CD 143: Technologies of the Self
Spring 2002
Re-Thinking the Self
in Light of
New Technologies
Karyn Y. Lu
Interesting Questions:
1. Does the “self” exist? In what context?
2. What makes a person the same individual as time goes by?
3. When people develop psychological disorders (such as multiple
personality disorder or schizophrenia) or neurological diseases
(such as Alzheimer’s disease), or suffer from amnesia, do they
lose their sense of self? Is “self” rooted in memory?
4. How do factors such as culture, gender, race, class, and sexual
orientation affect identity?
What is the self, or identity?
Idem: meaning “the same.” (Latin root)
“Identity is a self-structure – an internal, self-constructed, dynamic
organization of drives, abilities, beliefs, and individual history. The
better developed this structure is, the more aware individuals
appear to be of their own uniqueness and similarity to others and of
their own strengths and weaknesses in making their way in the
world. The less developed this structure is, the more confused
individuals seem to be about their own distinctiveness from others
and the more they rely on external sources to evaluate themselves”
(Marcia, 1980).
Overview
Traditional and Contemporary Paradigms of Identity
Classical psychological theory: Erik H. Erikson
Contemporary psychological approaches
Romantic / Modern / Postmodern approach
Buddhist approach
Eastern versus Western perception
Erik H. Erikson (1902-1994)
• Considered to be one of the most influential of all psychoanalysts,
second only to Freud.
• A follower of Freud who broke with him over the fundamental point of
what motivates human behavior.
• Formulated the most well-established theory on identity development.
• First to recognize identity as a major personality achievement and
as a crucial step toward becoming a productive, happy adult.
Erikson’s Developmental Model
Erikson, 1968. Identity: Youth and Crisis.
IDENTITY
vs.
IDENTITY
CONFUSION
According to Erikson…
the identity crisis occurs during adolescence because:
• Formal operational thinking develops;
• Youth begin to see themselves as possessing specific personality traits
that endure across time and situations;
• A systematic and integrated sense of self begins to emerge;
• Biological and psychological changes occur;
• Societal pressure to be useful contributors to the world.
“WHO AM I?”
The process of identity development
During adolescence (between ages 12-18), we must meet and resolve an
IDENTITY CRISIS.
PSYCHOLOGICAL MORATORIUM – time and energy for role and image
experimentation.
FIDELITY
People who emerge from this
stage with a strong sense of
self-identity are equipped to
face adulthood with certainty
and confidence.
IDENTITY DIFFUSION
Those who fail to achieve a
cohesive identity. The don’t know
who or what they are, where they
belong, or where they want to go.
Four identity statuses
James Marcia expanded Erikson’s ideas on identity formation and
created four possible patterns of coping with the task of identity
formation. Adolescents often shift from one status to another while
forming their identity:
• Identity Achievement
• Moratorium
• Identity Foreclosure
• Identity Diffusion
IDENTITY ACHIEVEMENT
Having already explored alternatives, these
individuals are committed to a clearly formulated
set of self-chosen values and goals. They feel a
sense of psychological well-being, of sameness
through time, and of knowing where they are going.
MORATORIUM
This is a delay or holding pattern. These
individuals have not yet made definite
commitments. They are in the process of
exploration – gathering information and trying
out activities – with the desire to find values and
goals to guide their life.
IDENTITY FORECLOSURE
These individuals have committed themselves to
values and goals without taking time to explore
alternatives. Instead, they accept a ready-made
identity that authority figures (e.g. parents, religious
leaders, romantic partners) have chosen for them.
IDENTITY DIFFUSION
These individuals lack clear direction. They are not
committed to values and goals, nor are they actively
trying to reach them. They may have never explored
alternatives, or may have tried to do so but found the
task too threatening and overwhelming.
Some contemporary approaches to identity
PERSON & SOCIAL/CULTURAL CONTEXT
• Identity develops from relations between the person and social /
cultural context.
• Regulation of these relations allow us to adapt to the context.
• For example, youths from different cultures use different methods (e.g.
assimilation vs. emotion-based solutions) of coping with issues such as
stress and anxiety.
