SAINT ESTANISLAO KOSTKA COLLEGE,

INC.
Sagario Street, Poblacion, Manukan, Zamboanga del Norte, 7110 Philippines

COURSE MODULES
in

Gen Ed 1
Understanding the Self

First Semester, S.Y. 2020-2021

Ann Catherine R. Santander

Instructor
Course Title: Understanding the Self Course Code: Gen Ed 1

Google Classroom: Class Code: bdwvvmj

https://classroom.google.com/c/MTMwMjAxNzY3ODU1?
cjc=bdwvvmj

Course Description:

The course deals with the nature of identity, as well as the factors and forces that affect the development and
maintenance of personal identity.

The directive to Know Oneself has inspired countless and varied ways to comply. Among the questions that
everyone has had to grapple with at one time or other is “Who Am I?” at now other question asked more
urgently than in adolescence traditionally believed to be a time of vulnerability and great possibilities. Issues of
self and identity are among the most critical for the young.

The course is intended to facilitate the exploration of the issues and concerns regarding self and identity to
arrive at a better understanding of one’s self. it strives to meet this goal by stressing the integration of the
personal with the academic contextualizing matters discussed in the classroom and in the everyday experiences
of students making for better learning, generating a new appreciation for the learning process, and developing a
more critical and reflective attitude while enabling them to manage and improve their selves to attain a better
quality of life.

The course is divided into three major parts: The first part seeks to understand the construct of the self from
various disciplinal perspectives: philosophy, sociology, anthropology, and psychology as well as the more as
the more traditional division between the East and West-each seeking to provide answers to the difficult but
essential questions of “What is the self?” And raising, among others, the questions: “is there even such a
construct as the self?”

The second part explores some of the various aspects that make up the self, such as the biological and material
up to and including the more recent Digital Self. The third and final part identifies three areas of concern for
young students: learning, goal, setting, and managing stress. It also provides for the more practical application
of the concepts discussed in this course and enables them the hands-on experience of developing self-help plans
for self-regulated learning, goal setting and self-care.

Pre- Requisite: NONE

Course Credit: 3 units; 54 hours

 UNDERSTANDING THE SELF
THE SELF FROM VARIOUS PERSPECTIVE

PRELIM COVERAGE

Part I. Defining the Self: Personal and Developmental Perspectives on Self and Identity

WEEK 1 Course introduction, citing of sources, requirements needed, schedule of classes, quizzes,
grading system, and modality/method.

Lesson 1. The Self from Various Philosophical Perspective

Lesson Objectives:

At the end of this lesson, the student will be:

1. explain why it is essential to understand the self;

2. describe and discuss the different notions of the self from the points of view of various philosophers
across time and space;
3. compare and contrast how the self has been represented in different philosophical schools; and
4. examine one’s self against the different views of self that were discussed in class.

INTRODUCTION

Before we even had to be in any formal institution of learning, among the many things that we were first
taught as kids is to articulate and write down our names. Growing up, we were told to refer back to this name
when talking about ourselves. Our parents painstakingly thought about our names. Should we be named after
famous celebrity? A respected politician or historical personality? Or even a saint? Were you named after one?
Our names represent us, who we are. It has not been a custom to just randomly pick a combination of letters
and number (or even punctuation marks) like zhjk756!! To denote our being. Human beings attach names that
are meaningful to birthed progenies because names are supposed to designate us in the world. Thus, some
people get baptized with names such as “precious,” “beauty,” or “lovely”. Likewise, when our parents call our
names, we were taught to respond to them because our names represent who we are. As a student in school, we
are told to always write our names on our papers, projects, or any output for that matter. Our names signify us.
Death cannot even stop this bond between the person and her name. Names are inscribed even into one’s
gravestone.

A name, no matter how intimately bound it is with the bearer, however, is not the person. It is only a
signifier. A person who was named after a saint most probably will not become an actual saint. He may not
even turn out to be saintly! The self is thought to be something else than the name. The self is something that a
person perennially molds, shapes, and develops. The self is not a static thing that one is simply born with like a
mole on one’s face or is just assigned by one’s parents just like a name. Everyone is tasked to discover one’s
self. Have you truly discovered yours?

ACTIVITY

Do you truly know yourself?

Answer the following questions about your “self” as fully and precisely as you can.
 1. How would you characterize your “self”?

2. What makes you stand out from the rest? What makes your “self”

3. How has your “self” transformed itself?

4. How is your “self” connected to your body?

5. How is your “self” connected to your body?

6. What will happen to your “self” after you die?

ANALYSIS

Were you able to answer the questions above with ease? Why? Which questions did you find easiest to
answer? Which ones are difficult? Why?

Questions Easy or difficult to answer? Why?

Can one truly know the self? Do you want to know about self?

ABSTRACTION

The history of philosophy is replete with men and women who inquired into the fundamental nature of
the self. Along with the question of the primary substratum that defines the multiplicity of things in the world,
the inquiry on the self has preoccupied the earliest thinkers in the history of philosophy: The Greeks. It was the
Greeks who seriously questioned myths and moved away from them in attempting to understand reality and
respond to perennial questions of curiosity, including the question of self. The different perspectives and views
on the self can be best seen and understood then by revisiting its prime movers and identify the most important
conjectures made by philosophers from the ancient times to the contemporary period.
Socrates and Plato

Prior to Socrates, the Greek thinkers, sometimes collectively called the Pre-
Socratics to denote that some of them preceded Socrates while others existed
around Socrates’ time as well, preoccupied themselves with the question of the
primary substratum, arche’, that explains the multiplicity of things in the world.
These men like Thales, Pythagoras, Parmenides, Heraclitus and Empedocles, to
name a few, were concerned with explaining the changes that they observed
around them. Tired of simply conceding to mythological accounts propounded by
poet-theologians like Homer and Hesoid, these men endeavored to finally locate
an explanation about the nature of change, the seeming permanence despite
change, and the unity of the world amidst its diversity.
Socrates
After a series of thinkers from all across the ancient Greek world who were disturbed by the same issue, a
man came out to question something else. This man is Socrates. Unlike the Pre-Socratics, Socrates was more
concerned with another subject, the problem of the self. He is the first philosopher who ever engaged in a
systematic questioning about the self. He is the first philosopher who ever engaged in a systematic questioning
about the self. To Socrates, and this has become his life-long mission, the true task of the philosopher is to
know oneself.

