Discussion on the Determination of Self
In every day life we experience causality and order, which would
suggest that everything is ordered and caused by something outside
ourselves. However it is hard to believe that we have no free choices
when presented with a decision to be made, surely if we were unable to
make choices concerning the direction and outcome of his own life, is
a slave. However many philosophers and thinkers have pondered this
over the years, and some believe that when we believe we are presented
with choices we are being deceived, and as B.F Skinner said, ‘human
beings.. are not free, because all men are really puppets or robots.
Man is a meat machine.’ He argues that as a puppet, we have no will of
our own: our movements are entirely under the control of the
puppet-master who pulls the puppet – strings. This presents a problem
for us, because even if we were to hold that man has no real freedom
and all his actions are controlled, we need to know who it is that is
‘pulling the strings’. It has been supposed that he is God, who is
omnipotent and omniscient. These capabilities surely allow him to
control the destinies of mankind. This concept is known as theological
determinism. Both St Augustine and Calvin had a clear belief in
theological determinism. According to Calvin, God has already decided
who is going to go to Heaven and who is going to Hell. God’s power is
magnified at the cost of man’s freedom. It seems to me that by
accepting this theory of determinism, one must reject the idea of
moral responsibility. We must choose whether we believe that at the
point of decision making a person can distinguish and thu...
... middle of paper ...
...argue that the order and patterning we perceive
in the world is purely circumstantial, although it cannot be denied it
also does not necessarily lead to a strict determinism, to do this
would not be logical. As Kant has pointed out, ‘freedom’ is not
strictly the oppsite of ‘determinism’, which is completely
constrained, forced or compelled. The opposite of this would surely be
better described as ;chance’, where events would be completely
unpredictable and random. Free will by it’s definition cannot be fully
determined, yet surely it is an impossibility that we, along with our
actions, destinies, and characters are pure chance. Kant maintained
that an act of free- will cannot be fully determined nor can it be
pure chance, but somehow it is both. He said the only explanation is
to ‘comprehend the incomprehensibility.’
is not plugged into his Experience Machine and he chooses his fate to be aware and a
Matosic et al. (2015) conducted a study to examine the relationship between personality antecedents and coach interpersonal styles from a self-determination theory perspective. Often, coaches play an extremely influential role in the lives of the athletes that they are responsible for. Motosic et al. stated that coaches exert a major impact on athletes’ “well-being,” “performance,” and “motivation” (p. 1). The researchers claimed that previous research had acknowledged the influential role of coaches by studying outcomes of coach interpersonal relations, however, previous studies had failed to examine any possible antecedents associated with coach interpersonal styles. Considering this, Matosic et al. attempted to address this gap in the research literature by formulating a study that examined the relationship between a personality antecedent and coach interpersonal styles. Self-Determination Theory provided an
Most recent theories on motivation conclude that people will start certain behaviors under the belief that this behavior will accomplish desired goals or outcomes. With Lewin (1936) and Tolman (1932) leading the charge, the goal-oriented behavior led researchers to want to understand more on the psychological value people attribute to goals, people’s expectations on reaching these goals, and the structures which keep people striving to achieve these goals. After some recent findings on goal-oriented behavior, researchers were able to differentiate different types of goals, whereas before researchers assumed that goals that were valued the same, with the same expectations of achievement, would need the same amount
Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi author had explained in the ‘What is the self’ about when the human born until death, there are always trying to do better represent their ideal images and gets more and more respects of the own self in the world. At the beginning, the author had provided an example of the ocean have tremendous of water, but water produces from many hydrogen and oxygen, so it is the same thing the for human’s self-having numerous goals, thoughts or ideas that organized in consciousness, sense that reification of the brain. The author has defined ‘self is the reification of related an abstract idea which are creating the emotions, thoughts, feelings and awareness all of these records in the human’s brain, but all ideas related to an
This essay will consider the terms ‘the self-actualising tendency’ and ‘the fully functioning person,’ and how they tie in with Roger’s six necessary and sufficient conditions for constructive personality change (Rogers, 1957). The essay will incorporate theoretical published evidence to support my understanding of the essay question. A summation will be given at the end to conclude the essay.
Wood, W. M., Karvonen, M., Test, D. W., Browder, D., & Algozzine, B. (2004). Promoting
God is Omnipotent: He is all powerful. The lord can do absolutely anything he want, as long as it i...
Human beings are the people of this world. We are a part of God’s creation. He put us on this world and gave us life. God created us Human beings so we can be a part of this world, and we can have purpose in life. We were put in this world to be able to make choices and live how we want, while also living a moral life. After we die we either go to Heaven or Hell based on how we lived our lives. “Good people go to heaven as a deserved reward for a virtuous life ...” (Talbott, 2013). If one lived a good life and believed in God, then one can go to Heaven. If one lived a bad life by doing unforgettable things and doesn’t ask for God’s forgiveness, then one will go to Hell. God is good so he will not punish everyone who is bad, but hey will have to make good again in God’s eyes by strengthening there faith.
John F. Crosby in his work, The Selfhood of the Human Person, attempts to provide an advancement in the understanding of the human person. Persons are conscious beings who think and know they are thinking. He claims persons are not merely replaceable objects, but characters who cannot be substituted or owned. Crosby describes personhood as standing in yourself, being an end to yourself, and being anchored in yourself. A feature of personhood is that persons can be conscious of everything in the universe while the universe acts on them. Additionally, personhood means persons exist for their own sake and not for the sake of others. However, persons who are centered in themselves often give of themselves. Persons are incommunicable unlike any other piece of creation. A quality of the incommunicability of persons is action. Aquinas explains person are not acted on but act through themselves.
Self-determination theory is one that assumes all humans are born with an innate drive to better oneself, basically becoming self-actualized, which is referred to as full-functioning. In self-determination theory, or SDT, full-functioning is characterized as “being aware and mindful, acting autonomously…, and pursuing and attaining intrinsic life goals” (Deci, Ryan, and, Guay 2013). SDT describes three autonomous behaviors: intrinsically motivated, extrinsically motivated, and emotionally motivated. SDT also describes three psychological basic needs of every human: the needs for competency, autonomy, and relatedness. The need for competency causes people to try tasks slightly tougher than they can currently manage, in order to improve upon
I guess the easiest thing that we have learned since we arrive in this world is interacting with other people. As we grow and develop, we get to see and interact with different types of people and we try to understand them through social psychology. We understand why people act the way they do and why some judge others and social psychology made us understand why we tend to decide with others and g with their judgment rather than have our own minds about the matter. Social psychology introduces as to our self and to our group or the people we belong with.
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 Self-Concept is a complicated process of gaining self-awareness. It consists of mental images an individual has of oneself: physical appearance, health, accomplishments, skills, social talents, roles, intellectual traits, and emotional states and more –all make up our self-concept.
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.