Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Define the concept of self
The Self
1. What is the self, what does it mean to be a self?
2. Is there a difference between being yourself authentically versus inauthentically? If so, what is the difference?
Abraham Lincoln once said that, if he had six hours to cut down a tree, he would spend the first five hours sharpening his axe. Likewise, any investigation into the ‘self’ requires, first and foremost, a thorough and clear preparation due to the difficult nature of an investigation into a matter or idea that has somewhat remained clouded in vague conceptions. In order, then, to arrive at a acceptable definition of the self, I will employ three key observations that should give me ample preparation for the main part of my investigation.
Since any particular object can only be perceived if it has characteristics that sets it apart from other objects, I can use this observation as a starting point for my attempt to first to perceive and then to define what can be understood as the ‘self’. Since objects that can be defined are separate entities are, due to their very nature, limited, we must accordingly postulate that the ‘self’ is a limited entity as well, if we assume that it can be perceived and defined. Only once this has been done can a person go about and explore the deeper meanings and nature of the ‘self’.
The next observation I would like to mention before I further delve into this matter is that every person perceives to have has some sort of ‘self’. We must assume that this holds true to every human being, as history has shown us so far that every person has some kind of focal point, which is the basis for his or her perception of ‘self’. No person known to us in western history had said the word “I” without having anything to refer ...
... middle of paper ...
...ay exist a perceived ‘self’ and a true ‘self’. In addition to this, Frankl suggested that the true ‘self’ was where the deepest meaning of love could be found. And both Frankl and Pieper recommended that the contemplation of the inner life is crucial to perceiving the true nature of the ‘self’. And, last but not least, I have given an account of one healing experience and the profound realization that came with it. Taking all of these observations together, I would like to make a tentative definition of the ‘self’: I postulate, that the true ‘self’ is love, and nothing but love. Since, at a deeper level of reality, nothing but love exists, there must exist an infinite oneness, such as the one described by all sages and prophets throughout history.
Bibliography:
Victor Frankl: "Man's Search for Meaning"
Joseph Pieper: "Leisure as a Basis for Culture"
“ The self's struggle for authenticity and definition will never end unless it's connected to its creator -- to you and to me. And that can happen with awareness -- awareness of the reality of oneness and the projection of self-hood. For a start, we can think about all the times when we do lose ourselves.”
Anil Ananthaswamy describes the self as the role the brain plays in our notions of self and existence. That our sense of self is layered, pulling information from
The wealth of knowledge written on the topic of self in social psychology presents important and useful constructs that help us to understand ourselves in relation to interactions with others. For example, there are topics written on escaping the self, self-esteem and failure, self as a stressor, and the loss of self in relation to spiritual bliss or ecstasy (Baumeister, 1991). Other “self” topics in social psychology include understanding the self in terms of cognitive, affective, and behavioral constructs (Fiske, 2004). Further, Fiske (2004) identifies several conceptual definitions of self, such as inner self and social self, and defines the core social motives of self as understanding, enhancing, and belonging. However, many researchers have investigated more specific understandings of the self in relat...
In this essay we will focus on the claim that it is in fact, only the psychological characteristics of a person that are essential to personal identity over time. These characteristics include memory, beliefs, intentions and personality. It might also be the case that persons require some kind of body, or at least a physical means of sustaining thought, but it is the thought, not the physical basis of it, which matters. This stance, known as 'Psychological Reductionism', argues that all other features, be it physical or otherwise, are neither necessary nor sufficient for personal identity over time.
“a person does not ‘inhabit’ a static object body but is subjectively embodied in a fluid, emergent, and negotiated process of being. In this process, body, self, and social interaction are interrelated to such an extent that distinctions between them are not only permeable and shifting but also actively manipulated and configured”
The philosophical problem of personal identity pertains to questions that arise about ourselves by virtue of our being persons. There is no single question that will sum up the problem, but rather a multitude of questions that are loosely connected to each other. Within this essay, the four most prominent problems will be explained and addressed. One of the most familiar is the question of “Who am I?” This regards to what makes one a unique individual. Another familiar question is, “What is it to be a person?” This concerns the necessary criteria for something to count as a person as opposed to a non-person. There is also the problem of persistence, relating to personal identity over time. An example of this would be to glance upon an old photograph of a childhood class, point and say, “That's me.” The questions arises of, “What makes you that one instead of one of the others?” The last problem to be explained is the one of evidence. How do we find out who is who? There are two separate sources of evidence used often in philosophy: first-person memory, pertaining to one remembering an action or event and therefore being the person who did such, and physical continuity, where if the one who performed the action or witnessed the event looks like you, then it is you.
The concept of the term “self” is a topic that has been analyzed for many years by many people. The self is the whole part of the being that contains the person. This is a very broad topic and although the term is simple it holds a vast amount if information. One of these people is a man by the name of Sigmund Freud. In the paper “The Dissection of the Psychical Personality” written by Freud, uses the term “Psychical Personality,” to explain the human thought processes, thinking and feelings that make up concept of “the self ” part of the person’s personality (Freud, The Dissection of the Psychical Personality, 2004, p. 70). The concept of the structural model of the psyche contains the Id, Ego and Superego, as developed by Freud tries to
Calkins described the self as being “related in a distinctive fashion both to itself and its experiences and to environing objects, personal and impersonal” (Calkins,1930, p45). This characteristic of self psychology is aligned with other popular systems of psychology such as functionalism.
