• Advanced search

Deposit your research

  • Open Access
  • About UCL Discovery
  • UCL Discovery Plus
  • REF and open access
  • UCL e-theses guidelines
  • Notices and policies

UCL Discovery download statistics are currently being regenerated.

We estimate that this process will complete on or before Mon 06-Jul-2020. Until then, reported statistics will be incomplete.

The Origins of Self: An Anthropological Perspective

Green open access

The Origins of Self explores the role that selfhood plays in defining human society, and each human individual in that society. It considers the genetic and cultural origins of self, the role that self plays in socialisation and language, and the types of self we generate in our individual journeys to and through adulthood. Edwardes argues that other awareness is a relatively early evolutionary development, present throughout the primate clade and perhaps beyond, but self-awareness is a product of the sharing of social models, something only humans appear to do. The self of which we are aware is not something innate within us, it is a model of our self produced as a response to the models of us offered to us by other people. Edwardes proposes that human construction of selfhood involves seven different types of self. All but one of them are internally generated models, and the only non-model, the actual self, is completely hidden from conscious awareness. We rely on others to tell us about our self, and even to let us know we are a self. Developed in relation to a range of subject areas – linguistics, anthropology, genomics and cognition, as well as socio-cultural theory – The Origins of Self is of particular interest to students and researchers studying the origins of language, human origins in general, and the cognitive differences between human and other animal psychologies.

anthropological views of the self essay

Archive Staff Only

  • Freedom of Information
  • Accessibility
  • Advanced Search
  • 6.2 Self and Identity
  • Introduction
  • 1.1 What Is Philosophy?
  • 1.2 How Do Philosophers Arrive at Truth?
  • 1.3 Socrates as a Paradigmatic Historical Philosopher
  • 1.4 An Overview of Contemporary Philosophy
  • Review Questions
  • Further Reading
  • 2.1 The Brain Is an Inference Machine
  • 2.2 Overcoming Cognitive Biases and Engaging in Critical Reflection
  • 2.3 Developing Good Habits of Mind
  • 2.4 Gathering Information, Evaluating Sources, and Understanding Evidence
  • 2.5 Reading Philosophy
  • 2.6 Writing Philosophy Papers
  • 3.1 Indigenous Philosophy
  • 3.2 Classical Indian Philosophy
  • 3.3 Classical Chinese Philosophy
  • 4.1 Historiography and the History of Philosophy
  • 4.2 Classical Philosophy
  • 4.3 Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Philosophy
  • 5.1 Philosophical Methods for Discovering Truth
  • 5.2 Logical Statements
  • 5.3 Arguments
  • 5.4 Types of Inferences
  • 5.5 Informal Fallacies
  • 6.1 Substance
  • 6.3 Cosmology and the Existence of God
  • 6.4 Free Will
  • 7.1 What Epistemology Studies
  • 7.2 Knowledge
  • 7.3 Justification
  • 7.4 Skepticism
  • 7.5 Applied Epistemology
  • 8.1 The Fact-Value Distinction
  • 8.2 Basic Questions about Values
  • 8.3 Metaethics
  • 8.4 Well-Being
  • 8.5 Aesthetics
  • 9.1 Requirements of a Normative Moral Theory
  • 9.2 Consequentialism
  • 9.3 Deontology
  • 9.4 Virtue Ethics
  • 9.6 Feminist Theories of Ethics
  • 10.1 The Challenge of Bioethics
  • 10.2 Environmental Ethics
  • 10.3 Business Ethics and Emerging Technology
  • 11.1 Historical Perspectives on Government
  • 11.2 Forms of Government
  • 11.3 Political Legitimacy and Duty
  • 11.4 Political Ideologies
  • 12.1 Enlightenment Social Theory
  • 12.2 The Marxist Solution
  • 12.3 Continental Philosophy’s Challenge to Enlightenment Theories
  • 12.4 The Frankfurt School
  • 12.5 Postmodernism

Learning Objectives

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

  • Apply the dilemma of persistence to self and identity.
  • Outline Western and Eastern theological views of self.
  • Describe secular views of the self.
  • Describe the mind-body problem.

Today, some might think that atomism and Aristotle’s teleological view have evolved into a theory of cells that resolves the acorn-oak tree identity problem. The purpose, or ergon, of both the acorn and the oak tree are present in the zygote, the cell that forms when male and female sex cells combine. This zygote cell contains the genetic material, or the instructions, for how the organism will develop to carry out its intended purpose.

But not all identity problems are so easily solved today. What if the author of this chapter lived in a house as a child, and years later, after traveling in the highly glamorous life that comes with being a philosopher, returned to find the house had burned down and been rebuilt exactly as it had been. Is it the same home? The generic questions that center on how we should understand the tension between identity and persistence include:

  • Can a thing change without losing its identity?
  • If so, how much change can occur without a loss of identity for the thing itself?

This section begins to broach these questions of identity and self.

The Ship of Theseus

Consider the following thought experiment. Imagine a wooden ship owned by the hero Theseus. Within months of launching, the need to replace decking would be evident. The salt content of sea water is highly corrosive. Accidents can also happen. Within a common version of the thought experiment, the span of one thousand years is supposed. Throughout the span, it is supposed that the entire decking and wooden content of the ship will have been replaced. The name of the ship remains constant. But given the complete change of materials over the assumed time span, in what sense can we assert that the ship is the same ship? We are tempted to conceptualize identity in terms of persistence, but the Ship of Theseus challenges the commonly held intuition regarding how to make sense of identity.

Similarly, as our bodies develop from zygote to adult, cells die and are replaced using new building materials we obtain though food, water, and our environment. Given this, are we the same being as we were 10 or 20 years ago? How can we identify what defines ourselves? What is our essence? This section examines answers proposed by secular and religious systems of belief.

Write Like a Philosopher

Watch the video “ Metaphysics: Ship of Theseus ” in the series Wi-Phi Philosophy . You will find five possible solutions for making sense of the thought experiment. Pick one solution and explain why the chosen solution is the most salient. Can you explain how the strengths outweigh the stated objections—without ignoring the objections?

Judeo-Christian Views of Self

The common view concerning identity in Judeo-Christian as well as other spiritual traditions is that the self is a soul. In Western thought, the origin of this view can be traced to Plato and his theory of forms. This soul as the real self solves the ship of Theseus dilemma, as the soul continuously exists from zygote or infant and is not replaced by basic building materials. The soul provides permanence and even persists into the afterlife.