Socrates affirms, claimed by Plato in his dialogues that the

unexamined life is not worth living. During his trial for allegedly
corrupting the minds of the youth and for impiety. Socrates declared
without regret that his being indicted was brought about by his going
around Athens engaging men, young and old, to question their
presuppositions about themselves and about the world, particularly about
who they are (Plato 2012). Socrates took it upon himself to serve as a
“gadfly” that disturbs Athenian men from their slumber and shakes them
off in order to reach the truth and wisdom. Most men, in his reckoning,
were really not fully aware of who they were and the virtues that they were
supposed to attain in order to preserve their souls for the afterlife. Socrates
Plato thought that this is the worst that can happen to anyone. To live but die
Plato
inside.

For Socrates, every man is composed of body and soul. This means that every human person is dualistic,
that is, he is composed of two important aspects of his personhood. For Socrates, this means all individuals
have an imperfect, impermanent aspect, the body, while maintaining that there is also a soul that is perfect and
permanent.

Plato, Socrates’ students basically took off from his master and supported the idea that man is a dual
nature of body and soul. In addition to what Socrates earlier espoused, Plato added that there are parts or three
components to the soul: the rational soul, the spirited soul, and the appetitive soul. In his magnum opus, The
Republic (Plato 2000), Plato emphasizes that justice in the human person can only
be attained if the three parts of the soul are working harmoniously with one
another. The rational soul forged by reason and intellect has to govern the affairs
of the human person; the spirited part, which is in charge of emotions, should be
kept at bay; and the appetitive soul in charge of base desires, like eating, drinking,
sleeping, and having sexual intercourse, is controlled as well. When this ideal
state is attained, the human person’s soul becomes just and virtuous.

Augustine and Thomas Aquinas

Augustine's view of the human person reflects the entire spirit of the medieval
world when it comes to man. Following the ancient view of Plato and infusing it with the newfound doctrine of
Christianity, Augustine agreed that man is of a bifurcated nature. There is an aspect of man, which dwells in the
world that is imperfect and continuously yearns to be with the divine while the other is capable of reaching
immortality.

The body is bound to die on earth and the soul is to anticipate living eternally in a realm of spiritual
bliss in communion with God. This is because the body can only thrive in the imperfect, physical reality that is
the world, whereas Augustine
the soul can also stay after death in an eternal
realm with the all transcendent God. The goal of every human
person is to attain this communion and bliss with the Divine by
living his life on earth in virtue.

Thomas Aquinas the most eminent 13th century scholar

and stalwart of the medieval philosophy, appended something to
this Christian view. Adopting some ideas from Aristotle, Aquinas
said that, indeed, man is composed of two parts: matter and form.
Matter, or hyle in Greek, refers to the common stuff that makes up
everything in the universe. Man's body is part of this matter. On the other hand, form, or morphe in Greek,
refers to the essence of a substance or thing. It is what makes it what it is. In the case • f the human person, the
body of the human person is something that he shares even with animals. The cells in a man's body is moreThomas or Aqu
less akin t the cells of any other living, organic being in the world. However, what makes a human person a
human person and not a dog or tiger is his soul, his essence. To Aquinas, just as for Aristotle, the soul is what
animates the body, it is what makes us humans.

Descartes
Rene Descartes, Father of Modern Philosophy, conceived that the human person
as having a body and a mind. In his famous treatise, The Meditations of First
Philosophy, Descartes claims that there is so much that we should doubt. in fact,
he says that much of what we think and believe, because they are not infallible,
may turn out to be false. One should only believe that which can pass the test of
doubt (Descartes 2008). If scam thing is so clear and lucid as not to be even
doubted, then that is the only time when one should actually buy a proposition. In
the end, Descartes thought that the only thing that one cannot doubt is the
existence of the self. For even if one doubts oneself, that only proves that there is
a doubting self, a thing that thinks and therefore, that cannot be doubted. Thus, his
famous cogito ergo sum or I think therefore, I am. The fact that one thinks should lead one to conclude without
a trace of doubt that he exists. The self then for Descartes is also a combination of two distinct entities: the
cogito or the thing that thinks, which is the mind and the extenza or extension of the mind, which is the body. In
Descartes' view, the body is nothing else but a machine that is attached to the mind. The human person has it
but it is not what makes man a man. If at all, that is the mind. Descartes says, "But what then, am I? A thinking
thing. It has been said. But what is a thinking thing? It is a thing that doubts, understands (conceives), affirms,
denies, wills, refuses; that imagines also, and perceives" (Descartes 2008).

Hume
David Hume, a Scottish philosopher, has a very unique way of looking at man.
As an empiricist who believes that one can know only what comes from the senses
and experience, Hume argues that the self is nothing like what his predecessors
thought of it. The self is not an entity over and beyond the physical body. One can
rightly see here the empiricism that runs through his veins. Empiricism is the school
of thought that espouses the idea that knowledge can only be possible if it is sensed and experiences. Men can
only attain knowledge by experiencing. For example, Jack knows that Jill is another human person not because
he has seen her soul. He knows she is just like him because he sees her, hears her, and touches her.

To David Hume, the self is nothing else but a bundle of impressions. What are impressions? For David
Hume, if one tries to examine his experiences, he finds that they can all be categorized into two: impressions
and ideas. Impressions are the basic object of our experience or sensation. They therefore form the core of our
thoughts. When one touches an ice cube, the cold sensation is an impression. Impressions therefore are vivid
because they are products of our direct experience with the world. Ideas, on the other hand, are copies of
impressions. Because of this, they are not as lively and vivid as our impressions. When one imagines the feeling
of being in love for the first time, that still is an idea.

What is the self then? Self, according to Hume, is simply "a bundle or collection of different
perceptions, which succeed each other with an inconceivable rapidity, and are in a perpetual flux and
movement (Hume and Steinberg 1992). Men simply want to believe that there is unified, coherent self, a soul or
mind just like what the previous philosophers thought. In reality what one thinks as unified self is simply a
combination of all experiences with a particular person.

Kant

Thinking of the self as mere combination of impressions was problematic for

Immanuel Kant. Kant recognizes the veracity in Hume's account that everything starts
with perception and sensation of impressions. However, Kant thinks that the things that
men perceive around them are not just randomly infused into the human person without
an organizing principle that regulates the relationship of all these impressions. For
Kant, there is necessarily a mind that organizes the impressions that men get from the
external world. Time and space, for example, are ideas that one cannot find in the world
but is built in our minds. Kant calls these the apparatus of the mind.

Along with the different apparatus of the mind goes the self. Without the self, one
cannot organize the different impressions that one gets in relation to his own existence. Kant therefore suggests
that the "self' is an actively engaged intelligence in man that synthesizes all knowledge and experience. Thus,
the self is not just what gives one his personality. It is also the seat of knowledge acquisition for all human
persons.

