Self Concept and Spiritual Maturity. Web.

Kernis, M. (1997). Efficacy, Agency, and Self-Esteem. New York: Plenum Press.

Klemp, H. (2009). The Call of Soul. Minneapolis, MN: Eckankar.

Plotnik, R. (2005). Introduction to Psychology. Ontario: Thomson-Wadsworth.

Rachlin, H. (1991) Introduction to Modern Behaviorism. New York: Freeman.

Solomon, S. and McGregor, H. (1997). Terror Management Theory And Self-Esteem: Evidence That Increased Self-Esteem Reduces Mortality Salience Effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72 (24).

The concept of the self

According to McLeod (2008) self concept is the perception that an individual holds about him or herself. It is the conscious expression that each individual embraces about his or her personality. In view of the fact that each person has a different perception, the concept of self differs from one person to another. Some concepts are good whereas, others are poor. A poor self concept affects self- worth and behavior (Cluff, 2007).

A variety of aspects define the concept of self: substantial, intellectual, societal and, transpersonal. One’s intellectual concepts describe the academic performance.

The physical component mostly relates to the body image, the weight or stature, whereas the societal concept of self portrays the relationship one has with other people. The transpersonal aspect relates to the connection of an individual to a supreme power or deity. This paper addresses the concept of self and how it relates to self-esteem and behavior.

Development of a self-concept

The concept of self develops right from childhood (McLeod, 2008). However, as life goes on, it grows through interaction with other people and the environment. It changes from time to time depending on these factors. In addition, self concept can develop through the reactions of other people. The manner in which an individual is handled can determine his or her self perception (McLeod, 2008).

Similarly, the response a young person receives from own parents or guardians establishes his opinion of self. A child who is brought up in a secure home learns from an early stage how to deal with his emotions toward self. For example, a child who is embraced by his parents to show affection will grow up differently from a child whose parents do not bother to embrace him.

It is likely that these children will have different concepts of self. As a child interacts with his environment, his concept of self grows and evolves. A student who does well in mathematics develops a perception that he or she is smart. He is likely to perform well in other subjects because he already believes that he can make it.

The self and emotion: How it affects an individual’s self-esteem

The concept of self and self- esteem are sometimes used interchangeably. However, self- esteem describes the conscious emotional attitude toward self (Cluff, 2007). It generally refers to the importance of self or self- value. Essentially, self- concept is related to self-worth (Cluff, 2007). An individual with a poor self-concept will have poor self- esteem, the opposite is true.

If an individual perceives that he is important, he will think positively. His attitude and emotions will align themselves with his concept of self. Self-esteem is categorized into: low and high. People with high self-esteem are confident in who they are, they are contented about their body size, talents, and abilities. This does not mean that they are perfect.

Nonetheless, they have made a choice to accept themselves (Cluff, 2007). Individuals with high esteem are often happy and hopeful. Additionally, they treat other people well because they have understood that everyone is important.

On the other hand, people with low self-esteem have issues with their personalities; they do not think they are good enough (Cluff, 2007). Habitually, they perceive themselves as failures. They are filled with negative feelings such as humiliation, loathing, guilt, sorrow. Such people are unhappy or depressed. They struggle with issues of anger and violence.

They are afraid to make significant decisions because they are afraid of disappointment or mockery. People with low-esteem prefer to stay away from their peers because they are afraid of experiencing rejection. Others try so hard to perform well in class or sports. Dejection and suicide among the youth are strongly interrelated to low self -esteem.

Cluff (2007) asserts that, a poor concept of self brings about negative emotions that dominate the thoughts and attitude of an individual. Nevertheless, it is imperative to note that not every emotion is influenced by high or low self- esteem; possessing high or low self esteem is an individual decision.

The self and behavior: How it affects an individual’s self-presentation

The action undertaken by an individual is largely influenced by the concept of self (Cluff, 2007). The manner in which a child conducts herself toward her teacher or a manager toward his employees is influenced by the self perception. It would appear that the concept of self is important because it determines behavior. According to Cluff, the emotions toward self affect the way of thinking.