Much of the Christian perspective on soul and identity rested on Aristotle’s theory of being, as a result of the work of St. Thomas Aquinas . Aquinas, a medieval philosopher, followed the Aristotelian composite of form and matter but modified the concept to fit within a Christianized cosmology. Drawing upon portions of Aristotle’s works reintroduced to the West as a result of the Crusades, Aquinas offered an alternative philosophical model to the largely Platonic Christian view that was dominant in his day. From an intellectual historical perspective, the reintroduction of the Aristotelian perspective into Western thought owes much to the thought of Aquinas.

In Being and Essence , Aquinas noted that there was a type of existence that was necessary and uncaused and a type of being that was contingent and was therefore dependent upon the former to be brought into existence. While the concept of a first cause or unmoved mover was present within Aristotle’s works, Aquinas identified the Christian idea of God as the “unmoved mover.” God, as necessary being, was understood as the cause of contingent being. God, as the unmoved mover, as the essence from which other contingent beings derived existence, also determined the nature and purpose driving all contingent beings. In addition, God was conceived of as a being beyond change, as perfection realized. Using Aristotelian terms, we could say that God as Being lacked potentiality and was best thought of as that being that attained complete actuality or perfection—in other words, necessary being.

God, as the ultimate Good and Truth, will typically be understood as assigning purpose to the self. The cosmology involved is typically teleological—in other words, there is a design and order and ultimately an end to the story (the eschaton ). Members of this tradition will assert that the Divine is personal and caring and that God has entered the narrative of our history to realize God’s purpose through humanity. With some doctrinal exception, if the self lives the good life (a life according to God’s will), then the possibility of sharing eternity with the Divine is promised.

Think Like a Philosopher

Watch this discussion with Timothy Pawl on the question of eternal life, part of the PBS series Closer to the Truth , “ Imagining Eternal Life ”.

Is eternal life an appealing prospect? If change is not possible within heaven, then heaven (the final resting place for immortal souls) should be outside of time. What exactly would existence within an eternal now be like? In the video, Pawl claimed that time has to be present within eternity. He argued that there must be movement from potentiality to actuality. How can that happen in an eternity?

Hindu and Buddhist Views of Self

Within Hindu traditions, atman is the term associated with the self. The term, with its roots in ancient Sanskrit, is typically translated as the eternal self, spirit, essence, soul, and breath (Rudy, 2019). Western faith traditions speak of an individual soul and its movement toward the Divine. That is, a strong principle of individuation is applied to the soul. A soul is born, and from that time forward, the soul is eternal. Hinduism, on the other hand, frames atman as eternal; atman has always been. Although atman is eternal, atman is reincarnated. The spiritual goal is to “know atman” such that liberation from reincarnation ( moksha ) occurs.

Hindu traditions vary in the meaning of brahman . Some will speak of a force supporting all things, while other traditions might invoke specific deities as manifestations of brahman . Escaping the cycle of reincarnation requires the individual to realize that atman is brahman and to live well or in accordance with dharma , observing the code of conduct as prescribed by scripture, and karma , actions and deeds. Union of the atman with brahman can be reach though yoga, meditation, rituals, and other practices.

Buddha rejected the concept of brahman and proposed an alternate view of the world and the path to liberation. The next sections consider the interaction between the concepts of Atman (the self) and Brahman (reality).

The Doctrine of Dependent Origination

Buddhist philosophy rejects the concept of an eternal soul. The doctrine of dependent origination , a central tenet within Buddhism, is built on the claim that there is a causal link between events in the past, the present, and the future. What we did in the past is part of what happened previously and is part of what will be.

The doctrine of dependent origination (also known as interdependent arising) is the starting point for Buddhist cosmology. The doctrine here asserts that not only are all people joined, but all phenomena are joined with all other phenomena. All things are caused by all other things, and in turn, all things are dependent upon other things. Being is a nexus of interdependencies. There is no first cause or prime mover in this system. There is no self—at least in the Western sense of self—in this system (O’Brien 2019a).

The Buddhist Doctrine of No Self ( Anatman )

One of many distinct features of Buddhism is the notion of anatman as the denial of the self. What is being denied here is the sense of self expressed through metaphysical terms such as substance or universal being. Western traditions want to assert an autonomous being who is strongly individuated from other beings. Within Buddhism, the “me” is ephemeral.

Listen to the podcast “ Graham Priest on Buddhism and Philosophy ” in the series Philosophy Bites.

Suffering and Liberation

Within Buddhism, there are four noble truths that are used to guide the self toward liberation. An often-quoted sentiment from Buddhism is the first of the four noble truths . The first noble truth states that “life is suffering” ( dukkha ).

But there are different types of suffering that need to be addressed in order to understand more fully how suffering is being used here. The first meaning ( dukkha-dukkha ) is commensurate with the ordinary use of suffering as pain. This sort of suffering can be experienced physically and/or emotionally. A metaphysical sense of dukkha is viparinama-dukkha . Suffering in this sense relates to the impermanence of all objects. It is our tendency to impose permanence upon that which by nature is not, or our craving for ontological persistence, that best captures this sense of dukkha. Finally, there is samkhara-dukkha , or suffering brought about through the interdependency of all things.

Building on an understanding of “suffering” informed only by the first sense, some characterize Buddhism as “life is suffering; suffering is caused by greed; suffering ends when we stop being greedy; the way to do that is to follow something called the Eightfold Path” (O’Brien 2019b). A more accurate understanding of dukkha within this context must include all three senses of suffering.

The second of the noble truths is that the cause of suffering is our thirst or craving ( tanha ) for things that lack the ability to satisfy our craving. We attach our self to material things, concepts, ideas, and so on. This attachment, although born of a desire to fulfill our internal cravings, only heightens the craving. The problem is that attachment separates the self from the other. Through our attachments, we lose sight of the impermanence not only of the self but of all things.

The third noble truth teaches that the way to awakening ( nirvana ) is through a letting go of the cravings. Letting go of the cravings entails the cessation of suffering ( dukkha ).

The fourth truth is founded in the realization that living a good life requires doing, not just thinking. By living in accordance with the Eightfold Path, a person may live such that “every action of body, mind, and speech” are geared toward the promotion of dharma.