(Adams, Marshall, Cote, Goossens, Phinney)
Some contemporary approaches to identity
TRUE AND FALSE SELF BEHAVIOR
• Individuals are aware of their true self and real motives.
• Behavior does not always reflect the “real me.”
• People often consciously violate their own self-concept.
• Self-esteem depends on one’s motives for false self-behavior.
• Explains instability in self-behavior.
(Susan Harter)
Some contemporary approaches to identity
THREE IDENTITY STYLES
• INFORMATIONAL
• Spends considerable amount of time thinking about the self and self-views
• Introspective, reflective, willing to entertain new ideas, values, and beliefs
• Cognitively-oriented, goal-oriented
• DIFFUSE / AVOIDANT
• Low self-esteem, poor peer relations
• Higher levels of depression and other disorders
• Less autonomy, low motivation, less mature relationships
• NORMATIVE
• Internalizes standards and prescriptions of significant others
• Automatic approach to decision making and problem solving
• Importance of homeostasis and resistance to conflicting ideas, values, and beliefs
(Michael Berzonsky)
Some contemporary approaches to identity
SITUATED IDENTITIES
Key assumptions:
1.
Self exits only in social contexts.
2.
Self-understanding results from social interaction.
•
Self develops from social context, not inherent, core traits.
•
Individuals have as many “selves” as significant social
environments. Results in diversified self.
•
Self is beyond individual control.
•
Individuals seek contexts that maximize self-fulfillment.
(Alexander & Wiley)
Some contemporary approaches to identity
LEVELS OF IDENTITY APPROACH
• Explores ethnic and national identity.
• Personal (unique to self).
• Social (shared by group members).
• Cultural (shared among broader group).
• Individuals enact social identity to claim / confirm group
membership
• Enactment stronger when group members are present
• In-group favoritism / out-group derogation
(Henri Tajfel)
Changing notions of the “self” through time
19th
CENTURY
20th
CENTURY
21th
CENTURY
(and beyond?)
Romanticist view of “self”
Attributes to each person characteristics of personal depth – such as
passion, soul, and creativity.
Modernist view of “self”
Characteristics of the self reside in our beliefs, opinions, and conscious
intentions. Normal persons are logical, predictable, honest, and sincere.
Postmodernist view of “self”
Fragmentation. The very concept of personal essences is thrown into
doubt. Traditional thoughts of self are dismantled.
The “self” in Buddhism
• The notion of “self” is illusory.
• “Self” grows out of craving and ignorance, and leads to repeated
suffering and stress.
• Any experience we might characterize as our “self” is impermanent, continually
in flux, conditioned from one moment to the next by interrelated, empty
phenomena.
• If we don’t abandon our sense of self-identity, we are bound to suffer pain and
alienation, as our "self" inevitably falls subject to circumstances outside our control.
• Through meditation, we enter the present moment by dropping our memories of
the past and fantasies about the future. Observing the present, we see that our
"self" is simply an internal dialogue of incessant chatter.
• As this chatter grows still, a point is reached in which "self," "other," and "present"
are transcended. That is where liberation is found.
Eastern vs. Western frameworks:
Cultural differences in viewing the “self”
In general, Western cultures tend to be more individualistic, while
Eastern cultures tend to be more collectivistic.
EASTERN
WESTERN
• Social harmony is
more important than
individual desires;
• Preoccupation with
the individual;
• Society is like
music - all different
parts should work
together
harmoniously;
• Emphasis on
“fitting in.”
VS.
• Individual rights
and freedoms
should form the
basis of society;
• Independence;
• Competition.
Re-Thinking the Self…
How does technology influence or alter our sense of the
self?
What impact does technology have on traditional
paradigms of identity? Will they need to be revised?
Exploring texts by Gergen, Minsky, and Turkle
Kenneth J. Gergen
• Professor of Psychology, Swarthmore College
• An authority on cultural change, personal identity, and
language and communication.
• Co-founder of the Taos Institute, a non-profit institute in
New Mexico for the furthering of social constructionist
thought in practical settings.