The way a person thinks affects his or her behavior. For example, an individual with high self –esteem and self- concept is secure. He is likely to present new ideas in a board meeting because he understands that his idea will succeed. He has the assurance that he can face the challenges that confront him. He walks tall with his head held up high because he has good feelings about himself.

In the same way, the school bully often has low self-esteem because of his poor concept of self. Therefore, he builds confidence in himself by harassing his fellow students and instigating fear.

This title makes him feel good about himself. A thief does not believe that he can make an independent living; therefore, he steals from others to make a statement. On the other hand, a teenage girl with a poor concept of self will try so hard to fit in with the popular girl. She can engage in shoplifting and dress skimpily to be accepted in the group.

Conclusion

Self perception determines the emotions that dominate a person. An individual with a poor concept of self thinks negatively about his or herself. Emotions such as remorse, pride, and embarrassment govern the mind, way of thinking, and behavior. Self- concept establishes a person’s lifestyle. However, it is significant to note that personal decision determines the concept of self (McLeod, 2008).

Its development can be influenced by the reactions of society but the final opinion depends on the individual. Whether to take a risk and make friends or stay isolated is a personal choice. People from violent or broken homes can make a choice to think positively about their body image and personality.

Self acceptance is the only way in which a person can live a fulfilled life. By accepting the body image, the academic performance and the opinion of the community, a good self concept is developed. In addition, positive thinking and good relationships further develop the perception of self.

According to McLeod (2008) a good concept of self affects self-esteem, which affects behavior. Knowledge of the self enables a person to develop a sense of wholeness, thus being in a position to respond to the environment around him or her.

References List

Cluff, D., (2007). Emotional Development and Self Esteem in Children. Retrieved from <https://www.kidsmakingchange.com/>

McLeod, S., (2008). The Self Concept in Psychology. Retrieved from <https://www.simplypsychology.org/self-concept.html>

Self and identity though closely related feature some significant differences, not only in their meaning but also in their applications. Self refers to how an individual perceives himself/herself in relations to other variables for instance people or characteristics that form part of the existence of human being.

On the other hand, identity refers to the attributes that people form or see in a person that distinguishes him/her from other people (Leary and Tangney 467). Therefore, it suffices to declare identity as no more than how one views another in relation to others while self is an intrinsic judgment that originates from an individual.

There stands a close relationship between self, self-concept, self-awareness and self-esteem. For instance, self-concept refers to a person’s perception of self in relation to other characteristics or variables like gender, race, and religion among others.

Self-awareness constitutes the individual level of his or her own self while self-esteem is an overall or an evaluation of the level of someone’s self-concept. Therefore, the word “self” seems closely linked with these three concepts as all refer to the way an individual views himself. However, one can ask, ‘How does self come about?’

Self is formed based on how an individual assesses himself/herself with regard to his or her own personality relating to skills, knowledge, abilities, hobbies occupations, physical characters and many others. A person can only tell his/her other self after a careful assessing of those areas or things that he or she believes as part of him/her or what he/she gets gratification and satisfaction from (Joan 78). For instance, an individual may say, “I am hard working”, an example of a self-assessment that transmits to self-concept of an individual.

On the other hand, if a person says, “I am tired, or happy”, it does not amount to self-concept because the statement stands out as not objective and is temporary since tiredness implies something that does not occur always and is not permanent. Therefore, it lasts just for some few minutes then the feeling will vanish. Being hard working implies an assessment and it can be exhibited in most parts of an individual’s life for a long time.

However, contrary to this, it holds true to declare the self-concept of a person as dynamic, changing with time based on how he/she re-assesses himself/herself. Such like changes may lead to identity crises as people will find it difficult to identify or know the clear stand or behavior of such an individual and therefore they would not record a common view concerning a person.

According to Locke, personal identity is something that depends on consciousness implying that people remain the same in their past and future actions and thoughts as well as their present ones. Identity therefore, comes after some time and therefore the thoughts and actions of a person become part of his/her identity or rather part of him/her after a certain period.

Furthermore, they might function as “impetus to the future behavior of an individual apart from providing this interpretative and evaluative context of the current thinking or view of the self” (Rodriguez 23). Therefore, self-concept does not restrict itself to the present only but rather encompasses the past and the future selves.