Buddhism’s Four Noble Truths

Part of the BBC Radio 4 series A History of Ideas , this clip is narrated by Steven Fry and scripted by Nigel Warburton.

The Five Aggregates

How might the self ( atman ) experience the world and follow a path toward liberation? Buddhist philosophy posits five aggregates ( skandhas ), which are the thoughtful and iterative processes, through which the self interacts with the world.

  • Form ( rupa ): the aggregate of matter, or the body.
  • Sensation ( vedana ): emotional and physical feelings.
  • Perception ( samjna ): thinking, the processing of sense data; “knowledge that puts together.”
  • Mental formation ( samskara ): how thoughts are processed into habits, predispositions, moods, volitions, biases, interests, etc. The fourth skandhas is related to karma, as much of our actions flow from these elements.
  • Consciousness ( vijnana ): awareness and sensitivity concerning a thing that does not include conceptualization.

Although the self uses the aggregates, the self is not thought of as a static and enduring substance underlying the processes. These aggregates are collections that are very much subject to change in an interdependent world.

Secular Notions of Self

In theology, continuity of the self is achieved through the soul. Secular scholars reject this idea, defining self in different ways, some of which are explored in the next sections.

Bundle Theory

One of the first and most influential scholars in the Western tradition to propose a secular concept of self was Scottish philosopher David Hume (1711–1776). Hume formed his thoughts in response to empiricist thinkers’ views on substance and knowledge. British philosopher John Locke (1632–1704) offered a definition of substance in his Essay Concerning Human Understanding. In Book XXIII, Locke described substance as “a something, I know not what.” He asserted that although we cannot know exactly what substance is, we can reason from experience that there must be a substance “standing under or upholding” the qualities that exist within a thing itself. The meaning of substance is taken from the Latin substantia , or “that which supports.”

If we return to the acorn and oak example, the reality of what it means to be an oak is rooted in the ultimate reality of what it means to be an oak tree. The ultimate reality, like the oak’s root system, stands beneath every particular instance of an oak tree. While not every tree is exactly the same, all oak trees do share a something, a shared whatness, that makes an oak an oak. Philosophers call this whatness that is shared among oaks a substance.

Arguments against a static and enduring substance ensued. David Hume’s answer to the related question of “What is the self?” illustrates how a singular thing may not require an equally singular substance. According to Hume, the self was not a Platonic form or an Aristotelian composite of matter and form. Hume articulated the self as a changing bundle of perceptions. In his Treatise of Human Nature (Book 1, Part IV), Hume described the self as “a bundle or collection of different perceptions, which succeed each other with inconceivable rapidity, and are in a perpetual flux and movement.”

Hume noted that what has been mistaken for a static and enduring self was nothing more than a constantly changing set of impressions that were tied together through their resemblance to one another, the order or predictable pattern (succession) of the impressions, and the appearance of causation lent through the resemblance and succession. The continuity we experience was not due to an enduring self but due to the mind’s ability to act as a sort of theater: “The mind is a kind of theatre, where several perceptions successively make their appearance; pass, re-pass, glide away, and mingle in an infinite variety of postures and situations” (Hume 1739, 252).

Which theories of self—and substance—should we accept? The Greek theories of substance and the theological theories of a soul offer advantages. Substance allows us to explain what we observe. For example, an apple, through its substance, allows us to make sense of the qualities of color, taste, the nearness of the object, etc. Without a substance, it could be objected that the qualities are merely unintelligible and unrelated qualities without a reference frame. But bundle theory allows us to make sense of a thing without presupposing a mythical form, or “something I know not what!” Yet, without the mythical form of a soul, how do we explain our own identities?

Anthropological Views

Anthropological views of the self question the cultural and social constructs upon which views of the self are erected. For example, within Western thought, it is supposed that the self is distinct from the “other.” In fact, throughout this section, we have assumed the need for a separate and distinct self and have used a principle of continuity based on the assumption that a self must persist over time. Yet, non-Western cultures blur or negate this distinction. The African notion of ubuntu , for example, posits a humanity that cannot be divided. The Nguni proverb that best describes this concept is “umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu” sometimes translated as “a person is a person through other persons” (Gade 2011). The word ubuntu is from the Zulu language, but cultures from southern Africa to Tanzania, Kenya, and Democratic Republic of the Congo all have words for this concept. Anthropological approaches attempt to make clear how the self and the culture share in making meaning.

The Mind as Self

Many philosophers, Western and non-Western, have equated the self to the mind. But what is the mind? A monist response is the mind is the brain. Yet, if the mind is the brain, a purely biological entity, then how do we explain consciousness? Moreover, if we take the position that the mind is immaterial but the body is material, we are left with the question of how two very different types of things can causally affect the other. The question of “How do the two nonidentical and dissimilar entities experience a causal relationship?” is known as the mind-body problem. This section explores some alternative philosophical responses to these questions.

Physicalism

Reducing the mind to the brain seems intuitive given advances in neuroscience and other related sciences that deepen our understanding of cognition. As a doctrine, physicalism is committed to the assumption that everything is physical. Exactly how to define the physical is a matter of contention. Driving this view is the assertion that nothing that is nonphysical has physical effects.

Listen to the podcast “ David Papineau on Physicalism ” in the series Philosophy Bites.

Focus on the thought experiment concerning what Mary knows. Here is a summary of the thought experiment:

Mary is a scientist and specializes in the neurophysiology of color. Strangely, her world has black, white, and shades of gray but lacks color (weird, but go with it!). Due to her expertise, she knows every physical fact concerning colors. What if Mary found herself in a room in which color as we experience it is present? Would she learn anything? A physicalist must respond “no”! Do you agree? How would you respond?

John Locke and Identity

In place of the biological, Locke defined identity as the continuity lent through what we refer to as consciousness. His approach is often referred to as the psychological continuity approach, as our memories and our ability to reflect upon our memories constitute identity for Locke. In his Essay on Human Understanding , Locke (as cited by Gordon-Roth 2019) observed, “We must consider what Person stands for . . . which, I think, is a thinking intelligent Being, that has reason and reflection, and can consider it self as itself, the same thinking thing in different times and places.” He offered a thought experiment to illustrate his point. Imagine a prince and cobbler whose memories (we might say consciousness) were swapped. The notion is far-fetched, but if this were to happen, we would assert that the prince was now the cobbler and the cobbler was now the prince. Therefore, what individuates us cannot be the body (or the biological).