Ryle
Gilbert Ryle solves the mind-body dichotomy that has been running a long time
in the history of thought by denying blatantly the concept internal, non-physical self.
For Ryle, what truly matter is the behaviors person manifests in his day-to-day life.

For Ryle, looking for and trying to understand a self as it really exists is like
visiting your friend's university and looking for the "university." One can roam around
the campus, visit the library and the football field, meet the administrators and faculty,
and still end up not finding the "university." This is because the campus, the people,
the systems, and the territory all form the university. Ryle suggests that the self is not
an entity one can locate and analyze but simply the convenient name that people use
to refer to all the behaviors that people make.

Merleau-Ponty
Merleau-Ponty is a phenomenologist who asserts that the mind-body bifurcation
that has been going on for a long time is a futile endeavor and an invalid problem.
Unlike Ryle who simply denies the self, Merleau-Ponty instead says that the mind and
body are so intertwined that they cannot be separated from one another. One cannot find any experience that is
not an embodied experience. All experience is embodied. One's body is his opening toward his existence to the
world. Because of these bodies, men are in the world. Merleau-Ponty dismisses the Cartesian Dualism that has
spelled so much devastation in the history of man. For him, the Cartesian problem is nothing else but plain
misunderstanding. The living body, his thoughts, emotions, and experiences are all one.

APPLICATION AND ASSESSMENT

In your own words, state what is the meaning of self for each of the following philosophers. After doing
so, explain how your concept of self is compatible with how they conceived of the self.

1. Socrates

2. Plato

3. Augustine

4. Descartes

5. Hume

6. Kant

7. Ryle

8. Merleau-Ponty
REFERENCES

Beitharz, Peter and Trevor Hogan. 2002. Social Self, Global Culture: An Introduction to Sociological Ideas.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Chaffee, John. 2015. The Philosopher's Way: Thinking Critically About

Profound Ideas. 5th edition. 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.

Descartes, Rene. 2008. Meditations on First Philosophy: With Selections from the Objections and Replies.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ganeri, Jonardon. 2012. The Self: Naturalism, Consciousness, and the First-Person Stance. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

Hume, David, and Eric Steinberg. 1992. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding; [with] A Letter from
a Gentleman to His Friend in Edinburgh,. [and] An Abstract of a Treatise of Human Nature.
Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.

Marsella, Anthony J., George A. De Vos, and Francis L. K. Hsu. 1985. Culture and Self: Asian and Western
Perspectives. London: Tavistock Publications.

Mead, George Herbert. 1934. Mind, Self, and Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.

Plato. 2000. Plato: The Republic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2012. Six Great Dialogues:
Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Phaedrus, Symposium, The Republic. Bloomberg: Courier Corporation.

Rappe, Sara L. 1995. "Socrates and Self-Knowledge." Apeiron: A Journal for Ancient
Philosophy and Science 28 (1): 1-24.

Schlenker, Barry R. 1985. The Self and Social Life. Pennsylvania: McGraw-Hill.

Stevens, Richard. 1996. Understanding the Self. New York: SAGE.

Lesson 2 - The Self, Society, and Culture

WEEK 2 Discussion, citing of sources, quizzes, individual activity, and modality/method.

Lesson Objectives

At the end of this lesson, the student will be able to:

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

INTRODUCTION

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 reexamine 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 6th Century
BC between the relationships of the two components of the human person.
Thinkers just settled with 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 ways of knowing and the growth of the social sciences, it became possible
for new approaches of the examination of the self to come to fore. One of the
locus, 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 like
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 is
essential? How much of who you are now is 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?

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 following table:

Similarities in All stages Differences in My "Self' across the Possible Reason for the
of My "Self' Three Stages to 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 one
another. Second, self is also self-contained and independent
because in itself it can exist. Its distinctness allows it to be elf-
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, therefore, allows it to be studied, described, and measured. Consistency also means that a
particular self's traits, characteristics, tendencies, and potentialities are more or 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, its 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 what spells for the self 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 this 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, p. 222).

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 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 in a Catholic university for more than a decade now.
Jon has a beautiful wife Joan, which he met in college. 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 calm,
all-smiles guy 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 circumstance. 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 it is also acceptable and expected. The self is capable of morphing and fitting itself into any
circumstance it finds itself in.

The Self and Culture

Remaining the same person and turning chameleon by adopting 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 the expectations and influences from others.

In the story above, Jon might have a moi but certainly, he has to shift personne from 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 professorial look. Another day, he has doting
but strict dad that he is. Inside his bedroom, he can play goofy with his wife, Joan. In all this and more, Jon
retains who he is (his being Jon and his moi), that part of him who is stable and static all throughout.

This dynamics and capacity for different personne can be illustrated better cross-culturally. A Filipino
OFW adjusting to a life in another country is a very good case study. In the Philippines, many people
unabashedly violate jaywalking rules. A common Filipino treats road, even national ones, as basically his, and
so he just simply 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. This
observation has been anecdotally confirmed by a lot of Filipinos.

The same malleability can be seen in how some men easily transform into sweet, docile guys when
trying to woo and court a particular woman and suddenly change after hearing a sweet "yes." This cannot
hardly 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 mo, linis mo." Filipinos
most probably do not consider national roads as something external to who they are. It is a part 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 rules or else be apprehended.

Language is another interesting aspect of this social constructivism. The Filipino language is incredibly
very 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 version of "I love you." The Filipino brand of this articulation of love, unlike the
English version, does not specify the subject and the object of love. Unlike in its English version, 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 2nd 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 and Ewing precious. Something expensive
is valuable, someone 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 apart from mere desire,
which is valuable.

Another interesting facet of our language is its being gender-neutral. in English, Spanish, and other
languages, there is a clear distinction 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 tremendous effect in our crafting of the self. This might also be one of the
reasons cultural divide definitely accounts for the 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 grow up and become social
beings? How can a boy turn out to be just like an ape? How do two twins coming out from the same mother
turn out to be terribly different when given up for adoption? More than a person's givenness (personality,
tendencies, propensities, etc.), one is believed to be in active participation of shaping the self. Most often, we
think 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, p. 83).