This means that it represents people’s future wishes as well as what they want to become future or those things of which an individual is afraid. Hence, it corresponds to standards, threats, goals, opportunities, hopes, fears, and happiness among others.

The self-categorization theory forms part of the few theories, which clearly relate to self-concept. The theory presents self-concept as having two levels namely personal identity and social identity implying that people’s evaluation of self depends on how a person’s self-perceptions fit in the social constructs as a whole. Therefore, the self-concept of an individual may alternate between the personal identity and the social identity.

Different cultures and societies have different views of self. For instance, in the western countries the ideas of self seem more leaned on independence as opposed to Asian countries where most people’s view of self stands as interdependent with the people’s ways of relationships and interpersonal interactions gaining prominence compared to their personal achievements or accomplishments.

Therefore, it becomes evident that self-identity is dynamic in the sense that it varies from one culture to another, and is not something static or permanent. It keeps on changing with time and even results to identity crises.

There stands various primary forces of identity formation such as the home/family, religion, sexuality, education, music, gender and many more that identify well with a given individual or rather relates to an individual. Therefore, every person has his or her way, which describes his/her identity.

The paper focuses on gender as one of the primary forces of identity formation. Gender differences in most cultures act as self-identity. The concept of self as applied to a person begins early in his/her life as the society socializes with the person because of gender segregation initiated by children themselves and the parents or rather the adults.

Various researches conducted have identified that, regardless of the culture, children, regardless of their gender, tend to engage in their plays separately. It therefore proves difficult to change or alter the way they want to live. Therefore, these plays and segregation contribute much towards the formation of the different identities seen in relationships and social interactions, which later inculcate in the entire way of life during their growth

Furthermore, girls tend to engage in one-on-one communications in their interactions while on the other hand, boys prefer engaging in-group activities. These preferences also contribute to their later lives concerning the identification of the two genders.

For instance, boys will prefer forming groups and putting together their efforts towards achievement of certain goal in life while girls will tend to constricted themselves in their day-to-day interactions due to what they used to do. Girl’s therefore, will tend to be secretive and will form strong intimate relationships of bonds among themselves as opposed to boys.

Another aspect of formation of identity among these genders is how the girls carry on with their lives. For instance, when it comes to speaking, girls wait for their turn and will often agree with others more easily and with fewer arguments. They will further acknowledge the contributions of their colleagues while the boys on the other the side will often build or form large groups, which result from their shared interests and the activities they engage in.

They also seem fond of boasting, threatening, and arguing more to show their levels of dominance in any discussion or any activities they engage in as a way of hierarchy. These examples of gender differences illustrate how the formation of identity of the two different categories comes up or forms based on their subsequent interaction and socialization later in their lives.

The society has also contributed a lot in the formation of identity especially on the gender. The society has come up with ‘segregative’ ways of showing differences in the way boys and girls ought to carry on with their life. The society does this through the evident segregation of roles, which the boys and girls engage in (Leary and Tangney 43).

For example, in a family where there are boys and girls, the society will inculcate different values in these children in the tasks they assign them. For example, girls will be given tasks relating to domestic affairs involving, kitchen work and keeping a house clean while on the other hand a boy child will be given responsibilities that are not related to domestic roles.

Therefore, as the children continue to grow, they will have already been oriented with what they are supposed to do or not. Another illustration of the same comes in the way guardians bring up their children in terms of choosing their clothing. These differences in selection of what the boys and girls wear contribute to their formation of identity.

Therefore, the differences in how parents socialize their children contribute to a greater magnitude in the way they socialize and make relationships in the society. Furthermore, this segregation internalizes and makes up their way of life in future as they grow up doing what they were brought up doing. Therefore, the issue of gender becomes a crucial factor in the formation of identity of an individual since a child grows with it and hence becoming part of his/her life.

Works Cited

Joan, Kron. The Semiotics of Home Décor. Boston: Bedford Books, 1997.

Leary, Mark, and Tangney, June. Handbook of self and identity. New York: Guilford Press, 2003.

Rodriguez, Richard. A Hunger of Memory. Boston: Godine, 1982