It is apparent that we are personified entities, but also, that we embrace “more” than just our bodies. “Human persons are physical, embodied beings and an important feature of God’s intended design for human life” (Cortez, 70). But, “human persons have an ‘inner’ dimension that is just as important as the ‘outer’ embodiment” (Cortez, 71). The “inner” element cannot be wholly explained by the “outer” embodiment, but it does give rise to inimitable facets of the human mental life such as human dignity and personal identity.
Throughout our lives we are shaped and molded by our friends and family. They have a lasting affect that can shape our mind and our self. Self is determined by the combination of selves that surround a person on a daily basis. From the childhood friends that we try so hard to hang on to as we journey farther and farther into the real world, to the hated boss and teachers that haunt our mind as we lie awake in our beds at nighttime, we are a product of all those selves. It is the self that determines the course of actions that are taken. Our Actions offer a window into our selves. The actions or reactions toward tragedies, celebrations, disappointments and the occasional lucky break all reflections of our self. Every one of us has a different self, because no one knows the exact same people as someone else. I believe our self contains our values and beliefs. All of our priorities, goals and aspirations we have for ourselves stem directly from the self. Our reactions are also a window into our self. In my opinion, self is a giant jigsaw-puzzle. It is filled with different pieces of others selves that we have interacted with throughout our life, that combine to make one big picture, our self. I have taken pieces of many people who I have encountered throughout my life. My three older brothers influenced major pieces of my self. The pieces of their selves have "fit" into my jigsaw-puzzle self, and complete my total picture. Without force, or a conscious effort by my brothers, the certain pieces of their selves have naturally configured to form my self.
Humans are designed to act with self-awareness, apply self-control, illustrate conscience, guiltiness, and make decisions based on some symbol of what they are, what they have been, as well as what they desire to be. Development of self has numerous descriptions including the development of physical or motor self to that of the mind. In the center of this all, three sociologists, including Charles Horton Cooley, George Herbert Mead, and Jean Piaget offer varying views on the development of self. The varying theories offered by these and other sociologists means that there is no universally accepted concept of development of self or how people come to aware of themselves. In fact, each individual has their own answer when it comes to answering
As I read through the Thinking Philosophically box in our text, the first question that comes up is, “What is a self?” It is wonderful to start off with an easy question, right? Well, Wikipedia defines the self as the subject of one’s own experience of phenomena: perceptions, emotions, thoughts ("Self," 2014). A standard dictionary definition is a person’s essential being that distinguishes them from others, especially considered as the object of introspection or reflexive action; and a person’s particular nature or personality; the qualities that make a person individual or unique ("Oxford dictionary," 2014). Don’t you feel more enlightened already?
The concept of the ‘self’ is regarded as an “entity which persists through time and change” (Grayling, pg. 540), in spite of other variations, albeit unnecessary ones, that occur in a person. Ones self is alleged to be the backbone of “thinking, perceiving, memory, and the like – the ultimate ‘bearers’ of our psychological properties.” (Grayling, pg. 540) The idea of ‘self’ is a topic of important philosophical debate, and one which Kant and Hume dexterously engage themselves in. This essay will begin by outlining Hume’s philosophical approach and his theory of self. Following that Kant’s theory of self will be looked at.
Truth of oneself makes it visible when faced with absurd events in life where all ethical issues fade away. One cannot always pinpoint to a specific trait or what the core essence they discover, but it is often described as “finding one’s self”. In religious context, the essential self would be regarded as soul. Whereas, for some there is no such concept as self that exists since they believe that humans are just animals caught in the mechanistic world. However, modern philosophy sheds a positive light and tries to prove the existence of a self. Modern philosophers, Descartes and Hume in particular, draw upon the notion of the transcendental self, thinking self, and the empirical self, self of public life. Hume’s bundle theory serves as a distinction between these two notions here and even when both of these conception in their distinction make valid points, neither of them is more accurate.
How does one create the “self”? How do we form as individuals? Whether a person is male or female, white or black, rich or poor, tall or short, pretty or ugly, fat or skinny, the most important factor is the development of the “self”. The self refers to the unique set of traits, behaviors, and attitudes that distinguishes one person from another (Newman 283). To distinguish between oneself from others, one must be able to recognize their unique traits and characteristics. One must be able to differentiate between one’s own physical appearance and another’s. There are many components such as gender, race, ethnicity, and social class, which shape and influence our values, beliefs, and impression of life. Understanding the difference between sex and gender allows one to grow into their own masculinity and femininity. Recognizing the history of one’s past in regard to their ethnic backgrounds and struggle will shape the development on one’s self. Having the luxury of money and power will affect the self and the way that one appreciates the value of the dollar or lack thereof. One of the most important factors may be one’s physical features which will eventually influence one’s self-confidence and affect the self as a whole. Once an individual has acknowledged the traits of their “self”, they’re in control of either maintaining their self, or changing their self to satisfy their standards.