Mead and Vygotsky

 For Mead and Vygotsky, human persons
develop 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 dialogue. "Should I do
this or that?" "But if I do this, it will be like this." Mead
"Don't I want the other option?" So cognitive and
emotional development of a child is always a mimicry
Vygotsky of how it is done in the social world, in the external reality where he is in. Both
Vygotsky and Mead treat the human mind as something that is made, constituted
through language as experienced in the external world and as encountered in dialogues with others. A young
child internalizes values, norms, practices, and social beliefs and mores through exposure to these dialogues
that will eventually become part of 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' though this. Notice how little
children are fond of playing role play with their toys? Notice how they make scripts and dialogues for their toys
as they play with them? According to Mead, it is through this that a child delineates the "I" from the rest.
Vygotsky, for his part believes a child internalizes real-life dialogues 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 dialogues. Notice how children eventually
become what they watch? Notice how children can easily adopt ways of cartoon characters they are exposed to?
Dora, for example?

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 family is ill deemed as a given in understanding the self. The kind of family that
we are born in and the resources available to us (human, spiritual,
economic) will certainly affect us and the kind of development that
we will have 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 a
family initiates a person to become that serves as the basis for this person's progress. Babies internalize ways
and styles that they view from their family. For example, by imitating the language of their primary agents of
rearing. Their family. Babies learn 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 of 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 to 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 a forest is
in itself already a miracle. His being a full 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 this section. One is who he is because of his family for the
most part.

Gender and the Self

Another important aspect of the self that is important to mention here is gender. Gender is one of those
loci of the self that is subject to alteration, change, and development. We have seen in 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 the biological. However, form 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 I?" (Moffat and Painter 1974)

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 LGBT activism
but for the most part, patriarchy has remained to be at work.

Nancy Chodorow, 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 as
women as care providers in the family. The way that little girls are given dolls instead of
dolls, encouraged to play with makeshift kitchen also reinforces notion of what roles they
should take and the selves they should develop. in boarding schools for girl, 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 to also 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 fits 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 personally
discovered and asserted and not dictated by culture and the society.

APPLICATION AND ASSESSMENT

Answer the following questions, cogently but honestly. Write your answers on the space provided.

1. How would you describe your "self'?

2. What are the influences of your 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 when 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 have shaped your "self'? Would you have wanted it otherwise?
6. What aspects of your "self' do you think may would like to change?

REFERENCES
Beilharz, Peter, and Trevor Hogan, 2002, Social Self, Global Culture
An Introduction to Sociological Ideas. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Chaffee, John. 2015. The Philosopher's Thinking Critically About Profound Ideas. 5 edition. 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. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

Marsella, Anthony J., George A. De Vos, and Francis L. K. Hsu. 1985. Culture and Self: Asian and Western
Perspectives. London: Tavistock Publications.

Mead, George Herbert. 1934. Mind, Self, and Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.

Moffat, Mary Jane and Charlotte Painter. 1974. Revelations: Diaries of Women. New York: Vintage Books.

Plato. 2012. Six Great Dialogues: Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Phaedrus. Symposium, The Republic. Bloomberg:
Courier Corporation.

Rappe, Sara L. 1995. "Socrates and Self-Knowledge." Apeiron: A Journal for Ancient Philosophy
and Science 28 (1):1-24.

Schlenker, Barry R. 1985. The Self and Social Life. Pennsylvania: McGraw-Hill.

Schwartz, Theodore, Dr Geoffrey M. White, and Catherine A. Lutz, eds. 1993. New Directions in
Psychological Anthropology. Cambridge, England; New York: Cambridge University Press.

Stevens, Richard. 1996. Understanding the Self. New York: SAGE.

Lesson 3 - The Self as Cognitive Construct

Week 3 Lecture/Discussion through google classroom, individual assessment/activity, citing of sources,
quizzes, and modality/method.

Lesson Objectives:
At the end of the lesson, the students shall be able to:

1. identify the different ideas in psychology about the "self";

2. create their own definition of the "self' based on the definitions from psychology;

3. analyze the effects of various factors identified in psychology in the formation of the "self'

INTRODUCTION

As seen from the previous lessons, every field of study, at least in the social sciences, have their own
research, definition, and conceptualization of self and identity. Some are similar while some specific only in
their field. Each field also has thousands of research on self and identity as well as related or synonymous
terms. The trend of the lessons also seems to define the concept of the "self' from a larger context (i.e. culture
and society) down to the individual. However, it must be pointed out that modern researches acknowledge the
contributions of each field and this is not some sort of a nurture vs. nature, society/culture vs. individual/brain,
other social sciences vs. psychology debate. Psychology may focus on the individual and the Cognitive
functions but it does not discount the Context and other possible factors that affect the individual. For students
who take up Psychology, discussions on theories, development, etc. actually takes it least one semester and still,
there are more to be known about the concept of "self." The following lesson provides at; Overview regarding
the said concept.

ACTIVITY

This activity has two parts that try to compare how we took at ourselves against how people perceive us
depending on how we present ourselves to them. For the first part, list ten to fifteen (10-15) qualities or things
around the human figures representing you that you think defines who you are.

For the second part, in the space below, write the following "I am _____________ (Your Name). Who
do you think I am based on what you see me do or hear me say?" Pass the paper around for two to three (2-3)
minutes without looking who writes on your paper. As you fill up the papers of your classmates, write briefly
and only those that you observe about the person. Do not use any bad words and do not write your name. After
the allotted period, pass all your answers to the teacher through email. Ask one of your classmates to exchange
your work via messenger.
ANALYSIS

Compare what you wrote about yourself to those written by your classmates. What aspects are similar
and which are not? What aspects are always true to you? What aspects are sometimes true or circumstantial?
What aspects do you think are not really part of your personality? Write your answers below then submit again
through email.

ABSTRACTION

In confidence or in an attempt to avoid further analytical discussions, a lot of people say "I am who I
am." Yet this statement still begs the question "If you are who you are, then who are you that makes you who
you are?"

As mentioned earlier there are various definitions of the "self' and other similar or interchangeable
concepts in psychology. Simply put, "self' is "the sense of personal identity and of who we are as individuals"
(Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, 106).

William James (1890) was one of the earliest psychologists to study the self and he conceptualized the
self as having two aspects- the "I" and the "me. The "I" is the thinking, acting, and feeling self (Gleitman,
Gross, and Reisberg 2011, 616; Hogg and Vaughan 2010, 66). The "me" on the other hand is the physical
characteristics as well as psychological capabilities that makes who you are (Gleitman, Gross, and Reisberg
2011, 616; Hogg and Vaughan 2010, 66). Carl Rogers (1959) theory of personality also used the same terms,
the "1" as the one who acts, and decides while the "me" is what you think or feel about yourself as an object
(Gleitman, Gross, and Reisberg 2011, 616).