John Locke on Personal Identity

Part of the BBC Radio 4 series A History of Ideas , this clip is narrated by Gillian Anderson and scripted by Nigel Warburton.

The Problem of Consciousness

Christof Koch (2018) has said that “consciousness is everything you experience.” Koch offered examples, such as “a tune stuck in your head,” the “throbbing pain from a toothache,” and “a parent’s love for a child” to illustrate the experience of consciousness. Our first-person experiences are what we think of intuitively when we try to describe what consciousness is. If we were to focus on the throbbing pain of a toothache as listed above, we can see that there is the experiencing of the toothache. Curiously, there is also the experiencing of the experiencing of the toothache. Introspection and theorizing built upon first-person inspections affords vivid and moving accounts of the things experienced, referred to as qualia .

An optimal accounting of consciousness, however, should not only explain what consciousness is but should also offer an explanation concerning how consciousness came to be and why consciousness is present. What difference or differences does consciousness introduce?

Listen to the podcast “ Ted Honderich on What It Is to Be Conscious ,” in the series Philosophy Bites.

Rene Descartes and Dualism

Dualism , as the name suggests, attempts to account for the mind through the introduction of two entities. The dualist split was addressed earlier in the discussion of substance. Plato argued for the reality of immaterial forms but admitted another type of thing—the material. Aristotle disagreed with his teacher Plato and insisted on the location of the immaterial within the material realm. How might the mind and consciousness be explained through dualism?

Mind Body Dualism

A substance dualist, in reference to the mind problem, asserts that there are two fundamental and irreducible realities that are needed to fully explain the self. The mind is nonidentical to the body, and the body is nonidentical to the mind. The French philosopher René Descartes (1596–1650) offered a very influential version of substance dualism in his 1641 work Meditations on First Philosophy. In that work, Descartes referred to the mind as a thinking thing ( res cogitans ) and the body as an extended nonthinking thing ( res extensa ). Descartes associated identity with the thinking thing. He introduced a model in which the self and the mind were eternal.

Behaviorism

There is a response that rejects the idea of an independent mind. Within this approach, what is important is not mental states or the existence of a mind as a sort of central processor, but activity that can be translated into statements concerning observable behavior (Palmer 2016, 122). As within most philosophical perspectives, there are many different “takes” on the most correct understanding. Behaviorism is no exception. The “hard” behaviorist asserts that there are no mental states. You might consider this perspective the purist or “die-hard” perspective. The “soft” behaviorist, the moderate position, does not deny the possibility of minds and mental events but believes that theorizing concerning human activity should be based on behavior.

Before dismissing the view, pause and consider the plausibility of the position. Do we ever really know another’s mind? There is some validity to the notion that we ought to rely on behavior when trying to know or to make sense of the “other.” But if you have a toothache, and you experience myself being aware of the qualia associated with a toothache (e.g., pain, swelling, irritability, etc.), are these sensations more than activities? What of the experience that accompanies the experience?

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/introduction-philosophy/pages/1-introduction
  • Authors: Nathan Smith
  • Publisher/website: OpenStax
  • Book title: Introduction to Philosophy
  • Publication date: Jun 15, 2022
  • Location: Houston, Texas
  • Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-philosophy/pages/1-introduction
  • Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-philosophy/pages/6-2-self-and-identity

© Dec 19, 2023 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

The Origins of Self

Distributed for UCL Press

The Origins of Self

An anthropological perspective.

Martin P. J. Edwardes

248 pages | 5 halftones | 6.14 x 9.21 | © 2019

Free digital open access editions are available to download from UCL Press.

Language and Linguistics: General Language and Linguistics

View all books from UCL Press

  • Table of contents
  • Author Events
  • Related Titles

Table of Contents

Be the first to know.

Get the latest updates on new releases, special offers, and media highlights when you subscribe to our email lists!

Sign up here for updates about the Press

Logo Oapen

  • For Librarians
  • For Publishers
  • For Researchers
  •   OAPEN Home

The Origins of Self

An Anthropological Perspective

Thumbnail

Publisher website

Publication date and place, classification.

  • Imported or submitted locally

Export search results

The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Differen formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

A logged-in user can export up to 15000 items. If you're not logged in, you can export no more than 500 items.

To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.

(Stanford users can avoid this Captcha by logging in.)

  • Send to text email RefWorks EndNote printer

Anthropology of the self : the individual in cultural perspective

Available online, at the library.

anthropological views of the self essay

Green Library

More options.

  • Find it at other libraries via WorldCat
  • Contributors

Description

Creators/contributors, contents/summary.

  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. Greek Philosophy and Concepts of the Psyche
  • 3. Buddhism and the Doctrine of the No-Soul (Anatta)
  • 4. The Hindu Conception of the Self
  • 5. Taoism, Confucianism and the Chinese Self
  • 6. African Philosophy and Conceptions of the Self
  • 7. People as Social Beings: Conceptions of the Self in Oceania
  • 8. Feminist Philosophy and the Theory of the Self.
  • (source: Nielsen Book Data)

Bibliographic information

Browse related items.

Stanford University

  • Stanford Home
  • Maps & Directions
  • Search Stanford
  • Emergency Info
  • Terms of Use
  • Non-Discrimination
  • Accessibility

© Stanford University , Stanford , California 94305 .

Logo

Essay on Anthropological Perspective Of Self

Students are often asked to write an essay on Anthropological Perspective Of Self in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Anthropological Perspective Of Self

Understanding anthropology.

Anthropology is the study of humans, their behavior, and societies. It helps us understand the diversity of human cultures across the world. The ‘self’ in anthropology refers to how individuals see and define themselves.

The Self in Different Cultures

Anthropologists have found that the concept of ‘self’ varies greatly among different cultures. In some societies, people see themselves as independent individuals. In others, people view themselves as part of a larger group or community.

Self-Identity

Self-identity is how we see ourselves. It can be influenced by many factors like our experiences, social interactions, and cultural norms. Anthropologists study these influences to understand how self-identity is formed.

Role of Language

Language plays a crucial role in shaping our ‘self’. It’s not just a tool for communication, but also a way to express our identity. Anthropologists study language to explore how it influences our sense of self.

