The Self, Society, and Culture - Page 1 of 11

The Self, Society, and Culture

MODULE 2
OVERVIEW
Across time and history, the self has been debated, discussed, and fruitfully or otherwise
conceptualized by different thinkers in philosophy. Eventually, with the advent of the social
sciences, it became possible for new ways and paradigms to re-examine the true nature of the self.
People put a halt on speculative debates on the relationship between the body and soul, eventually
renamed body and the mind. Thinkers just eventually got tired of focusing on the long-standing
debate since sixth century BC between the relationships of these two components of the human
person. Thinkers just settled on the idea that there are two components of the human person and
whatever relationship these two have is less important than the fact that there is a self. The debate
shifted into another locus of discussion. Given the new approaches to the examination of the self
t come to the fore. One of the loci, if not the most important axis of analysis is the relationship
between the self and the external world. What is the relationship between external reality and the
self? In the famous Tarzan story, the little boy named Tarzan was left in the middle of the forest.
Growing up, he never had an interaction with any other human being but apes and other animals.
Tarzan grew up acting strangely like apes and unlike human persons. Tarzan became an animal,
in effect. His sole interaction with them made him just like one of them. Disappointedly, human
persons will not develop as human persons without intervention. This story, which was supposed
to be based on real life, challenges the long-standing notion of human persons being special and
being a particular kind of being in the spectrum of living entities. After all, our selves are not
special because of the soul infused into us. We may be gifted with intellect and the capacity to
rationalize things but at the end of the day, our growth and development and consequentially, our
selves are truly products of our interaction with external reality.
How much of you are essential? How much of who you are now a product of your
society, community, and family? Has your choice of school affected yourself now? Had you been
born into a different family and schooled in a different college, how much of who you are now
would change?

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• explain the relationship between and among the self, society, and culture;
• describe and discuss the different ways by which society and culture shape the self;
• compare and contrast how the self can be influenced by the different institutions in the
society; and
• examine one’s self against the different views of self that were discussed in the class.

OSMEÑA COLLEGES College of Teacher Education

Aspire…Achieve…Advance!
 The Self, Society, and Culture - Page 2 of 11

LEARNING EXPERIENCES & SELF-ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES (SAA)

ACTIVITY
Paste a picture of you when you were in elementary, in high school, and now that you are in
college. Below the picture, list down your salient characteristics that you remember.

My Elementary Self My High School Self My College Self

ANALYSIS
After having examined your “self” in its different stages, fill out the table below:
Similarities in all stages of my Differences in my “self” across Possible reasons for the
“self” the three stages of my life differences in me

ABSTRACTION
What is the Self?
The self, in contemporary literature and even common sense, is commonly defined by the
following characteristics: “separate, self-contained, independent, consistent, unitary, and private”
(Stevens 1996). By separate, it is meant that the self is distinct from other selves. The self is always
unique and has its own identity. One cannot be another person. Even twins are distinct from each other.
Second, self is also self-contained and independent because in itself it can exist. Its distinctness, allows it
to be self-contained with its own thoughts, characteristics, and volition. It does not require any other self
for it to exist. It is consistent because it has a personality that is enduring and therefore can be expected to
persist for quite some time. Its consistency allows it to be studied, described, and measure. Consistency
also means that a particular self’s traits, characteristics, tendencies, and potentialities are more less the
same. Self is unitary in that it is the center of all experiences and thoughts that run through a certain
person. It is like the chief command post in an individual where all processes, emotions, and thoughts
converge. Finally, the self is private. Each person sorts out information, feelings and emotions, and
thought processes within the self. This whole process is never accessible to anyone but the self.
This last characteristic of the self being private suggests that the self is isolated from the external
world. It lives within its own world. However, we also see that this potential clash between the self and
the external reality is the reason for the self to have a clear understanding of what it might be, what it can
be, and what it will be. From this perspective then, one can see that the self is always at the mercy of
external circumstances that bump and collide with it. It is ever-changing and dynamic, allowing external
influences to take part in its shaping. The concern then of this lesson is in understanding the vibrant
relationship between the self and external reality. This perspective is known as the social constructionist
perspective. “Social constructionists argue for a merged view of ‘the person’ and ‘their social context’
where the boundaries of one cannot easily be separated from the boundaries of the other” (Stevens 1996).