Other concepts similar to self is identity and self-concept. Identity is composed of one's personal
characteristics, social roles and responsibilities, as well as affiliations that defines who one is (Elmore,
Oyserman, and Smith 2012, 69). Self-concept is basic what comes to your mind when you are asked about who
you are (Elm re5 Oyserman, and Smith 2012, 69).

Self, identity, and self-concept re not fixed in one-time frame. For example, when asked about who you
are, you can say "I was a varsity player in Grade 5" which pertains to the past, "a college student" which may
be the present, and "a future politician" which is the future. They are not also fixed for life nor are they ever-
changing at every moment. Think of a malleable metal, strong and hard but can be bent and molded in other
shapes. Think about water. It can take any shape of the container, it can be in solid, liquid, or gas form, but at
its core, it is still the same elements.

Carl Rogers captured this idea in his concept of self-schema or our own organized system or collection
of knowledge about who we are (Gleitman, Gross, and Reisberg 2011, 616; Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, 107-
108). Imagine an organized list or a diagram similar to the one below:
 Hobbies

Family SELF Religion

Nationality

The schema is not limited to the example above. It may also include your interests, your work, your
course, your age, your name, your physical characteristics, etc. As you grow and adapt to the changes around
your, they also change. But they are not passive receivers, they actively shape and affect how you see, think,
and feel about things object (Gleitman, Gross, and Reisberg 2011, 617; Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, 107-108).

For example, when someone states your first name, even if he is not talking about you, your attention is
drawn to him. If you have a provincial language and you hear someone using it, it catches your attention. If you
consider yourself a book-lover, a bookstore may always entice you out of all the other stores in a mall.

Theories generally see the self and identity as mental constructs, created and re-created in memory
(Elmore, Oyserman, and Smith 2012, 75). Current researches point to the frontal lobe of the brain as the
specific area in the brain associated with processes Concerning the self (Elmore, Oyserman, and Smith 2012,
75).

Several psychologists, especially during the field's earlier developments followed this trend of thought,
looking deeper into the mind of the person to theorize about the self, identity, self-concept, and in turn, one's
personality. The most influential of them is Sigmund Freud. Basically, Freud saw the self, its mental processes,
and One's behavior as the results of the interaction between the Id, the Ego, and the Superego.

However, as mentioned earlier, one cannot fully discount the effects of society and culture to the
formation of the self, identity, and self-concept. Even as Freud and other theories and researchers try to
understand the person by digging deeper into the mind, they cannot fully discount the huge and important
effects of the environment as in the abovementioned definitions of the self, social interaction always has a part
to play in who we think we are. This is not nature vs. nurture but instead a nature-and-nurture perspective.

Under the theory of symbolic interactionism, G.H. Mead (1934) argued that the self is created and
developed through human interaction (Flogg and Vaughan 2010, 66). Basically, there are at least three reasons
why self and identity are social products (Elmore, Oyserman, and Smith 2012, 76) :

1. We do not create ourselves out of nothing. Society helped in creating the foundations of who we are
and even if we make our choices, we will still operate in our social and historical contexts in one way or
the other. Of course, you may transfer from one culture to another, but parts of who you were will still
affect you and you will also have to adapt to the new social context. Try looking at your definition of
who you are and see where society had affected you;

2. Whether we like to admit it or not, we actually need others to affirm and reinforce who we think we
are. We also need them as reference points about our identity. One interesting example is the social
media interactions we have. In the case of Facebook, there are those who will consciously or unconsciously try
to garner more Likes and/or positive Reactions and that can and will reinforce their self-concept. It is
almost like a battle between who got more friends, more views, and trending topics. If one says s/he is a
good singer but his/her performance and the evaluation of his/her audience says otherwise, that will
have an effect on that person's idea of him/herself, one way or another.

3. What we think as important to us may also have been influenced by what is important in our social or
historical context. Education might be an important thing to your self-concept because you grew up in a
family that valued education. Money might be important to some because they may have grown in a
poor family and realized how important money is in addressing certain needs like medical emergencies.
Being a nurse or a lawyer can be priority in your self-schema because it is the in-demand course during your
time.

Social interaction and group affiliation, therefore, are vital factors in creating our self- concept
especially in the aspect of providing us with our social identity or our perception of who we are based on our
membership to certain groups (Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, 110). It is also inevitable then that we can have
several social identity, that those identities can overlap, and that we automatically play the roles as we interact
with our groups. For example, you are a student yet you are also a member of a certain group of friends. You
study because it is your role as a student but you prefer to study with your friends and your study pattern
changes when you are with your friends than when you do it alone.

However, there are times when we are aware of our self-concepts, also called self-awareness. Carver
and Scheier (1981) identified two types of self that we can be aware of: 1) the private self or your internal
standards and private thoughts and feelings, and 2) the public self or your public image commonly geared
towards having a good presentation of yourself to others (Hogg and Vaughan 2010, 69).

Self-awareness also presents us with at least three other self-schema: the actual, ideal, and ought self.
The "actual" self is who you are at the moment, the "ideal" self is who you like to be, and the "ought" self is
who we think we should be (Higgins 1997 in Hogg and Vaughn 2010, 74). Example is that you are a student
interested in basketball but is also academically challenged in most of your subject. Your ideal self might be to
practice more and play with the varsity team but ought to pass your subjects as a responsible student. One has
to find solution to such discrepancies in order to avoid agitation, dejection, or other negative emotions. In some
instances, however, all three may be in line with one another.

Self-awareness may be positive or negative depending on the circumstances and our next course of
action. Self-awareness can keep you from doing something dangerous, it can help remind you that there is an
exam tomorrow in one of your subjects when you are about to spend time playing computer games with your
cousins, among others. In other instances, self-awareness can be too much that we are concerned about being
observed and criticized by others, also known as self-consciousness (Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, 112). At other
times, especially with large crowds, we may experience deindividuation or "the loss of individual self-
awareness and individual accountability in groups (Festinger, Pepitone, & Newcomb, 1952; Zimbardo, 1969,
all in Jhangiani and Tary 2014, 114). A lot of people will attune themselves with the emotions of their group
because the large crowd also provides some kind of anonymity, we may lessen our self-control and act in ways
that we will not do when we are alone. A common example is a mass demonstration erupting into a riot.

Our group identity and self-awareness also has a great impact on our self-esteem, one of the common
concepts associated with the "self," it is defined as our own positive or negative perception or evaluation of
ourselves (Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, 125; Gleitman, Gross, and Reisberg 2011, 617).