Anthropology and Self-Understanding

In conclusion, anthropology provides a unique lens to understand the ‘self’. It helps us see how culture, society, and language shape our identities. This understanding can help us appreciate the diversity of human experiences.

250 Words Essay on Anthropological Perspective Of Self

Understanding the self.

The ‘Self’ is a term we use to describe who we are. It includes our thoughts, feelings, and actions. But, how we understand the ‘Self’ can change based on different cultures and societies. This is where anthropology comes in. Anthropology is the study of humans and human behavior. So, an anthropological perspective of ‘Self’ means looking at how different cultures understand and define the ‘Self’.

The Social Self

In many cultures, the ‘Self’ is not just about the individual. It is also about the social group or community. This is often called the ‘social self’. The ‘social self’ means that our identity is shaped by our relationships with others. For example, in many African cultures, a person’s identity is tied to their community. This shows that the ‘Self’ is not always about the individual, but can also be about the group.

The Independent Self

In contrast, some cultures focus on the individual. This is called the ‘independent self’. The ‘independent self’ means that our identity is based on our personal thoughts, feelings, and actions. For example, in many Western cultures, people are encouraged to be independent and unique. This shows that the ‘Self’ can also be about personal identity.

In conclusion, the ‘Self’ is a complex concept. It can be understood in different ways based on different cultures. Anthropology helps us see these differences. It shows us that the ‘Self’ can be both social and individual. It can be about the group and the individual. This gives us a richer understanding of what it means to be human.

500 Words Essay on Anthropological Perspective Of Self

Introduction.

The ‘self’ is a concept we all understand, but it can be tricky to define. It’s the idea of who we are as individuals, our thoughts, feelings, and actions. In anthropology, the study of humans and cultures, the ‘self’ is seen in a unique way. This essay will explain the anthropological perspective of self in simple terms.

Anthropological View of Self

In anthropology, the ‘self’ is not just about what’s inside us. It is also about how we connect with the world around us. Anthropologists believe that our ‘self’ is shaped by the culture we live in. This means our beliefs, values, and behaviors are influenced by the society we grow up in.

For example, if you grow up in a culture that values hard work, you might see yourself as a hard worker. This is because your culture has shaped your view of yourself. So, the ‘self’ is not just about who we think we are, but also about how our culture sees us.

Individual and Society

Anthropologists also look at the relationship between the individual and society. They believe that our ‘self’ is not just a personal thing. It is also a social thing. This means that our ‘self’ is not just about us as individuals, but also about how we fit into our society.

For example, if you are a student, your ‘self’ might include being a part of a school community. This is because your role as a student is a part of your ‘self’. So, the ‘self’ is not just about who we are, but also about how we belong to a larger group.

Changes in the Self

Another important point in the anthropological perspective of self is that our ‘self’ can change over time. This is because as we grow and experience new things, our views of ourselves can change.

For example, if you move to a new country, you might start to see yourself in a different way. This is because your new experiences can shape your ‘self’. So, the ‘self’ is not a fixed thing, but something that can change and grow.

In conclusion, the anthropological perspective of self is a unique way of looking at who we are. It sees the ‘self’ as something that is shaped by our culture, our society, and our experiences. It reminds us that our ‘self’ is not just about us as individuals, but also about how we connect with the world around us.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

  • Essay on Anthem For Doomed Youth
  • Essay on Anti Bullying
  • Essay on Anxiety Experience

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Anthropology of the Self: The Individual in Cultural Perspective

Buy this book.

anthropological views of the self essay

PhilArchive

External links.

anthropological views of the self essay

  • Available at Amazon.com

Through your library

  • Sign in / register and customize your OpenURL resolver
  • Configure custom resolver

Similar books and articles

Citations of this work, references found in this work.

No references found.

Phiosophy Documentation Center

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

  • We're Hiring!
  • Help Center

paper cover thumbnail

Sociological and Anthropological Perspective of Self

Profile image of Arnel Perez

George Herbert Mead ; American philosopher; sociologist; and psychologist/ one of the founders of Pragmatism and Symbolic Interactionism/ "Mind,  Self is something which has development and it arises in the process of social experience and activity (Social self).

Related Papers

anthropological views of the self essay

Handbook of Social Psychology, 2nd edition

meeta virmani

The study of self has taken an important position in the recent context. The difference between the 'Non-Western' and the 'Western' self has played its role and we have ended up by putting nomenclatures of individualistic societies to some nations, and collectivistic to others. But is the discussion of self only limited to the notion of individualism and collectivism, and if not, then what are the other implications on the study of self? This paper talks about how self has been talked about in theory, how temporally a shift has happened in the notion of self and the factors that have an impact on the construction of self.

Oxford Handbooks Online

kenneth gergen

The study of self has taken an important position in the recent context. The difference between the ‘Non-Western’ and the ‘Western’ self has played its role and we have ended up by putting nomenclatures of individualistic societies to some nations, and collectivistic to others. But is the discussion of self only limited to the notion of individualism and collectivism, and if not, then what are the other implications on the study of self? This paper talks about how self has been talked about in theory, how temporally a shift has happened in the notion of self and the factors that have an impact on the construction of self.

Vlad Glaveanu

Interrogations about the self are as ancient as humankind and the "who am I?" question seems to have travelled across historical times only to be posed more acutely than ever in our postmodern age. This essay will start by reviewing definitions of the self as well as the main problems psychologists are confronted with when theorizing the self. I will argue, in supporting the vision of the self as being a social structure, that both tendencies to "individualize" and "discursify" fail to acknowledge the intersubjective nature of the self and its genesis within me - other relations. This particular approach will be further developed by connecting the self to the social context of representations, attributions and culture. In the end, the notion of "synergetic self" will be introduced and developed with an emphasis on its dynamic, transformative, emergent and creative dimensions. I will explain how this new standpoint manages to overcome old dichotomies in the psychology of selfhood and to offer a truly social and contextual account of the self. Keywords: self, individualistic approach, discursive approach, intersubjectivity, culture, representations, attributions, synergy.

… face aux menaces du soi et …

Claire Hart

Philosophical Psychology

Tobias Schlicht

Jeffrey B. Holl

This work is an assemblage of the social and the conceptual, the singular and the total into a broad reaching exposition of how beings may be symbolized and signified ontologically to subject-objects. At book length it negotiates an argument for the transcendental without taking leave of the horizons of production and how the represented world appears thereto.