OSMEÑA COLLEGES College of Teacher Education

Aspire…Achieve…Advance!
 The Self, Society, and Culture - Page 3 of 11

Social constructivists argue that the self should not be seen as a static entity that stays constant
through and through. Rather, the self has to be seen as something that is in unceasing flux, in a constant
struggle with external reality and is malleable in its dealings with society. The self is always in
participation with social life and its identity subjected to influences here and there. Having these
perspectives considered should draw one into concluding that the self is truly multifaceted.
Consider a boy named Jon. Jon is a math professor at a Catholic university for more than a
decade now. Jon has a beautiful wife whom he met in college, Joan. Joan was Jon’s first and last
girlfriend. Apart from being a husband, Jon is also blessed with two doting kids, a son and a daughter. He
also sometimes serves in the church too as a lector and a commentator. As a man of different roles, one
can expect Jon to change and adjust his behaviors, ways, and even language depending on his social
situation. When Jon is in the university, he conducts himself in a matter that befits his title as a professor.
As a husband, Jon can be intimate and touchy. Joan considers him sweet, something that his students will
never conceive him to be. His kids fear him. As a father, Jon can be stern. As a lector and commentator,
on the other hand, his church mates knew him as a guy who is clam, all-smiles, and always ready to lend a
helping hand to anyone in need. This short story is not new to most of us. We ourselves play different
roles, act in different ways depending on our circumstances. Are we being hypocritical in doing so? Are
we even conscious of our shifting selves? According to what we have so far, this is not only normal but is
also acceptable and expected. The self is capable of morphing and fitting itself into any circumstances it
finds itself in.

The Self and Culture

Remaining the same person and turning chameleon by adapting to one’s context seems
paradoxical. However, the French Anthropologist Marcel Mauss has an explanation for this phenomenon.
According to Mauss, every self has two faces: personne and moi. Moi refers to a person’s sense of who he
is, his body, and his basic identity, his biological givenness. Moi is a person’s basic identity. Personne, on
the other hand, is composed of the social concepts of what it means to be who he is. Personne has much
to do with what it means to live in a particular institution, a particular family, a particular religion, a
particular nationality, and how to behave given expectations and influences from others.
In the story above, Jon might have a moi but certainly, he has to shift personne from the time to
time to adapt to his social situation. He knows who he is and more or less, he is confident that he has a
unified, coherent self. However, at some point, he has to sport his stern professional look. Another day, he
has to be the doting but strict father that he is. Inside his bedroom, he can play goofy with his wife, Joan.
In all this time and more, Jon retains who he is, his being Jon-his moi-that part of him that is stable and
static all throughout.
This dynamics and capacity for different personne can be illustrated better cross-culturally. An
overseas Filipino worker (OFW) adjusting to life in another country is a very good case study. In the
Philippines, many people unabashedly violate jaywalking rules. A common Filipino treats toad, even
national ones, as basically his and so he just merely crosses whenever and wherever. When the same
Filipino visits another country with strict traffic rules, say Singapore, you will notice how suddenly law-
abiding the said Filipino becomes. A lot of Filipinos has anecdotally confirmed this observation.
The same malleability can be seen in how some men easily transform into sweet, docile guys
when trying to woe and court a particular woman and suddenly just change rapidly after hearing a sweet
“yes”. This cannot be considered a conscious change on the part of the guy, or on the part of the law-
abiding Filipino in the first example. The self simply morphed according to the circumstances and
contexts.
In the Philippines, Filipinos tend to consider their territory as a part of who they are. This
includes considering their immediate surrounding as a part of them, thus the perennial “tapat ko, linis ko.”
Filipinos most probably do not consider national roads as something external to who they are. It is a part

