Republic of the Philippines

UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN PHILIPPINES

College of Arts and Communication
University Town, Catarman N. Samar

First Semester, SY 2022 - 2023

UNDERSTANDING THE SELF (GE 3)

MODULE 2: SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

Hanah Elizabeth Bugna-Sosa CAC,

Part-Time Lecturer

Name of Student: : Jomark M. Guda

Course & Section: 1st Year Public Administration Section 1A
 UNIT 1- THE SELF FROM VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES

2
SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

INTRODUCTION
The social aspect of the self is explored in many ways, in which social situations influence one’s view
of the self. The self is created in isolation, and people are not born with perception of oneself as good
in sports, make-up artistry, dancing, or business. Such perceptions are identified through observation,
or interaction with other people. “Am I beautiful?” “Do my eyebrow look like Liza Soberano na?”
These questions can be answered by looking at those people around.
In this module, we will learn that the self has meaning only within the social context, and it is
not wrong to say that the social situation defines our self-concept and our self-esteem. We rely on
others to provide a “social reality” – to help us determine what to think, feel, and do (Hardin &
Higgins, 1996).

OBJECTIVES:
At the end of this module, you are expected to:

A. Compare and contrast the different views of the self;

B. Examine the two components of the self;
C. Describe the concept of looking-glass self and how it affects selfconcept; and,
D. Explain the concept of social comparison and why it is important to human behavior.
Now, let us properly begin our discussion on Sociological Perspective!

1. SOCIOLOGICAL VIEWS OF THE SELF

1.1 The Self as Product of Modern Society Among Others
With modernization, the self becomes a “delocalized” self which is free to seek its own identity;
defining religion, theological tradition, free from customary constraints hence, deviating from the
traditional way of life. Stability of one’s self-identity is no longer based on pre-given traditional broad
definition of the self.
Clifford Geertz (1973) believes that the struggle for one’s individuality is only possible in modern
society where religio-theological traditions are gradually replaced by rational and scientific
calculations; and the intimate personal affiliations are replaced by exceeding impersonal associations
brought about by urbanized way of life. Modernization or the destruction of the traditional way of life
“delocalizes” the self. This poses certain problems as:

1. The newfound freedom threatens the very authenticity of the self (e.g. love)

UNDERSTANDING THE
(G 3) | HANAH ELIZABETH -SOSA 2
SELF E BUGNA
 UNIT 1- THE SELF FROM VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES

2. Alienation (Marx) – human being haunted by the very images they have created
3. Objectification of the body ( e.g. medical practice)
4. Dehumanization of self
Solution: For the individual to discover the “true” and “authentic” part of himself/herself to realize
his/her potentials, there is a need to abolish repressive social constraints.

1.2. Self as Necessary Fiction

Self for Nietzsche, is the sum of individual’s action, thoughts, and feelings. Self is nothing
more than a metaphor, a representation of something abstract; symbolic. It is possible for us to
remember something even if we have not experienced it.
Self has a continuity even if it is only in memory i.e.
either heard or witnessed what did not happen to you. A
true given self is not what unites these experiences, but
it is the presumed unity of these experiences that gave
rise to a concept of the self.

1.3. Post-Modern View of the Self

Self is a narrative, a text written and rewritten.
Self is a story. It is dynamic. Self is a product of modern
discourse that is historically and socially imprisoned by
what is acceptable by norms, etc. Self in post modernity
is complicated by electronic mediated virtual interaction
of cyber self such as change in appearance (in the
cyberspace). According to N. Green, self is “digitalized”
in cyberspace, a virtual version of who we are. The self
is seen in websites or social media – Facebook, Twitter,
Instagram, etc.

The following are the manifestations:

1. Information technology dislocates the self, thus, self

is “digitalized” in cyberspace.
2. Global migration produces
multicultural identities.
3. Post-modern selves are “pluralized” selves.

Social Construction of the Self:

Self is not discovered; it is made through the socialization process. BUT, individuals are not
just napless victims of socialization. The individual is an active, strategizing agent that negotiates for
the definition of himself. This means that “Ikaw ang gumagawa ng kung ano ka”. Self is acquired
socially through language, like symbols. We construct ourselves based on our social roles through
socialization agents – family, school, community, etc.

UNDERSTANDING THE
(G 3) | HANAH ELIZABETH -SOSA 2
SELF E BUGNA
 UNIT 1- THE SELF FROM VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES

1.4. Rewriting the Self as an Artistic Way

Nietzsche states that the unity of the self is accomplished through conscious effort – transform
self through beautifully work of art. Individuals must fashion, care for and cultivate themselves.
Rorty: contingencies of selfhood – conceal the “ugly” by reinterpreting the overall aesthetic
contours of the self. This does not mean that by rewriting the narrative of one’s self, he/she will
discover something deep about himself/herself… redescribing one’s self is just a way of reinterpreting
and redescribing one’s past.

1.5. Self Creation and Collective Identity

Memories (photographs, videos) play significant role in creating the self and identity.
Memory and forgetting are most important powers in recreating a person’s identity. Such
memories of the past include pain, triumph, etc. Such experiences of the past can be linked with social
transformation.