Aishath Nasheeda

Self as Self The word " self " means complete individuality. It can also refer to one's character, one's nature or one's interest. The term concept is an abstract idea which gives meaning to what it represents. Therefore, self-concept is how we define our self, based on the characteristic we know and the values we hold to ourselves. These values and characteristics are linked to various aspects of our self-concept such as self,

RELATED PAPERS

moussa ledoux njoupouognigni

Costas Synolakis

Journal de Pédiatrie et de Puériculture

Ahlem Bezzine

Zeitschrift für Physik C Particles and Fields

Giovanni Valenti

Asian Security

Avinash Paliwal

Dragana Dardic

Helio H Caiaffa Filho

Modelling in Science Education and Learning

Cristina Jordán

Ronny Suarez

Magallania (Punta Arenas)

Gaceta de M�xico

Fernando Meneses-Gonzalez

PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Lee Ching Ng

Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin

Guilherme Irffi

blog alfabeta

Frmn Glz Ptíaz

International Journal of Health, Economics, and Social Sciences (IJHESS)

International Journal of Angiology

Jurnal Konservasi Cagar Budaya

Yustinus Suranto

Computers, Materials & Continua

Muhammad Afzaal khan

Urban Geography

Gertjan Wijburg

Physical Review E

European Journal of Cancer

JESUS A. HERNANDEZ

Cardiovascular Diabetology

Matteo Santamaria

Sablon Tumbler Plastik Murah Cepat

seminarkit jogja01

Revista MENDIVE

Reinaldo Meléndez Ruiz

ANDREA ROCHA

IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

Eleonora Agustine

Jornal Brasileiro De Pneumologia

Renato Andreotti E Silva

Revista de Geociências do Nordeste

Alanna Costa Dutra

European Urology Supplements

David Sussman

Revista Venezolana de Gerencia

CARLOS MANOSALVAS VACA

RELATED TOPICS

  •   We're Hiring!
  •   Help Center
  • Find new research papers in:
  • Health Sciences
  • Earth Sciences
  • Cognitive Science
  • Mathematics
  • Computer Science
  • Academia ©2024

Anthropology Review

What are the key components of the anthropological perspective?

Anthropology is the study of human commonalities and diversity. It seeks answers to questions about the different ways of being human, the commonalities and differences between societies in different parts of the world, the impact of different lifestyles and how these developed over time. The anthropological perspective includes several key components. These include a holistic approach to understanding human behaviour, an emphasis on cultural relativism, and a commitment to participant observation as a method of data collection.

Table of Contents

Additionally, anthropologists often focus on the ways in which power structures and social inequalities shape human experience, and they may also examine the intersections between biology and culture.

Overall, the anthropological perspective seeks to understand the diversity of human experiences across time and space while also recognizing the interconnectedness of all aspects of human life.

There are three key components of the anthropological perspective – they are comparative or cross-cultural studies, holism and cultural relativism.

Components of the Anthropological Perspective (1) – Comparative or cross-cultural studies

It is not possible to understand human diversity without studying diverse cultures.

An anthropologist approaches the study of different societies with fresh eyes and an open mind. They seek to understand what holds a society together, what makes it function the way it does, and how it has adapted to its environment –

  • What holds a society together.
  • What makes it function the way it does.
  • How the society has adapted to the environment.
  • The main modes of communication within the society.
  • How the people’s past has shaped their culture.

Only then will an anthropologist be able to trace the impact of different forces on the formation of human culture.

It is also interesting to note that when one views a situation as an “outsider” one is likely to notice things about the society that the society itself is not consciously aware of and which occur simply because that is the way it has “always” been. Anthropologists who are not enculturated can view a society dispassionately. They are able to ask questions that locals never ask. This makes it possible to identify why it is that people do what they do.

Cross-cultural studies are not only important to identify differences. They also enable anthropologists to identify similarities, enabling them to identify universals in being human.

Components of the Anthropological Perspective (2) – Holism

Anthropologists view culture as a complex web of interdependent and interconnected values, beliefs, traditions, and practices that shape the way people live and interact with one another. Each aspect of a society’s culture influences and interacts with other aspects of the same culture. Therefore, it is impossible to understand a culture in isolation or by examining individual elements in a piecemeal manner. This is why an anthropologist must consider all the components of the anthropological perspective.

When an anthropologist attempts to understand a culture, they must take into consideration the whole culture – its history, customs, language, religion, art, politics and economics – as well as the equilibrium between these different parts. This means that all aspects of the culture must be studied together to get a comprehensive understanding of how they work together to create a functioning society.

For example, an anthropologist studying a traditional agricultural community must examine not only the farming techniques used but also the social organization around agriculture including labour division and gender roles. In this way, one can see how farming practices are intertwined with cultural values such as family structure and social hierarchy, in a manner that makes sense in the environmental (for example fertile lands or arid desert) and historical context of the society.

When embarking on an ethnography the anthropologist must take account of each part of the equation or they risk misunderstanding the whole.

Economic Structure

When an anthropologist seeks to understand a culture, they must consider various aspects that influence the way people live and interact with each other. One important aspect is the economics of the culture. This includes examining the mode of production and the relations of production.

The mode of production refers to the way in which goods and services are produced within a society. For example, some societies may rely on subsistence agriculture while others may have industrialized economies with high levels of automation. The mode of production can have profound effects on social organization, power dynamics, and cultural values.

The relations of production refer to the social relationships that exist between people in regards to economic activities such as work and exchange. This includes examining issues such as labour division, property ownership, and access to resources. In some societies, these relationships may be based on kinship ties or communal ownership while in others they may be more individualistic or based on market relationships.

By understanding the economics of a culture, anthropologists gain an understanding of how people make a living, what resources are valued by society, and how wealth is distributed among different groups. They can also better understand how economic activities intersect with other aspects of culture such as religion, politics, and gender roles.

Kinship System

Another important aspect for consideration is the kinship system, which includes the system of descent , marriage practices, and living arrangements after marriage .

The system of descent refers to how people trace their ancestry and inheritance through their family tree. There are several different forms of descent systems such as patrilineal, matrilineal, and bilateral . These systems can have significant impacts on issues such as inheritance rights, social status, and gender roles .