OSMEÑA COLLEGES College of Teacher Education

Aspire…Achieve…Advance!
 The Self, Society, and Culture - Page 4 of 11

of them and they are a part of it, thus crossing the road whenever and wherever becomes a no-brainer. In
another country, however, the Filipino recognizes that he is in a foreign territory where nothing
technically belongs to him. He has to follow the rules or else he will be apprehended.
Language is another interesting aspect of this social constructivism. The Filipino language is
incredibly interesting to talk about. The way by which we articulate our love is denoted by the phrase,
“mahal kita.” This, of course, is the Filipino translation of “I love you.” The Filipino brand of this
articulation of love, unlike in English, does not specify the subject and the object of love; there is no
specification of who loves and who is loved. There is simply a word for love, mahal, and the pronoun
kita, which is a second person pronoun that refers to the speaker and the one being talked to. In the
Filipino language, unlike in English, there is no distinction between the lover and the beloved. They are
one.
Interesting too is the word mahal. In Filipino, the word can mean both “love” and “expensive”. In
our language, love is intimately bound with value, with being expensive, being precious. Something
expensive is valuable. Someone whom we love is valuable to us. The Sanskrit origin of the word love is
“lubh”, which means desire. Technically, love is a desire. The Filipino word for it has another intonation
part from mere desire, valuable.
Another interesting facet of our language is its being gender-neutral. In English, Spanish, and
other languages, the distinction is clear between a third person male and third person female pronoun. He
and she; el and ella. In Filipino, it is plain, “siya”. There is no specification of gender. Our language does
not specify between male and female. We both call it “siya”.
In these varied examples, we have seen how language has something to do with culture. It is a
salient part of culture and ultimately, has a tremendous effect in our crafting of the self. This might also
be one of the reasons why cultural divide spells out differences in how one regards oneself. In one
research, it was found that North Americans are more likely to attribute being unique to themselves and
claim that they are better than most people in doing what they love doing. Japanese people, on the other
hand, have been seen to display a degree of modesty. If one finds himself born and reared in a particular
culture, one definitely tries to fit in a particular mold. If a self is born into a particular society or culture,
the self will have to adjust according to its exposure.

The Self and the Development of the Social World

So how do people actively produce their social worlds? How do children growing up become
social beings? How can a boy turn out to just be like apes? How do twins coming out from the same
mother turn out to be terribly different when given up for adoption? More than his givenness (personality,
tendencies, and properties, among others), one is believed to be in active participation in the shaping of
the self. Most often, we think the human persons are just passive actors in the whole process of the
shaping of selves. That men and women are born with particularities that they can no longer change.
Recent studies, however, indicate that men and women in their growth and development engage actively
in the shaping of the self. The unending terrain of metamorphosis of the self is mediated by language.
“Language as both a publicly shared and privately utilized symbol system is the site where the individual
and the social make and remake each other” (Schwartz, White and Lutz 1993).

Mead and Vygotsky

For mead and Vygotsky, the way that human persons develop is with the use of language
acquisition and interaction with others. The way that we process information is normally a form of an
internal dialogue in our head. Those who deliberate about moral dilemmas undergo this internal dialog.
“Should I do this or that?” “But if I do this, it will be like this.” “Don’t I want the other option?” and so
cognitive and emotional development of a child is always a mimicry of how it is done in the social world,
in the external reality where he is in.

