Modern Theory Of Self

[steve_bank]

A modem view on self.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology_of_self

"The psychology of self is the study of either the cognitive, conative or affective representation of one's identity or the subject of experience. The earliest formulation of the self in modern psychology derived from the distinction between the self as I, the subjective knower, and the self as Me, the object that is known.[1]

Current views of the self in psychology position the self as playing an integral part in human motivation, cognition, affect, and social identity.[2] It may be the case that we can now usefully attempt to ground experience of self in a neural process with cognitive consequences, which will give us insight into the elements of which the complex multiply situated selves of modern identity are composed.

The self has many facets that help make up integral parts of it, such as self-awareness, self-esteem, self-knowledge, and self-perception. All parts of the self enable people to alter, change, add, and modify aspects of themselves in order to gain social acceptance in society. "Probably, the best account of the origins of selfhood is that the self comes into being at the interface between the inner biological processes of the human body and the sociocultural network to which the person belongs"

It would appear self in psychology is not a totality or object. The tern refers to multiple aspects of what we are.



http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/...28340-0093.xml

"The “self” is surely one of the most heavily researched areas in social and personality psychology, even if the debate continues as to whether a self truly exists. Whatever stance one adopts regarding the self’s ontological status, there is little doubt that the many phenomena of which the self is a predicate—self-knowledge, self-awareness, self-esteem, self-enhancement, self-regulation, self-deception, self-presentation—to name just a few, are indispensable research areas. Furthermore, the study of the self extends far beyond the topics that explicitly reference the term"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontology

"Ontology (introduced in 1606) is the philosophical study of the nature of being, becoming, existence, or reality, as well as the basic categories of being and their relations.[1] Traditionally listed as a part of the major branch of philosophy known as metaphysics, ontology often deals with questions concerning what entities exist or may be said to exist and how such entities may be grouped, related within a hierarchy, and subdivided according to similarities and differences. A very simple definition of ontology is that it is the examination of what is meant by 'being'.?

Psychology appears to have taken over ontology.


Does self exist?

 

[Speakpigeon]

Obviously, we're composite. There is the so-called "self", which has to be important. But there are also things like the unconscious mind and the conscious mind. There is the rational mind and something like the intuitive "personality" or "character" that contributes to what you appear to be. What is the specific role of consciousness for example? The role of the self seems more obvious. Yes, the self is made of a multiplicity of very different things, but I wouldn't say that the self includes "the multiple aspects of what we are". Rather, it seems to be a sort of DIY functional construct, like a character in a play, that serves a functional role, probably mostly in relation to our social life I would say. I don't think there's anything we're aware of that would include "the multiple aspects of what we are". There would be no use for that, I guess. We don't need to be anybody. We just need to pretend we are and then not even all the time. That's more economical like that and saving energy is the key to explain our psychology.
EB

 

[ruby sparks]

For quite a few years now, I've generally been seeing and thinking of self as a 'user illusion'. We experience a set of (by and large) ongoing sensations which appear to be connected up (and to some extent are) and we call it/them a self. If it can be said to exist (and that might depend on what is meant by 'exist') then it's not, I don't think, what many people commonly think or thought it is/was.

 

[Speakpigeon]

A modem view on self.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology_of_self

"The psychology of self is the study of either the cognitive, conative or affective representation of one's identity or the subject of experience. The earliest formulation of the self in modern psychology derived from the distinction between the self as I, the subjective knower, and the self as Me, the object that is known.[1]

That's rather idiotic. Either there's just one self of it's not a self at all.

Current views of the self in psychology position the self as playing an integral part in human motivation, cognition, affect, and social identity.[2] It may be the case that we can now usefully attempt to ground experience of self in a neural process with cognitive consequences, which will give us insight into the elements of which the complex multiply situated selves of modern identity are composed.

The main thing about the self is that it is what the "subjective knower" knows of the "person", i.e. what is subjectively known of "the object that is known". This is crucial since it may vary one minute to the next and evolve over time for a mix of all sorts of reasons.

As an example, what the self is on the moment depends on what the subject, i.e. the "subjective knower", knows in terms of memories, i.e. what memories the subject happens to recall on the moment. Different memories make for a different self. A recalled memory tells us who we are but different memories will tell us different things.

The self is also dependent on what we feel on the moment. Feeling tired and feeling gung-ho will make us a different person.

Our perceptions also tell us who we are. If you're in Toronto your senses will tell you you're the kind of person that can be in Toronto.

And so on.

So, the idea that we have one self that would persist throughout our life should taken with a pinch of salt.

The self has many facets that help make up integral parts of it, such as self-awareness, self-esteem, self-knowledge, and self-perception. All parts of the self enable people to alter, change, add, and modify aspects of themselves in order to gain social acceptance in society. "Probably, the best account of the origins of selfhood is that the self comes into being at the interface between the inner biological processes of the human body and the sociocultural network to which the person belongs"

That's true but that won't help you analyse your own self precisely because it's true of all of us and we clearly don't all have the same selves.

It would appear self in psychology is not a totality or object. The tern refers to multiple aspects of what we are.

Read again what's said here. Psychology assumes a self as a constitutive object. According to this, the subject, the "subjective knower" only knows one of the "many facets" at a time. So the question is whether psychology is right in assuming one constitutive self. I think the only way to accept this as true would be to equate self with the entire organic brain and body since that's what would eventually determine whatever the "subjective knower" could possibly know. Yet, even that is dubious since both body and the brain can suffer accident and certainly will undergo evolution according to accidents in life, whether you eat pop-corn or bananas.

So, the self is a convenient fiction. You could see it as whatever you think best describe who you are now, assuming you're stable enough that this fiction has predictive power as to what you will do next, tomorrrow, in ten years. Married people will object to the idea that their partner has the same self as when they married.

"Ontology (introduced in 1606) is the philosophical study of the nature of being, becoming, existence, or reality, as well as the basic categories of being and their relations.[1] Traditionally listed as a part of the major branch of philosophy known as metaphysics, ontology often deals with questions concerning what entities exist or may be said to exist and how such entities may be grouped, related within a hierarchy, and subdivided according to similarities and differences. A very simple definition of ontology is that it is the examination of what is meant by 'being'.?

Psychology appears to have taken over ontology.

Does self exist?

I doubt it very much my-self.
EB

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

A “self” is just a constructed analogue of the individual that the brain animates as part of its mapping/problem solving capacity. It just doesn’t let the self know this in order to allow it an illusion of autonomy for better strategic planning. As we evolved out of an hourly struggle for survival to our current status (80-90 year lifespan expectation), the analogue “self” became repurposed for social interaction and thereby took over a primary position, such that there is barely any latency. The animation is the animator and vice versa. It’s the ghost in our machine.