Marriage practices also vary widely across cultures. Some societies practice arranged marriages while others allow individuals to choose their own partners. The rules around who can marry whom depend on factors such as age, social status, religion or ethnicity. Marriage practices may also have an impact on issues such as property ownership and inheritance.

Living arrangements after marriage can also vary widely across cultures . In some societies, newlyweds move in with one spouse’s family while in others they may establish their own household. The living arrangements of married couples can have an impact on issues such as gender roles within the family unit and the relationships between different generations.

By understanding the kinship system of a culture, anthropologists can gain insight into how families are organized and how social relationships are established within a society. They can also better understand how these relationships intersect with other aspects of culture such as religion, politics, and economics.

Religion, Beliefs and Rituals

Religion can be an important part of a culture’s identity and can shape many aspects of daily life. Different cultures may have different religious beliefs or practices, ranging from monotheistic religions such as Christianity or Islam to polytheistic religions such as Hinduism or Shintoism. Religion can also have an impact on issues such as gender roles, social hierarchy, and political power.

Beliefs are another important aspect of culture that anthropologists must consider. These beliefs may include ideas about the nature of reality, morality, and the afterlife. Beliefs shape how people view themselves and their place in society. They can also influence how people make decisions about issues such as health care or education.

Rituals are formalized behaviors that are typically associated with religious or cultural practices. Rituals may include things like prayer, meditation, or sacrifice. They often serve to reinforce social norms and values within a society while also providing individuals with a sense of community and belonging.

By understanding the religion, beliefs, and rituals of a culture, anthropologists can gain insight into how people understand their place in the world and how they relate to others within their society. They can also better understand how these beliefs intersect with other aspects of culture such as politics, economics, and gender roles.

Politics and Power

Politics refers to how a society is organized and who has power within that society. Different societies have different forms of government such as democracy , monarchy, or dictatorship. The balance of power between different groups within a society can also vary widely. Some societies may be hierarchically organized with clear social classes while others may be more egalitarian.

Understanding the political system of a culture can provide insights into issues such as social inequality, conflict resolution, and decision-making processes.

Anthropologists must also consider how political power is obtained and maintained within a society. This can include factors such as wealth, education, or military force.

Gender roles are another important aspect of culture that anthropologists must consider. These roles refer to the behaviours and expectations associated with being male or female in a given society. Gender roles can vary widely across cultures and may influence many aspects of daily life including work, family life, and social interactions. Understanding gender relations within a culture can provide insights into issues such as reproductive rights, violence against women, and access to education or employment opportunities.

Components of the Anthropological Perspective (3) – Cultural Relativism

This concept refers to the idea that when studying a different culture, an anthropologist must suspend their own cultural biases and avoid making value judgments about the beliefs and practices of the people they are studying.

Anthropologists recognize that every culture has its own unique set of values, beliefs, and practices that are shaped by historical, social, and environmental factors. These cultural differences can be difficult for outsiders to understand or accept, but it is important for anthropologists to approach other cultures with an open mind and without imposing their own cultural values on what they observe.

For example, an anthropologist studying a traditional society where arranged marriages are common may initially find this practice strange or even objectionable, based on their own cultural upbringing. However, in order to gain a deeper understanding of why arranged marriages are practiced in this society, the anthropologist must set aside their personal biases and seek to understand how this practice fits into the larger cultural context.

Cultural relativism does not mean that all cultural practices are equally valid or morally acceptable. Rather, it acknowledges that different cultures have different ways of understanding and interacting with the world around them. By approaching other cultures with an open mind and without preconceived notions or judgments, anthropologists can gain a deeper understanding of these differences while also recognizing universal human experiences such as love, loss, joy and pain.

In summary, cultural relativism is an essential component of the anthropological perspective. It requires anthropologists to approach other cultures with humility and respect while recognizing that every culture has its own unique set of values and beliefs shaped by historical, social and environmental factors. By embracing this perspective, anthropologists can gain deeper insights into what makes each culture unique while also recognizing shared human experiences across cultures.

Conclusion – The Importance of Considering all the Components of the Anthropological Perspective

The components of the anthropological perspective are crucial for understanding a culture in its entirety. Without taking these factors into consideration, an anthropologist’s understanding of a culture would be incomplete and may lead to misunderstandings or misinterpretations.

Firstly, studying the politics and power dynamics within a society is important because it provides insights into how decisions are made and who holds influence over different aspects of daily life. This knowledge can help anthropologists understand issues such as social inequality, conflict resolution, and decision-making processes. By understanding the political system of a culture, an anthropologist can gain a deeper understanding of its structure and function.

Secondly, examining gender roles is important because it helps to shed light on how men and women interact with each other in different societies. Understanding gender relations within a culture provides insights into issues such as reproductive rights, violence against women, and access to education or employment opportunities. This knowledge can help anthropologists better understand how gender identity shapes individuals’ lives in different ways.

Finally, cultural relativism is essential for gaining an accurate understanding of another culture. It requires anthropologists to approach other cultures with humility and respect while recognizing that every culture has its own unique set of values and beliefs shaped by historical, social, and environmental factors. By embracing this perspective, anthropologists can avoid imposing their own cultural biases on their observations and instead seek to understand the beliefs and practices of the people they are studying on their own terms.

Overall, these three components of the anthropological perspective work together to provide a holistic view of a given culture. By keeping these components in mind when studying a culture, an anthropologist can gain a more complete picture of that society’s history, traditions, beliefs, practices and way of life over time.

For Further Reading

“Cultural values are a web of linked concepts, fixed in time and space.”

Evans-Pritchard and the Religion of the Nuer Tribe

How do economic and residence practices impact women’s status and power?

What are the different marriage wealth-exchange practices?

Claude Lévi-Strauss’s Structuralism and its Influence on Anthropological Thought

Clifford Geertz and the Thick Description of the Balinese Cockfight

Bronislaw Malinowski, the Trobriand people and the Kula

Why did Marxist ideas only start being applied in Anthropology in the last half century, and what are some of the key ideas that influence Materialistic Anthropology?