OSMEÑA COLLEGES College of Teacher Education

Aspire…Achieve…Advance!
 The Self, Society, and Culture - Page 5 of 11

Both Vygotsky and Mead treat the human mind as something that is made, constitute through
language as experienced in the external world and as encountered in dialogs with others. A young child
internalizes values, norms, practices, and social beliefs and more through exposure to these dialogs that
will eventually become part if his individual world. For Mead, this takes place as a child assumes the
“other” through language and role-play. A child conceptualizes his notion of “self” through this. Can you
notice how little children are found of playing role-play with their toys? How they make scripts and
dialogs for their toys as they play with them? According to Mead, it is through this that a child delineates
the “I” from the rest. Vgotsky, for his part, a child internalizes real-life dialogs that he has had with
others, with his family, his primary caregiver, or his playmates. They apply this to their mental and
practical problems along with the social and cultural infusions brought about by the said dialogs. Can you
notice how children eventually become what they watch? How children can easily adapt ways of cartoon
characters they are exposed to?

Self in Families
Apart from the anthropological and psychological basis for the relationship between the self and
the social world, the sociological likewise struggled to understand the real connection between the two
concepts. In doing so, sociologists focus on the different institutions and powers at play in the society.
Among these, the most prominent is the family.
While every child is born with certain givenness, disposition coming from his parents’ genes and
general condition of life, the impact of one’s family is still deemed as a given in understanding the self. The
kind of that we are born in, the resources to us (human, spiritual, and the kind of development will have
will certainly affect us as we go through life. As a matter of evolutionary fact, human persons are one of
those beings whose importance of family cannot be denied. Human beings are born virtually helpless and
the dependency period of a human baby to its parents for nurturing is relatively longer than most other
animals. Learning therefore is critical in our capacity to actualize our potential of becoming humans. In
trying to achieve the goal of becoming a fully realized human, a child enters a system of relationships, most
important of which is the family.
Human persons learn the ways of living and therefore their selfhood by being in a family.
It is what of a family initiates a person to become that serves as the basis for this person's progress.
Babies internalize ways and styles that they observe from their family. By imitating, for example,
the language of its primary agents of rearing its family, babies learn the language. The same is
true for ways of behaving. Notice how kids reared in a respectful environment becomes respectful
as well and the converse if raised in a converse family. Internalizing behavior may either be
conscious or unconscious. Table manners or ways speaking to elders are things that are possible
to teach and therefore, are consciously learned by kids. Some behaviors and attitudes, on the
other hand, may be indirectly taught through rewards and punishments. Others, such as sexual
behavior or how to confront emotions, are learned through subtle means, like the tone of the
voice or intonation of the models. It is then clear at this point that those who develop and
eventually grow to become adult who still did not learn simple matters like basic manners of
conduct failed in internalizing due to parental or familial failure to initiate them into the world.
Without a family, biologically and sociologically, a person may not even survive or
become a human person. Go back to the Tarzan example. In more ways than one, the survival of
Tarzan in the midst of the forest is already a miracle. His being a fully human person with a sense
of selfhood is a different story though. The usual teleserye plot of kids getting swapped in the
hospital and getting reared by a different family gives an obvious manifestation of the point being
made in section. One is who he is because of his family for the most part.