One of the ways in which our social relationship affects our self-esteem is through social comparison.
According to the social comparison theory, we learn about ourselves, the appropriateness of our behaviors, as
well as our social statues by comparing aspects of ourselves with other people (Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, 139;
Hogg and Vaughan 2010, 72).

The downward social comparison is the more common type of comparing ourselves with others. As the
name implies, we create a positive self-concept by comparing ourselves with those who are worse off than us
(Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, 139). By having the advantage, we are able to raise our self-esteem. Another
comparison is the upward social comparison which is comparing ourselves with those who are better off than us
(Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, p. 134 While it can be a form of motivation for some, a lot of those who do this
actually felt tower self-esteem as we highlight more of our weakness or inequities.

Take not that this occurs not only between individuals but also among groups. Thus, if a person's group
is performing better and is acknowledged more than the other group, then his/her self-esteem may also be
heightened.

Social comparison also entails what is called self-evaluation maintenance theory which states that we
can feel threatened when someone out-performs us, especially when that person is close to us i.e. a friend or
family caresser 1988 in Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, 144). In this case, we usually react in three ways. First, we
distance ourselves from that person or redefine our relationship with them (Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, 144)
Some will resort to silent treatment, change of friends, while some may also' redefine by being closer with that
person, hoping that some association may give him/her a certain kind of acknowledgement also. Second, we
may also reconsider the importance of the aspect or skill in which you were out-performed (Jhangiani and Tarry
2014, 144). If you got beaten in drawing, you might think that drawing is not really for you and you'll find a
hobby that where you could excel, thus preserving your self-esteem. Lastly, we may also strengthen our resolve
to improve that certain aspect of ourselves (Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, 144). Instead of quitting drawing, you
might join seminars, practice more often, read books about it, add some elements in your drawing that makes it
unique, etc. Achieving your goal through hard work may increase your self-esteem too.

However, in the attempt to increase or maintain self-esteem, some people become narcissistic.
Narcissism is a "trait characterized by characterized by overly high self-esteem, self-admiration, and self-
centeredness" (Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, 128). They are often charismatic because of how they take care of
their image. Taking care of that image includes their interpersonal relationships thus they will try to look for
better partners, better acquaintances, as well as people who will appreciate them a tot. This makes them a bad
romantic partner or friend since they engage in relationships only to serve themselves (Jhangiani and Tarry
2014, 128).

Sometimes there is a thin line between high self-esteem and narcissism and there are a lot of tests and
measurements for self-esteem like the Rosenberg scale but the issue is that the result can be affected by the
desire of the person to portray him/herself in a positive or advantageous way (Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, 126).
In case you really want to take a test and find a numerical value or level for your self-esteem, try to be honest
and objective about what you feel and see about yourself.

Though self-esteem is a very important concept related to the self, studies have shown that it only has a
correlation, not causality, to positive outputs and Outlook (Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, 131). It can be argued that
high or healthy self-esteem may result to an overall good personality but it is not, and should not be, the only
source of a person's healthy perspective of him/herself.

People with high self-esteem are commonly described as outgoing, adventurous, and adaptable in a lot
of situations. They also initiate activities and building relationship with people. However, they may also
dismiss other activities that does not conform to their self-concept or boost their self-esteem. They may also be
bullies and experiment on abusive behaviors with drugs, alcohol, and sex (Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, 131).

This duality in the behavior and attitudes only proves the abovementioned correlation. Baumeister,
Smart, and Boden (1996) in their research on self-esteem concluded that programs, activities, and parenting
styles to boost self-esteem should only be for rewarding good behavior and other achievements and not for the
purpose of merely trying to make children feel better about themselves or to appease them when they get angry
or sad (Jhangiani and Tarry 2014, 132).

APPLICATION AND ASSESSMENT

Do a research and list ten (10) things to do in order to boost your self-esteem or improve your self-
concept. Cite your sources. Analyze which of the those tips are more likely to backfire and make someone
conceited or narcissistic and revise them in order to make the statements both helpful to the individual as well
as society in general.

REFERENCES

Elmore, Kristen, George Smith, and Daphna Oyserman. 2012. "Self, Self-Concept and Identity." Handbook of
Self and Identity. 2nd ed. Edited by Mark R. Leary and June Price Tangney: 69-95. New York: The
Guilford Press.

Gleitman, Henry, James Gross, and Daniel Reisberg. 2011. Psychology 8th Ed. Canada: WAN. Norton and
Company.

Hogg, Michael and Graham Vaughan. 2010. Essentials of Social Psychology. Italy: Pearson Education Limited.

Jhangiani, Rajiv and Hammond -I-Try. .2014. Principles of Social Psychology 1st Ed. Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0internatiorral License.

Lesson 4 - The Self in Western and Eastern Thought

Week 4 &5 Lecture/Discussion through google classroom & Modular modality, individual
assessment/activity, citing of sources quizzes.

Lesson Objectives:

At the end of the lesson, the students will be able to:

1. differentiate the concept of self according to western though against eastern/oriental perspectives;

2. explain the concept of self as found in Asian thoughts; and

3. create a representation of the Filipino self.

INTRODUCTION

Different cultures and varying environment tends to create different perceptions of the "self' and one of
the most common distinctions between cultures and people is the eastern vs. western dichotomy wherein
eastern represents Asia and western represents Europe and Northern America. It must be understood that this
distinction and the countries included was politically colored at the time that aforementioned concepts were
accepted and used in the social sciences. Furthermore, it must be reiterated that while countries that are closer
to each other geographically may share commonalities, there are also a lot of factors that create differences. In
the Philippines alone, each region may have a similar or varying perception regarding the "self."

ACTIVITY

Write the top five (5) differences between Western and Eastern society, culture, and individuals in the
table below. Cite your sources. Submit your output via email/messenger.
 WESTERN EASTERN

ANALYSIS

Do you agree with the differentiation between the West and the East? Where can you find the
Philippines in the distinction? What are the factors that make the Philippines similar or different from its Asian
neighbors? Is there also a difference between regions or ethnolinguistic groups in the Philippines? Submit your
output via email/ messenger.

ABSTRACTION

There are actually a lot of sources in which you can analyze the perspective of each culture and country
about the concept of “self”. You can see it in their literature like how one culture depicts a hero or a villain in
their stories. You can see it in their social organizations like how they see their boss or their subordinate. Art
works, dances, even clothing may show you clues about the “self”.

For the purposes of this lesson however, we will look at religious beliefs and political philosophies that
greatly influenced the mindset of each nation or culture. Since almost all the theories about the self, which were
discussed in the previous lessons, also came from the Western scientific research, we will highlight the eastern
thoughts in this lesson.