Kenneth Gergen on The Saturated Self:
"I begin this book with two central contentions: first, that we rely heavily on
psychological language in making sense of ourselves and others, and second, that this
language is built into many of our patterns of relationship… I then propose that Western
discourse for understanding self and others is undergoing major transformations, and
that as this language is altered, so are traditional patterns of cultural life."
K. Gergen’s Home page: http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/kgergen1/
The Self Under Siege
• We are increasingly immersed in and consumed by social
interaction.
• New technologies enable us to sustain relationships with
an ever-expanding range of people. We are moving toward
a state of social saturation.
• Social saturation is impacting traditional ways of thinking
about the human self and related patterns of social life.
Recall
Changing notions of the “self” through time
19th
CENTURY
20th
CENTURY
21th
CENTURY
(and beyond?)
Romanticist view of “self”
Attributes to each person characteristics of personal depth – such as
passion, soul, and creativity.
Modernist view of “self”
Characteristics of the self reside in our beliefs, opinions, and conscious
intentions. Normal persons are logical, predictable, honest, and sincere.
Postmodernist view of “self”
Fragmentation. The very concept of personal essences is thrown into
doubt. Traditional thoughts of self are dismantled.
“THE SATURATED SELF IS NO SELF AT ALL.”
Technologies of social saturation
Low Tech:
High Tech:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Railroad
Postal service
Automobile
Telephone
Radio
Motion pictures
Printed books
Air travel
TV and video
Media
Computer
E-mail
Rockets / Satellites
Cellular phones
Fax machines
Digitization of major
media
The process of social saturation
"A century ago, social relationships were largely confined to the distance of an
easy walk"
Multiplying relationships:
perseverance of the past
acceleration of the future
Bending of life-forms
Relating in new keys:
friendly lover
microwave relationship
Intensifying interchange
Multiplying Relationships
Preservation of the past
• Time and distance are no longer threats to a relationship.
• As we move through life, the cast of characters is everexpanding.
Acceleration of the future
• The pace of relationships is accelerated.
• With the aid of technology, the number of friendships
expands as never before.
Bending of life-forms
New patterns of relationships are taking place.
Television invites us to participate vicariously in
relationships.
Electronic relationships conceal visual information,
so there is greater tendency to create an imaginary
other with whom to relate.
Relating in new keys
Friendly lover
• “Romantic” relationships become unrealistic
• Multiplicity of low-level, “friendly” relationships
Microwave relationship
• Disappearance of traditional nuclear family
• Family members attempt to compensate for vast
expanses of nonrelatedness with intense expressions
of bondedness.
Intensifying exchange
Technology intensifies the emotional level of many
relationships.
It is more difficult for relationships to normalize
(“comfortable depth”).
Breakdown of surveillance.
Occasional meetings are intensified by fantasy,
fleetingness.
POPULATING THE SELF
The acquisition of multiple and disparate potentials for being
We become pastiches, imitative assemblages of
each other. We harbor multitudes of hidden
potentials.
Onlooking audience of the
intererior: for each belief
there exists a strong
countertendency.
Destroys traditional
views of
committed
self
Splitting of the self
into a multiplicity of self-investments
• Vertigo of the Valued
• Expansion of Inadequacy
• Rationality in Recession
MULTIPHRENIA
Marvin Minsky
• Professor of Media Arts and Sciences, and Professor of Electrical Engineering
and Computer Science, at MIT.
• His research has led to both theoretical and practical advances in artificial
intelligence, cognitive psychology, neural networks, and the theory of Turing
Machines and recursive functions.
• Pioneer of intelligence-based mechanical robotics and telepresence. He
designed and built the first LOGO "turtle."
• In the early 1970s, Minsky and Seymour Papert began formulating a theory
called The Society of Mind which combined insights from developmental child
psychology and their experience with research on Artificial Intelligence. The
Society of Mind proposes that intelligence is not the product of any singular
mechanism, but comes from the managed interaction of a diverse variety of
resourceful agents.
