| Part ofa series on |
| The Self (Outline) |
|---|
| Constructs |
| Theories |
| Processes |
| Value judgment |
| As applied to activities |
| Interpersonal |
| Social |
| Politics |
Inphilosophy, theself is anindividual's ownbeing,knowledge, andvalues, and the relationship between these attributes.
The first-person perspective distinguishes selfhood frompersonal identity. Whereas "identity" is (literally) sameness[1] and may involvecategorization andlabeling,[2]selfhood implies a first-person perspective and suggests potential uniqueness. Conversely, "person" is used as a third-person reference. Personal identity can be impaired in late-stageAlzheimer's disease and in otherneurodegenerative diseases. Finally, the self is distinguishable from "others". Including the distinction between sameness andotherness, the self versus other is a research topic in contemporaryphilosophy[3] and contemporaryphenomenology (see alsopsychological phenomenology),psychology,psychiatry,neurology, andneuroscience.
Althoughsubjective experience is central to selfhood, the privacy of this experience is only one of many problems in thephilosophy of self and thescientific study ofconsciousness.
The psychology of self is the study of either thecognitive andaffective representation of one's identity or the subject of experience. The earliest formulation of the self inmodern psychology forms the distinction between two elements I and me. The self asI, is the subjective knower. While, the self asMe, is the subject that is known.[4] Current views of the self in psychology positions the self as playing an integral part in human motivation, cognition, affect, andsocial identity.[5] Self, following the ideas ofJohn Locke, has been seen as a product ofepisodic memory[6] but research on people withamnesia reveals that they have a coherent sense of self based on preserved conceptual autobiographical knowledge.[7] Hence, it is possible to correlate cognitive and affective experiences of self with neural processes. A goal of this ongoing research is to provide grounding insight into the elements of which the complex multiple situated selves of human identity are composed.
What the Freudian tradition has subjectively called, "sense of self" is for Jungian analytic psychology, where one's identity is lodged in the persona orego and is subject to change in maturation.Carl Jung distinguished, "The self is not only the center but also the whole circumference which embraces both conscious and unconscious; it is the center of this totality...".[8] TheSelf in Jungian psychology is "the archetype of wholeness and the regulating center of the psyche ... a transpersonal power that transcends the ego."[9][10] As aJungian archetype, it cannot be seen directly, but by ongoing individuating maturation and analytic observation, can be experienced objectively by its cohesive wholeness-making factor.[11]
Meanwhile,self psychology is a set of psychotherapeutic principles and techniques established by the Austrian-born American psychoanalystHeinz Kohut upon the foundation of the psychoanalytic method developed by Freud, and is specifically focused on the subjectivity of experience, which, according to self psychology, is mediated by a psychological structure called the self.[12] Examples of psychiatric conditions where such "sameness" may become broken includedepersonalization, which sometimes occurs inschizophrenia, where the self appears different from the subject.
The 'Disorders of the Self' have also been extensively studied by psychiatrists.[13]
For example, facial andpattern recognition take large amounts of brain processing capacity butpareidolia cannot explain many constructs of self for cases of disorder, such as schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.One's sense of self can also be changed upon becoming part of a stigmatized group. According to Cox,Abramson,Devine, and Hollon (2012), if an individual has prejudice against a certain group, like the elderly and then later becomes part of this group. This prejudice can be turned inward causing depression.[14]
The philosophy of a disordered self, such as inschizophrenia, is described in terms of what the psychiatrist understands are actual events in terms of neuron excitation but are delusions nonetheless, and the schizo-affective or a schizophrenic person also believes are actual events in terms of essential being. PET scans have shown that auditory stimulation is processed in certain areas of the brain, and imagined similar events are processed in adjacent areas, but hallucinations are processed in the same areas as actual stimulation. In such cases, external influences may be the source of consciousness and the person may or may not be responsible for "sharing" in the mind's process, or the events which occur, such as visions and auditory stimuli, may persist and be repeated often over hours, days, months or years—and the afflicted person may believe themselves to be in a state of rapture or possession.
Two areas of thebrain that are important in retrievingself-knowledge are themedial prefrontal cortex and the medial posterior parietal cortex.[15]Theposterior cingulate cortex, theanterior cingulate cortex, and medial prefrontal cortex are thought to combine to provide humans with the ability to self-reflect. Theinsular cortex is also thought to be involved in the process ofself-reference.[16]
Culture consists of explicit and implicit patterns of historically derived and selected ideas and their embodiment in institutions, cognitive and social practices, and artifacts. Cultural systems may, on the one hand, be considered as products of action, and on the other, as conditioning elements of further action.[17] The way individuals construct themselves may be different due to their culture.[18]
Hazel Rose Markus andShinobu Kitayama's theory of the interdependent self hypothesizes that representations of the self in human cultures fall on a continuum fromindependent tointerdependent. The independent self is supposed to be egoistic, unique, separated from the various contexts, critical in judgment, and prone to self-expression. The interdependent self is supposed to be altruistic, similar with the others, flexible according to contexts, conformist, and unlikely to express opinions that would disturb the harmony of his or her group of belonging.[19] However, this theory has been criticized by other sociologists, includingDavid Matsumoto[20] for being based on popular stereotypes and myths about different cultures rather than on rigorous scientific research. A 2016 study[21] of 10,203 participants from 55 cultural groups also failed to find a correlation between the postulating series of causal links between culture and self-construals, finding instead that correlations between traits varied both across cultures did not correlate with Markus & Kitayama's identifications of "independent" or "interdependent" self.[22]
The philosophy of self seeks to describe essential qualities that constitute a person's uniqueness or a person's essential being. There have been various approaches to defining these qualities. The self can be considered as the source of consciousness, theagentresponsible for an individual's thoughts and actions, or the substantial nature of a person which endures and unifies consciousness over time.