OSMEÑA COLLEGES College of Teacher Education

Aspire…Achieve…Advance!
 The Self, Society, and Culture - Page 6 of 11

Gender and the Self

Another important aspect of the self is gender. Gender is one of those of the self that is
subject to alteration, change, and development. We have seen the past years how people fought hard
for the right to express, validate, and assert their gender expression. Many conservatives may frown
upon this and insist on biological. However, from the point-of-view of the social sciences and the
self, it is important to give one the leeway to find, express, and live his identity. This forms part of
selfhood that one cannot just dismiss. One maneuvers into the society and identifies himself as who
he is by also taking note of gender identities. A wonderful anecdote about Leo Tolstoy's wife that
can solidify this point is narrated below:
Sonia Tolstoy, the wife of the famous Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy, wrote when she
Was twenty-one, "I am nothing but a miserable crushed worm, whom no one wants, whom
no one loves, a useless creature with morning sickness, and a big belly, two rotten teeth,
and a bad temper, a battered sense of dignity, and a love which nobody wants and which
nearly drives me insane." A few years later she wrote, "It makes me laugh to read over this
diary. It's so full of contradictions, and one would think that I was such an unhappy woman.
Yet is there a happier woman than l?" (Tolstoy 1975)
This account illustrates that our gender partly determines how we see ourselves in the world.
Oftentimes, society forces a particular identity unto us depending on our sex and/or gender. In the
Philippines, husbands for the most part are expected to provide for the family. The eldest man in a
family is expected to head the family and hold it in. Slight modifications have been on the way due
to feminism and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) activism but for the most part,
patriarchy has remained to be at work.
Nancy Chodorow, a feminist, argues that because mothers take the role of taking care of
children, there is a tendency for girls to imitate the same and reproduce the same kind of mentality of
women as care providers in the family.
The way that little girls are given dolls instead of guns or any other toys or are encouraged to
play with makeshift kitchen also reinforces the notion of what roles they should take and the selves
they should develop. In boarding schools for girls, young women are encouraged to act like fine
ladies, are trained to behave in a fashion that befits their status as women in society.
Men on the other hand, in the periphery of their own family, are taught early on how to behave
like a man. This normally includes holding in one's emotion, being tough, fatalistic, not to worry about
danger, and admiration for hard physical labor. Masculinity is learned by integrating a young boy in a
society. In the Philippines, young boys had to undergo circumcision not just for the original, clinical
purpose of hygiene but also to assert their manliness in the society. Circumcision plays another social
role by initiating young boys into manhood.
The gendered self is then shaped within a particular context of time and space. The sense of self
that is being taught makes sure that an individual fit in a particular environment. This is dangerous and
detrimental in the goal of truly finding one's self, self-determination, and growth of the self. Gender
has to be personally discovered and asserted and not dictated by culture and the society.

APPLICATION
Answer the following questions cogently but honestly. Write your answers in the SAA
answer sheet provided.
1. How would you describe your self?
2. What are the influences of family in your development as an individual?
3. Think of a time when you felt you were your “true self”. What made you think you were truly
who you are during this time of your life?
4. Following the question above, can you provide a time when you felt you were not living your
“true self”? Why did you have to live a life like that? What did you do about it?
5. What social pressures help shape your self? Would you have wanted it otherwise?
6. What aspects of your self do you think may be changed or you would like to change?

OSMEÑA COLLEGES College of Teacher Education

Aspire…Achieve…Advance!
 The Self, Society, and Culture - Page 7 of 11

SELF-ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES (SAA) SHEET

ACTIVITY
My Elementary Self My High School Self My College Self

OSMEÑA COLLEGES College of Teacher Education

Aspire…Achieve…Advance!
 The Self, Society, and Culture - Page 8 of 11

ANALYSIS
After having examined your “self” in its different stages, fill out the table below:
Similarities in all stages of my Differences in my “self” across Possible reasons for the
“self” the three stages of my life differences in me

APPLICATION
1. ______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

2. ______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

3. ______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

OSMEÑA COLLEGES College of Teacher Education

Aspire…Achieve…Advance!
 The Self, Society, and Culture - Page 9 of 11

4. ______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

5. ______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

6. ______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

KEY POINTS

✓ The self is always unique and has its own identity. One cannot be another person.
✓ Every self has two faces: personne and moi.
✓ Moi refers to a person’s sense of who he is, his body, and his basic identity, his biological givenness.
Moi is a person’s basic identity.
✓ Personne is composed of the social concepts of what it means to be who he is.
✓ Personne has much to do with what it means to live in a particular institution, a particular family, a
particular religion, a particular nationality, and how to behave given expectations and influences from
others.

END OF MODULE ASSESSMENT

Now that you have finished the review of the various concepts outlined above, it is now time for an
assessment to see how far you have improved. On every module’s “End of Module Assessment” (this
part), write your answers on separate sheet/s provided. (See separate sheets for the questions.)

LOOKING AHEAD
Congratulations for making it till the end of this module! If you aced the assessments, I am happy for you.
If you have not reached your desired level of competence, just keep going! Remember that an expert was
once a beginner. The next topic will deal on the Self as Cognitive Construct. Happy learning!