M. Minsky’s Home Page: http://web.media.mit.edu/~minsky/minsky.html
The Society of Mind
• A theory of the workings of the mind
• How can intelligence emerge from nonintelligence?
• The Society of Mind is a scheme in which each mind is
made of many smaller processes called agents.
• Each mental agent by itself can only do some simple
thing that needs no mind or thought at all. But when
we join these agents in societies – in certain very
special ways – this leads to true intelligence.
The mind and the brain
Common sense
The society of mind
The self
The agents of the mind
Agents and agencies
Exploitation
The soul
One self or many?
The conservative self
The world of blocks
Long-range plans
Ideals
Self-control
The Society of Mind as a metaphor for the society of mind
The “Self” according to Minsky
“Self” is not definable… but we can ask:
What are our ideas about Selves?
What psychological functions do those ideas serve?
SELF
SELF-IMAGES
SELF-IDEALS
•Beliefs about what we
are
•Beliefs about what we
are capable of doing
•Beliefs about what we
may be disposed to do
•Ideas about what
we’d like to be
•Ideas about what we
ought to be
•Inaccessible to
consciousness
The “Self” in a society of mind framework
Is the concept of a Self necessary at all?
The Self not as a centralized and all-powerful entity, but
rather as a society of ideas that include both our selfimages and self-ideals.
Does a single, central, ruling Self exist? Is it a myth?
“Perhaps it’s because there are no persons in our heads to
make us do the things we want – nor even ones to make us
want to want – that we construct the myth that we’re inside
ourselves.
The conservative self
Ordinary view: “Selves are magic, self-indulgent luxuries
that enable our minds to break the bonds of natural cause
and law… they embody special kinds of liberty.”
Selves are practical necessities. For example, one
function of the Self is to keep us from changing too
rapidly. It’s a way of constraining the changes we might
later make to our long-range plans.
Sherry Turkle
• Professor of the Sociology of Science (Program in Science, Technology, and
Society) at MIT.
• Sociology and personality psychology background.
• Licensed clinical psychologist.
• Turkle has written numerous articles on psychoanalysis and culture and on the
"subjective side" of people's relationships with technology, especially computers.
• Turkle’s current research is about the psychological impact of computational
objects as they become increasingly "relational" artifacts. She is studying a
range of objects, from "affective computers" to robotic dolls and pets.
S. Turkle’s Home page: http://web.mit.edu/sturkle/www/
The Cyberspace society
• The computer has become more than a tool and mirror: we are able to
step through the “looking glass.”
• In cyberspace, we can talk, exchange ideas, and assume personae of
our own creations.
• Eroding boundaries between the real and virtual, the animate and the
inanimate, the unitary and the multiple self.
• In cyberspace, the self is constructed and the rules of social interaction
are built, not received.
A nascent culture of simulation is affecting our ideas
about mind, body, self, and machine.
Your identity on the computer = the sum of your distributed presence
(The self as a multiple, distributed system)
WINDOW 1:
WINDOW 2:
MUD
(“shooting the breeze”)
MUD
(“flame war”)
WINDOW 3:
WINDOW 4:
MUD
(“heavy sexual things”)
Word Processing
(“Physics homework”)
REAL LIFE:
R.L.
JUST ONE MORE WINDOW?
(“and not usually my best one”?)
Something to think about…
• Cyberspace provides worlds for anonymous social interaction in
which one can play a role as close to or as far away from one’s “real
self” as one chooses.
• We have parallel identities, lead parallel lives.
• Identity is constructed and reconstructed over and over again.
What impact does this phenomenon have on Erikson’s theory of
identity development? Does the internet extend the moratorium
period indefinitely?
Does technology enable us to know ourselves better? Or cause
us to understand ourselves less?
Are our virtual personae fragments of our real-life personality? Is
it psychotherapy or addiction?
The shift to postmodernism
Romantic
Centered
Linear
Transparent
Modern
Postmodern
Decentered
Nonlinear
Opaque
Unitary
Multiplicity
Whole
Fragmented
Rigidity
Flexibility