First is Confucianism. Confucianism can be seen as a code of ethical conduct, of how one should
properly act according to their relationship with other people, thus it is also focused on having a harmonious
social life (Ho 1995, 116). The identity and self-concept therefore of the individual is interwoven with the
identity and status of his/her community or culture, sharing its pride as well as its failures (Ho 1995, 116-117).

Self-cultivation is seen as the ultimate purpose of life but the characteristics of a chun-tzu, a man of
virtue or noble character, is still embedded in his/her social relationships (Ho 1995, 117). The cultivated self in
Confucianism is what some scholars call a "subdued self" wherein personal needs are repressed (subdued) for
the good of many, making Confucian society also hierarchal for the purpose of maintaining order and balance
in society (Ho 1995, 118).

The second philosophy is Taoism. For the purposes of discussion, Taoism is living in the way of the
Tao or the universe. However, Taoism rejects having one definition of what the Tao is, and one can only state
clues of what it is as they adapt a free-flowing, relative, unitary, as well as paradoxical view of almost
everything. Taoism rejects the hierarchy and strictness brought by Confucianism and would prefer a simple.
Thus, its teachings aim to describe how to attain that life (Ho 1995, 119)

The self is not just an extension of the family or the community; it is part of the universe, one of the
forms and manifestations of the Tao (Ho 1995, 120). The ideal self is selflessness but this is not forgetting
about the self, it is living a balanced-life with society and nature, being open and accepting to change,
forgetting about prejudices and egocentric ideas and thinking about equality as well as complementarity among
humans as well as other beings (Ho 1995, 120-121). In this way, you will be able to act spontaneously because
you will not be restricted by some legalistic standards but because you are in harmony with everything.

The third belief is Buddhism. There are various groups who have adapted Buddhism thus you may find
differences in their teachings with our discussion but more likely, their core concepts remained the same. The
self is seen as an illusion, born out of ignorance, of trying to hold and control things, or human-centered needs,
thus the self is also the source of all these suffering (Ho 1995, 121). It is therefore our quest to forget about the
self, forget the cravings of the self, break the attachments you have with the world, and to renounce the self
which is the cause of ail suffering and in doing so attain the state of Nirvana (Ho 1995, 122).

The self or the individual is not the focus of the abovementioned Asian or Eastern philosophies or
belief. Even with extended discussions about how the self should work, Confucianism and Taoism still situates
the self within a bigger context. The person, in striving to be a better person, does not create a self above other
people or nature but a self that is beneficial to his/her community as well as in order and in harmony with
everything else. As for Buddhism, the self, with all its connections and selfish ideas, is totally taken, not just
out of the center of the picture, but out of the whole picture as a whole.

Bearing the previous lessons in mind, Western perspective does not discount the role of environment
and society in the formation of the self but the focus is always looking towards the self. You Compare yourself
in order to be better you create associations and bask in the glory of that group for your self-esteem; you but
primacy in developing yourself.

One can also describe that the Western thought looks at the world in dualities wherein you are distinct
from the other person, son the creator is separate from the object s/he created, in which the self is distinguished
and acknowledged (Wolter 2012, 1). On the other hand, the Eastern perspective sees the other person as part of
yourself as well as the things you may create, a drama in which everyone is interconnected with their specific
roles (Wolter 2012, 1).

Several studies showed that Americans, for example, talk more about their personal attributes when
describing themselves while Asians in genera would talk about their social roles or the social situations that
invoked certain traits that they deem positive for their self (Gleitman, Gross, and Reisberg 2011, 618).
Evaluation of the self also differs as Americans would highlight their personal achievements while Asians
would rather keep a low profile as promoting the self can be seen as boastfulness (Gleitman, Gross, and
Reisberg 2011, 619) that disrupts social relationships.

The Western culture then is what we would call an individualistic culture since their focus in on the
person. Asian culture on the other hand is called a collectivistic culture as the group and social relations is
given more importance than individual needs and wants.

By valuing the individual westerners may seem to have loose associations or even loyalty to their own
groups. Competition is the name of the game and they are more likely straightforward and forceful in their
communication as well as decision-making. Eastern or oriental persons look after the welfare of their groups
and values cooperation. They would also be more compromising and they tend to go around the bush in
explaining things, hoping that the other person would “feel” what they want to say (Qingxue 2003, 2324: 27).

Westerners also emphasize more on the value of equality even if they see that the individual can rise
above everything else' Because everyone is on their own in the competition, one can say that they also promote
ideals that create a "fair" competition and protect the individual. Asians, with their collective regard, puts more
emphasis on hierarchy—as the culture wants to keep things in harmony and in order (Qingxue 2003, 25-26).
For example, Westerners would most likely call their boss, parents, or other seniors by their first name. The
boss can also be approached head-on when conflicts or problems about him/her arises. For Asians, we have
respectful terms for our seniors and a lot of workers would not dare go against the high ranking officials
(Qingxue 2003, 26-27)

It must be emphasized, however, that these are general commonalities among Western cultures as
compared to Asian or Oriental cultures. In the case of the Philippines, we can also consider the colonization
experience for differences and similarities with our Asian neighbors. We might also find variation among
provinces and regions due to geographical conditions.

With the social media, migration, and intermarriages, variety between the Western and Asian
perceptions may either be blurred or highlighted. Whereas conflict is inevitable in diversity, peace is also
possible through the understanding of where each of us is coming from.

APPLICATION AND ASSESSMENT

Create your own representation, diagram, or concept map of the self according to Filipino culture.
Provide a brief explanation about your output. You can also cite books and researches about Filipino culture,
self, and identity to further elaborate on the topic. Once done, submit your output via email.

PRELIM EXAMINATION

REFERENCES

Gleitman, Henry, James Gross, and Daniel Reisberg. 2011. Psychology 8th Ed. Canada: WAN. Norton and
Company.

Ho, David. 1995. "Selfhood and Identity in Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, and Hinduism: Contrast with the
West." Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 25: 2,
http://www.iaccp.orgisitesidefautti files/1101995 (.).pdf.

Qingxue. Liu. 2003. "Understanding Different Cultural Patterns or Orientations Between East and West."
Investigationes Linguisticae Vo1.1X.April2003.
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi= 10.1.1.184.6260&rep=rep1&type=pdf.

Wolter, Derek C. 2012. "In Search of the Self: Eastern versus Western Perspectives."

Oglethorpe Journal of Undergraduate Research Vol. 1 iss. I, Article I.

http://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/ojur/vol1/iss1/1.