OSMEÑA COLLEGES College of Teacher Education

Aspire…Achieve…Advance!
 The Self, Society, and Culture - Page 10 of 11

SELF AND MODULE EVALUATION

This part requires you to rate the quality of the module to help you continuously improve the development
of this learning module. This also asks you to rate your learning experience for each of the modules.
Rate the module using the following:
1- Strongly disagree
2- Disagree
3- Agree
4- Strongly agree

The learning module: 1 2 3 4

Please check appropriate column

was engaging
allowed for self-checking (SAAs)
developed in gradual, manageable steps
provided independent, self-paced learning
contained relevant information I needed

SELF-EVALUATION
Rate the extent of your learning in this module using the scale below. Check the column corresponding to
your rating in the space provided. Do not hesitate to contact me if you need further assistance.
4- I’m an expert. I understand and can teach a friend about it.
3-I’m a Practioner. I understand and can cite examples on the topics given.
2- I’m an apprentice. I understand if I get help or look at more examples.
1- I’m a novice. I do not understand the topic.

My learning: 1 2 3 4
I can now

Please check appropriate column

explain the relationship between and among the self, society, and
culture;
describe and discuss the different ways by which society and culture
shape the self;
compare and contrast how the self can be influenced by the different
institutions in the society; and
examine one’s self against the different views of self that were
discussed in the class.

OSMEÑA COLLEGES College of Teacher Education

Aspire…Achieve…Advance!
 The Self, Society, and Culture - Page 11 of 11

END OF MODULE ASSESSMENT (Answer Sheet)

sheeeSHeShShe
(Please do not forget to provide information on this part)
Name: _____________________________________________ Course& Year:_____________
Module Number and Title: ______________________________________________________
Contact number & email (if any):_______________________________
Date accomplished: ________________________
True or False. Write T if the statement is correct. Write F if the statement is incorrect. Write it
before the number.
1. Social constructivists argue that the self should not be seen as a static entity that stays constant through
and through.
2. Oftentimes, society forces a particular identity unto us depending on our sex and/or gender.
3. self is also self-contained and independent because in itself it can exist.
4. Personne, on the other hand, is composed of the social concepts of what it means to be who he is.
5. The gendered self is then shaped within a particular context of time and space.
6. The sense of self that is being taught makes sure that an individual fit in a particular environment.
7. Moi is a person’s basic identity.
8. Human beings are born virtually helpless and the dependency period of a human baby to its parents for
nurturing is relatively longer than most other animals.
9. Learning therefore is critical in our capacity to actualize our potential of becoming humans.
10. Gender has to be personally discovered and asserted and not dictated by culture and the society.

REFERENCES
Beilharz, Peter, and Trevor Hogan. 2002. Social Self, Global Culture:An Introduction to
Sociological Ideas. New York: Oxford University Press •
Chaffee, John. 2015. The Philosopher's Way: Thinking Critically About Pr0f0und Ideas. 5th Ed.
Boston: Pearson.
David, Randolph. 2002. Nation, Self, and Citizenship: An Invitation to Philippine
Sociology. Dept. of Sociology, College of Social ScienceS and Philosophy, University of the
Philippines,
Ganeri, Jonardon. 2012. The Self: Naturalism, Consciousness, and the First_ Person Stance. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Marsella, Anthony J., George A. De Vos, and Francis L. K. Hsu. 1985. Culture and Self: Asian
and Western Perspectives. Tavistock Publications.
Mead, George Herbert. 1934. Mind, Self, and Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Plato. 2012. Six Great Dialogues: Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Phaedrus, Symposium, The Republic.
Massachusetts: Courier Corporation.
Rappe, Sara L. 1995. "Socrates and Self-Knowledge." Apeiron: A Journal for Ancient Philosophy
and Science 28.

OSMEÑA COLLEGES College of Teacher Education

Aspire…Achieve…Advance!