We are
often told that we must know ourselves, love ourselves, before anyone can
reciprocate. This idea of knowing oneself stems as far back as Socrates, but
that does not make it any less relevant to today. Self-knowledge has been a
concept far longer than I’m sure many of us may have guessed. Freud was known
to openly argue the concept, believing that it was limited and biased (and
obviously that psychoanalysis was necessary for true insight – because that isn’t
biased). Nowadays, you can take high school and college courses on
self-knowledge, you likely are someone or know someone who purchased a
self-help book or one of those ten-step programs “guaranteed” to help you know
yourself.
So
clearly self-knowledge is important, but it is also very difficult to grasp –
to truly have. However, self-knowledge is crucial because self-deception is so
easy. Carl Jung is quoted regarding self-knowledge saying, “there is no coming
to [self] consciousness without pain. People will do anything, no matter how
absurd, in order to avoid facing their own soul. One does not become
enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness
conscious.” We cannot truly understand ourselves – have full, genuine
self-knowledge – if we refuse to recognize both the good and bad parts of
ourselves.
Self-knowledge
is also compiled of different forms, different “selves.” The ecological self is
the self as perceived within the immediate physical environment. The
interpersonal self stems from communication. The extended self has its
foundations in memory and anticipation. The private self is acknowledged as we
eventually realize our conscious experiences are our own, exclusively. Our conceptual
self draws on social assumptions and theories regarding human nature in general
(though especially ourselves). Ulric Neisser argued these different types of
knowledge in a 2008 publication. Neisser also argued that we rarely
differentiate between these different selves – we rarely experience them as
distinct because “they are held together by specific forms of stimulus
information.” What I thought was more interesting, however, was Neisser’s
argument that these different selves differ in developmental histories, the
accuracy with which we can know them, what they contribute to our overall human
experience, and even what pathologies they are subject to.
Do I think I am in touch with all of these different selves?
Not anymore. I definitely had the assumption that I knew myself very well
before, and even when I started this post. Now I’m not nearly as sure. Am I
going to run to Barnes and Noble to purchase a self-help ten-step
self-knowledge book? Not quite yet, but I’m getting closer as I keep writing. I
guess we can try to evaluate this and get a little personal tonight. So, as I’m
sitting in my living room typing this I suppose my ecological self is my
perception of myself as a worn-out, slightly overwhelmed college student ready
for a mini vacation. My interpersonal self is only communicating via text
message and I’m merely being reminded that I’m sick and alone.. I suppose my
interpersonal self is not too pleased currently (sorry about that interpersonal
self, I’ll find some better people to text next time). My extended self is
anticipating the vacation well remaining firmly stuck in my memories of
Thanksgivings past, increasing my anticipation of this year’s, as well as the
semester thus far and what I must remember is to come. Perhaps I’m not quite in
touch with my private self yet, however my conceptual self is definitely rooted
in the stigmas, stereotypes, and obligations of being a college student.
Did I
evaluate that correctly? I think so, but I’m not 100% sure, I am just an
undergraduate student after all. It was fun though, you should try it; though it was definitely odd to separate them. I hope you feel like you learned something from this post, though not quite up to the standards of a ten-step book.
No comments:
Post a Comment