WEEK 3 to 5

1.
WEEK 6 PRELIM EXAMINATION
 MIDTERM COVERAGE

WEEK 7 & 8

1.
WEEK 9 to 11

1.

WEEK 12 MIDTERM EXAMINATION

FINAL COVERAGE

WEEK 13-17

1.

WEEK 18 FINAL EXAMINATION

MODULE 1
PRELIM COVERAGE

WEEK 1

1.

WEEK 2

2.

WEEK 3 to 5

3.

WEEK 6 PRELIM EXAMINATION

I. Introduction:
II. Learning Objectives
At the end of this module, ________________:

1.
III. Four -Pronged Integration (Optional)
A. Core Values/Related values
(Sample: SEMPER FIDELIS ….)

B. Social Orientation (Optional)

C. Lesson Across Discipline (Optional)

Sample: World History, Collection Management, Social Responsibility,
D. Faith / Biblical Reflection/Quotes (Optional)
(Sample)
Galatians 6:9
“Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if
we do not give up”

I Corinthians 14:40

But all things must be done properly and in an orderly manner.

IV. Topics/ Discussions

Week 2

A. ____ (Topic)

WEEK 3 to 5

2. ____ (Topic)
Source:

IV. Summary/ Synthesis

__

V. Assessment/Evaluation

QUIZZES( To be given in EDMODO or Google Classroom) (SAMPLE)

Q 1: Completion test

Q 2: Graded Recitation

Q 3: Essay

ACTIVITY

A.

B. Online Interview Session: (Optional)

(Sample) The group will conduct an interview with the cataloger of a particular library based
on the following:

1. Type of catalog adopted by the library ( OPAC or card?)

2. Flow chart of the cataloging procedures
3. How often the records are being updated?
4. Challenges encountered in the technical section

Submit through my email your prepared questions before conducting the online interview. Make
a detailed report regarding the interview. Submit it online or you can drop your work in the
school designated drop point.

Note: The teacher will make representation with the library cataloger and the schedule when
the interview will be conducted.

MODULE 2
MIDTERM COVERAGE

WEEK 7 & 8
 1.

WEEK 9 to 11

1.

WEEK 12 MIDTERM EXAMINATION

I. Introduction:

II. Learning Objectives

At the end of this module, the students _________:

1.

III. Four -Pronged Integration (Optional)

A. Core Values/Related values

B. Social Orientation (Optional)

C. Lesson Across Discipline (Optional)

D. Faith / Biblical Reflection/Quotes (Optional)

1Timothy: 3:17 (SAMPLE)

“That the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

John 7:24

“Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.”

IV. Topics/ Discussions

Week 7 & 8
 1.

Week 9 to 11

V. Summary/ Synthesis

VI. Assessment/Evaluation

QUIZZES( To be given in EDMODO or Google Classroom) (SAMPLE)

Q 1: Completion test (SAMPLE)

Q 2: Graded Recitation

Q 3: Transcription exercises

ACTIVITY

A. Search the Library of Congress Online Catalog and the Philippine eLib and give your
observation on how the MARC records are being displayed. (SAMPLE)
https://catalog.loc.gov/vwebv/searchBrowse
http://web.nlp.gov.ph/nlp/?q=node/49

MODULE 3
FINAL COVERAGE

WEEK 13 TO 17

1.

WEEK 18 FINAL EXAMINATION

I. Introduction:

II. Learning Objectives

At the end of this module, the students _______:

1.
III. Four -Pronged Integration

A. Core Values/Related values

A. Social Orientation

B. Lesson Across Discipline

C. Faith / Biblical Reflection/Quotes

IV. Topics / Discussion

Week 13-17

V. Summary/ Synthesis

VI. Assessment/Evaluation

QUIZZES( To be given in EDMODO or Google Classroom)

VII. GRADING SYSTEM& RUBRICS (SAMPLE only)

PRELIM MIDTERM FINAL AVERAGE

Attendance(online/ Attendance(online/ Attendance(online/ PG +MG+FG 3

remote) remote) remote)
= Grade
class participation class participation class participation
10% 10% 10%

Major Exam Major Exam Major Exam

20% Quizzes 20%
20% 20% Discussion output
(written)
Assign./Req./ Discussion Discussion Output 20%
output
50% (written) Presentation of working
20% catalog
Total 100% 50%
Presentation of working
catalog Total 100%
50%

Total 100%

Grading for Group Presentations- Rubrics (SAMPLE only)

Group
Time Bound
Content (40) Preparedness (30) Teamwork (20) Grade
(10)
(100)

Detailed Mastery Collaborative Time compliant

(complete) 10 Ability to efforts evident,
Answer 10 consistency of ( Not late)
answers with one
15 Clear presentation another
10
Persuasive
10

Correct
grammar10

Organized
5
Total

Grading for the Written Output- Rubrics (SAMPLE only)

Content (30) Effort (30) Presentation Originality (20) Total

(20)
100

Detailed, with Variety of Summarized, Not copied or

justifications, references/ organized, copy pasted,
grammatically resources used, orderly, pictures ownership of
correct, with time element and images, the work is
evident in the charts, diagrams evident
discussions, output (as needed),
examples, easy to
pictures/images understand, neat
(as needed),
references
 30=Excellent 30=Excellent 20=Excellent 20=Excellent

25=Very Good 25=Very Good 18=Very Good 18=Very Good

20=Good 20=Good 15=Good 15=Good

15=Fair 15=Fair 10= Fair 10= Fair

10=Poor 10=Poor 5=Poor 5=Poor

Rubric for Assessing Cataloging Skills (SAMPLE only)

Cataloging Skills Novice Developing Proficient Accomplished

1 2 3 4
Descriptive Cataloging

1. Identification of access Does not Limited Can identify Demonstrate

points know how to ability in more ability in
a. Main entry identify identifying appropriate access points
a. Added entry
access points access access identification
points points

2. Use of the ISBD Commits Commits Shows an Can create an

(International Standards error in the error in the increase ISBD records
Bibliographic identification use of ability in the appropriately
Description)Machine and use of punctuation application and
Readable Cataloging punctuation marks and of ISBD completely
(MARC) and Resource marks and indentions standards
Description and Access identification
of elements

VIII. References

 American Psychological Association (APA) Format (Search link for details)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APA_style
 Modern Language Association (MLA) Format (Search link for details)
https://www.library.cornell.edu/sites/default/files/mla_style_revised.pdf

Cataloging Worksheet

A. Book
Author /s Creator/s
Title and Statement of
Responsibility

Edition Area

Publication, Distribution Area

Material / Physical Description

Area

Note Area

Series Area

ISBN