The self has a particular prominence in the thought ofRené Descartes (1596-1650).[23]In addition to the writings ofEmmanuel Levinas (1906-1995) on "otherness", the distinction between "you" and "me" has been further elaborated inMartin Buber's 1923 philosophical workIch und Du.
In philosophy, the problem ofpersonal identity[24] is concerned with how one is able to identify a single person over a time interval, dealing with such questions as, "What makes it true that a person at one time is the same thing as a person at another time?" or "What kinds of things are we persons?"
A question related to the problem of personal identity is Benj Hellie'svertiginous question. The vertiginous question asks why, of all the subjects of experience out there,this one—the one corresponding to the human being referred to as Benj Hellie—is the one whose experiences arelive? (The reader is supposed to substitute their own case for Hellie's.)[25] Hellie's argument is closely related to Caspar Hare's theories ofegocentric presentism andperspectival realism, of which several other philosophers have written reviews.[26]Similar questions are also asked repeatedly byJ. J. Valberg in justifying hishorizonal view of the self,[27] and byThomas Nagel inThe View from Nowhere.[28][29] Tim S. Roberts refers to the question of why a particular organism out of all the organisms that happen to exist happens to be you as the "Even Harder Problem of Consciousness".[30]
Open individualism is a view in the philosophy of self, according to which there exists only one numericallyidenticalsubject, who is everyone at all times, in the past, present and future.[31]: 617 It is a theoretical solution to the question of personal identity, being contrasted with "Empty individualism", the view that personal identities correspond to a fixed pattern that instantaneously disappears with the passage of time, and "Closed individualism", the common view that personal identities are particular to subjects and yet survive over time.[31]: xxii
Open individualism is related to the concept ofanattā in Buddhist philosophy. In Buddhism, the term anattā (Pali:𑀅𑀦𑀢𑁆𑀢𑀸) or anātman (Sanskrit:अनात्मन्) is the doctrine of "non-self" – that no unchanging, permanent self or essence can be found in any phenomenon. While often interpreted as a doctrine denying the existence of a self,anatman is more accurately described as a strategy to attain non-attachment by recognizing everything as impermanent, while staying silent on the ultimate existence of an unchanging essence.[32][33] In contrast, dominant schools of Hinduism assert the existence ofĀtman aspure awareness orwitness-consciousness,[34][35][36] "reify[ing] consciousness as an eternal self."[37]
One thought experiment in the philosophy of personal identity is theteletransportation paradox. It deals with whether the concept of one'sfuture self is a coherent concept. The thought experiment was formulated byDerek Parfit in his 1984 bookReasons and Persons.[38] Derek Parfit and others consider a hypothetical "teletransporter", a machine that puts you to sleep, records your molecular composition, breaking you down into atoms, and relaying its recording to Mars at the speed of light. On Mars, another machine re-creates you (from local stores of carbon, hydrogen, and so on), each atom in exactly the same relative position. Parfit poses the question of whether or not the teletransporter is actually a method of travel, or if it simply kills and makes an exact replica of the user.[39] Then the teleporter is upgraded. The teletransporter on Earth is modified to not destroy the person who enters it, but instead it can simply make infinite replicas, all of whom would claim to remember entering the teletransporter on Earth in the first place. Using thought experiments such as these, Parfit argues that any criteria we attempt to use to determine sameness of person will be lacking, because there is nofurther fact. What matters, to Parfit, is simply "Relation R", psychological connectedness, including memory, personality, and so on.[40]
Religious views on the Self vary widely. The Self is a complex and core subject in many forms ofspirituality. Two types of Self are commonly considered—the Self that is the ego, also called the learned, superficial Self of mind and body, egoic creation, and the Self which is sometimes called the "True Self", the "Observing Self", or the "Witness".[41] InHinduism, theĀtman (Self), despite being experienced as an individual, is actually a representation of the unified transcendent reality,Brahman.[42] Our experience of reality doesn't match the nature of Brahman due tomāyā.
One description of spirituality is the Self's search for "ultimate meaning" through an independent comprehension of the sacred. Another definition of spiritual identity is: "A persistent sense of Self that addresses ultimate questions about the nature, purpose, and meaning of life, resulting in behaviors that are consonant with the individual’s core values. Spiritual identity appears when the symbolic religious and spiritual value of a culture is found by individuals in the setting of their own life. There can be different types of spiritual Self because it is determined by one's life and experiences."[43]
Human beings have a Self—that is, they are able to look back on themselves as both subjects and objects in the universe. Ultimately, this brings questions about who we are and the nature of our own importance.[44] Traditions such as inBuddhism see theattachment toSelf is an illusion that serves as the main cause ofsuffering and unhappiness.[45]
We often put others (and ourselves) into categories. Labeling someone as a Muslim, a Turk, orsoccer player are ways of saying other things about these people.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Other | |