Another important aspect of this view if the self is that self creation is formed within
“imagined communities.” Selves obtain their nature from cultural traditions, embodied in various
social institutions. These are preserved in a collective narrative which becomes reservoir for the
projection of self-creation. Self creation along cultural lines must be done in maximum cultural
recognition of differences among and between individuals and cultural groups.

1.6. Self Creation and the Struggle for Cultural Recognition

This is a challenge of self-identity amidst recognition of racial and ethnic identities. Self-
creation is necessarily grounded on collective solidarities. We create ourselves by struggling with
cultural hassles then owning the created self. We hide the ugly part of our cultural nature. We learn to
adjust.

BEYOND SELF CREATION

The quest for self-identity is a product of modern society but this is complicated by the socio-
cultural sensibilities of postmodernity, new information technologies and globalization, reconfiguring
ourselves as to gender, sex, ethnicity, creating one’s own style, signature.

UNDERSTANDING THE
(G 3) | HANAH ELIZABETH -SOSA 2
SELF E BUGNA
 UNIT 1- THE SELF FROM VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES

2. MEAD’S THEORY OF SELF

George Herbert Mead (1863-1931) is an American
Sociologist best known as the Founder of American Pragmatism, a
pioneer of Symbolic Interaction Theory and as one of the founders
of Social Psychology.
Mead’s theory of the self maintains that the conception a
person holds of himself/herself in his/her mind emerges from social
interaction with others. This is, in effect, a theory and argument
against biological determinism because it holds that the self is
neither initially there at birth nor necessarily at the beginning of a
social interaction, but is constructed and re-constructed in the
process of social experience and activity.
The self, according to Mead, is made of two components:
the “I” and the “me” represents the expectations and attitudes of others (the “generalized other”)
organized into a social self. The individual defines his or her own behavior with reference to the
generalized attitude of the social group(s) he//she occupies. When the individual can view himself or
herself from the standpoint of the generalized other, self-consciousness in the full sense of the term is
attained. From this standpoint of the generalized other (internalized in the “me”) is the major
instrument of social control, for it is the mechanism by which the community exercises control over

the conduct of its individual members.

The “me” is the organized set of attitudes of others that the individual assumes. It is the
socialized aspect of the individual. It represents the learned behavior, attitudes, and expectations of
others and the society. The “me” is considered a phase of the self that is in the past. The “me” has
been developed by the knowledge of society and social interactions that the individual has gained.
On the other hand, the “I” can be considered the present and future phase of the self. It
represents the individual’s identity based on response to the “me.” The “I” is the response to the “me,”
or the person’s individuality. It allows the individual to still express creativity and individualism and
understand when to possibly bend and stretch the rules that govern social interactions.
For Mead, existence in community comes before individual consciousness. First one must
participate in the different social positions within society and only subsequently can one use that
experience to take the perspective of others and thus become self-conscious.

2.1 Mead’s Three Stages of Development of Self

STAGE 1: THE PREPARATORY SELF

▪ 0-2 years old

▪ In this stage, children mimic those around them

▪ This is why parents of young children typically

do not want to use foul language around them
(Rath, 2016).
Examples:

UNDERSTANDING THE
(G 3) | HANAH ELIZABETH -SOSA 2
SELF E BUGNA
 UNIT 1- THE SELF FROM VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES

1. If a two-year0old child can “read”, what he/she has most likely done is memorized that had
been read to him/her.

2. In a noontime TV show, Vic Sotto, Allan K., Jose Manalo, use quite foul language lie
“bwisit”, “bastos!”, “sira ulo”, and so is the language of a child who hears them.
Does he/she have any idea of what he/she is saying or doing? No. He/She is mimicking. He/She
is in the preparatory stage. If he/she had been an older child, the scenes in the segments of the
show would cease to have any humor. It works because he/she doesn’t understand the meaning
behind his/her words, actions, or tone of voice.

STAGE 2: THE PLAY STAGE

▪ 2-6 years old

▪ Children play pretend and do not adhere to the rules in

organized games like patintero or basketball.

▪ Playing a game with children on this age is far easier to

just go with any “rules” they come up with during the
course of the game than trying to enforce any “rules”
upon them.

Example:

1. Playing the never-ending chinese garter with girls still do

not actually have one specific set of rules the same as the
last time played, and yet they still play the game while
adhering to these rules
During this stage, children play ‘pretend’ as the
significant other. This means that when they play “bahay-bahayan”, they literally pretending to
be the mommy or the daddy that they know.

STAGE 3: THE GAME STAGE

▪ 7 years old onwards

▪ In this stage, children can begin to understand and

adhere to the rules of games

▪ They can begin to play more formalized games

because they begin to understand other people’s
perspective or the perspective of the
generalized other.
In this stage, when children play ‘pretend’, they may
still play “bahaybahayan”, but are pretending to a mommy or a daddy independent of the one
that resides in their home. The generalized other refers to the viewpoint of the social group at
large. The child begins taking this perspective into account during this stage. (Rath, 2016).

UNDERSTANDING THE
(G 3) | HANAH ELIZABETH -SOSA 2
SELF E BUGNA
 UNIT 1- THE SELF FROM VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES

2.2 The Looking Glass Self: Our Sense of Self is Influenced by Others’ View of Us
The concept of the looking-glass self states that part of how we see ourselves comes from our
perception of how others see us (Cooley, 1902).
According to the American Sociologist Charles Horton Cooley
(1864-1929), the degree of personal insecurity you display in social
situations is determined by what you believe other people think of
you. Cooley’s concept of the looking-glass self, states that a
person’s self grows out of a person’s social interactions with
others. The view of ourselves comes from the contemplation of
personal qualities and impressions of how others perceive us.
Actually, how we see ourselves does not come from who we really
are, but rather from how we believe other see us. (Isaksen, 2013).

Sometimes, the influence of other people’s appraisal of ourselves on our selfconcept may be
strong that we end up internalizing them. For example, we are often labeled in a particular ways by
others, perhaps informally in terms of our ethnic background, or more formally in terms of a physical
or psychological diagnosis. The labeling bias occurs when we are labeled, and others’ view and
expectations of us are affected by that labeling (Fox & Stinnet, 1996). For example, if a teacher
knows that a child has been diagnosed with a particular psychological disorder, that teacher may have
different expectations and explanations of the child’s behavior than he or she would if not aware of
that label. Where things get really interesting for our present discussion is when those expectations
start to become self-fulfilling prophecies, and our self-concept and even our behavior start to align
with them. For example, when children are labeled in special education contexts, these labels can then
impact their self-esteem (Taylor, Hume & Welsh. 2010).

If we are repeatedly labeled and evaluated by others, then self-labeling may occur, which
happens when we adopt others’ labels explicitly into our self-concept. The effects of this self-labeling
on our self-esteem appear to depend very much on the nature of the labels. Labels used in relation to
diagnosis of psychological disorders can be detrimental to people who then internalize them. For
example, Moses (2009) found that adolescents who self-labeled according to diagnosis they had
received were found to have higher levels of self-stigma in their self-concepts compared with those

UNDERSTANDING THE
(G 3) | HANAH ELIZABETH -SOSA 2
SELF E BUGNA
 UNIT 1- THE SELF FROM VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES

who described their challenges in non-pathological terms. In these types of situation, those who self-
label may come to experience internalized prejudicee, which occurs when individuals turn prejudice
directed toward them by others onto themselves. Internalized prejudice has been found to predict more
negative selfconcept and poorer psychological adjustment in members of various groups, including
sexual minorities (Carter, 2012) and racial minorities (Szymanski & Obiri, 2011).
In other cases, labels used by wider society to describe people negatively van be positively
reclaimed by those being labeled. Galinsky and colleagues (2013) explored this use of self-labeling by
members of oppressed groups to reclaim derogatory terms, including “queer” and “bitch,” used by
dominant groups. After selflabeling, minority group members evaluated these terms less negatively,
reported feeling more powerful, and were also perceived by observers as more powerful. Overall,
these results indicate that individuals which incorporate a formerly negative label into their self-
concept in order to reclaim it can sometimes undermine the stigma attached to the label.

2.3 Social Comparison Theory: Our Sense of Self is Influenced by Comparisons with Others
Self-concept and self-esteem are also heavily influenced by the process of social comparison
(Buunk & Gibbons, 2007; Van Lange, 2008). Social comparison occurs when we learn about our
abilities and skills, about the appropriateness and validity of our opinions, and about our relative
social status by comparing our own attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors with those of others. These
comparisons can be with people whom we know and interact with, with those whom we read about or
see on TV, or with anyone else we view as important. However, the most meaningful comparisons we
make tend to be with those we see as similar to ourselves (Festinger, 1954)

Social comparison occurs primarily on

dimensions on which there are no correct
answers or objective benchmarks and thus
on which we can rely only on the beliefs of others for information. Answers to questions such as
“What should I wear to the interview?” or “What kind of music should I have at my wedding?” are
frequently determined at least in part by using the behavior of others as a basis of comparison. We
also use social comparison to help us determine our skills or abilities – how good we are at
performing a task or doing a job. For example, when students ask their teacher for the class average
on an exam, they are also seeking to use social comparison to evaluate their performance.

UNDERSTANDING THE
(G 3) | HANAH ELIZABETH -SOSA 2
SELF E BUGNA
 UNIT 1- THE SELF FROM VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES

SUMMARY
In summation, this section discussed the sociological perspective of the self. Because of
modernization, the self becomes delocalized – a self which is free to choose its own identity. The self,
according to Nietzsche, is the sum of individual’s action, thoughts, and feelings. It can be written and
rewritten. For Mead, the society plays an important role in our self-concept because it influenced our
view of the self. He also suggested that there are three (3) stages of self-development: preparatory
stage, play stage, and game stage. The concept of looking-glass self was postulated by Cooley, that
how we see ourselves comes from how other people see us. This also led to social comparison theory
– we tend to compare ourselves to other people when determining our skills and abilities.

UNDERSTANDING THE
(G 3) | HANAH ELIZABETH -SOSA 2
SELF E BUGNA