Dance as Ritual – an anthropological perspective

How Residence Customs After Marriage Vary Around the World

Compare the operations and implications of Bridewealth and Dowry

The impact of Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ARTs) on Anthropology

“The two-gender system is neither innate nor universal” (Towle and Morgan 2006)

Tradition and Modernity

The 4 Main Branches of Anthropology – Unlocking the Secrets of Human Diversity

Anthropology vs Sociology – Which Lens to Use When Studying Humanity?

anthropological views of the self essay

Disclosure:  Please note that some of the links in this post are affiliate links. When you use one of  my affiliate links , the company compensates me. At no additional cost to you, I’ll earn a commission, which helps me run this blog and keep my in-depth content free of charge for all my readers.

Leave a comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Library homepage

  • school Campus Bookshelves
  • menu_book Bookshelves
  • perm_media Learning Objects
  • login Login
  • how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
  • hub Instructor Commons
  • Download Page (PDF)
  • Download Full Book (PDF)
  • Periodic Table
  • Physics Constants
  • Scientific Calculator
  • Reference & Cite
  • Tools expand_more
  • Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

Social Sci LibreTexts

4.2B: Sociological Theories of the Self

  • Last updated
  • Save as PDF
  • Page ID 7969

Sociological theories of the self attempt to explain how social processes such as socialization influence the development of the self.

Learning Objectives

  • Interpret Mead’s theory of self in term of the differences between “I” and “me”
  • One of the most important sociological approaches to the self was developed by American sociologist George Herbert Mead. Mead conceptualizes the mind as the individual importation of the social process.
  • This process is characterized by Mead as the “I” and the “me. ” The “me” is the social self and the “I” is the response to the “me. ” The “I” is the individual’s impulses. The “I” is self as subject; the “me” is self as object.
  • For Mead, existence in a community comes before individual consciousness. First one must participate in the different social positions within society and only subsequently can one use that experience to take the perspective of others and thus become self-conscious.
  • Primary Socialization occurs when a child learns the attitudes, values, and actions appropriate to individuals as members of a particular culture.
  • Secondary socialization refers to the process of learning the appropriate behavior as a member of a smaller group within the larger society.
  • Group socialization is the theory that an individual’s peer groups, rather than parental figures, influences his or her personality and behavior in adulthood.
  • Organizational socialization is the process whereby an employee learns the knowledge and skills necessary to assume his or her organizational role.
  • In the social sciences, institutions are the structures and mechanisms of social order and cooperation governing the behavior of a set of individuals within a given human collectivity. Institutions include the family, religion, peer group, economic systems, legal systems, penal systems, language and the media.
  • The self : The self is the individual person, from his or her own perspective. Self-awareness is the capacity for introspection and the ability to reconcile oneself as an individual separate from the environment and other individuals.
  • generalized other : the general notion that a person has regarding the common expectations of others within his or her social group
  • socialization : The process of learning one’s culture and how to live within it.
  • community : A group sharing a common understanding and often the same language, manners, tradition and law. See civilization.

image

Sociological theories of the self attempt to explain how social processes such as socialization influence the development of the self. One of the most important sociological approaches to the self was developed by American sociologist George Herbert Mead. Mead conceptualizes the mind as the individual importation of the social process. Mead presented the self and the mind in terms of a social process. As gestures are taken in by the individual organism, the individual organism also takes in the collective attitudes of others, in the form of gestures, and reacts accordingly with other organized attitudes.

This process is characterized by Mead as the “I” and the “me. ” The “me” is the social self and the “I” is the response to the “me. ” In other words, the “I” is the response of an individual to the attitudes of others, while the “me” is the organized set of attitudes of others which an individual assumes. The “me” is the accumulated understanding of the “generalized other,” i.e. how one thinks one’s group perceives oneself. The “I” is the individual’s impulses. The “I” is self as subject; the “me” is self as object. The “I” is the knower, the “me” is the known. The mind, or stream of thought, is the self-reflective movements of the interaction between the “I” and the “me. ” These dynamics go beyond selfhood in a narrow sense, and form the basis of a theory of human cognition. For Mead the thinking process is the internalized dialogue between the “I” and the “me. ”

Understood as a combination of the “I” and the “me,” Mead’s self proves to be noticeably entwined within a sociological existence. For Mead, existence in a community comes before individual consciousness. First one must participate in the different social positions within society and only subsequently can one use that experience to take the perspective of others and become self-conscious.

IMAGES

  1. Anthropological View of the Self

    anthropological views of the self essay

  2. Lesson 3

    anthropological views of the self essay

  3. Unit 3 Reflection.docx

    anthropological views of the self essay

  4. The sociological and anthropological perspective of the self

    anthropological views of the self essay

  5. Anthropology as a Perspective in Understanding the Self

    anthropological views of the self essay

  6. The “Self” According To Anthropology

    anthropological views of the self essay

VIDEO

  1. Sociological and anthropological perspective of the self

  2. Anthropological Perspective of Self

  3. Anthropological view of self: Culturally shaped (GE1

  4. The Self from the ANTHROPOLOGICAL Perspective

  5. THE ANTHROPOLOGICAL VIEW OF SELF: FOR educational purposes only

  6. My Self Essay For Class#3

COMMENTS

  1. The Origins of Self: An Anthropological Perspective

    Developed in relation to a range of subject areas - linguistics, anthropology, genomics and cognition, as well as socio-cultural theory - The Origins of Self is of particular interest to students and researchers studying the origins of language, human origins in general, and the cognitive differences between human and other animal psychologies.

  2. Person, Self, and Identity: Some Anthropological Retrospects

    Anthropology has important contributions to make in extending the study of the self. An integrated and cumulative body of anthropological theory relevant to the self has yet to be realized. Nevertheless, it is possible to connect several lines of theory to suggest...

  3. 6.2 Self and Identity

    Anthropological Views. Anthropological views of the self question the cultural and social constructs upon which views of the self are erected. For example, within Western thought, it is supposed that the self is distinct from the "other." ... In his Essay on Human Understanding, Locke (as cited by Gordon-Roth 2019) observed, "We must ...

  4. The Origins of Self: An Anthropological Perspective

    The present essay presents the views of other theorists who have proposed similar ideas (Rita Carter and Shlomo Mendelovic) and some applications of a multiple self theory, including Robert Lifton ...

  5. Debating Self, Identity, and Culture in Anthropology

    This paper explores relations between "identity" and "self"—concepts that tend to be approached separately in anthropological discourse. In the conceptualization of the self, the "Western" self, characterized as autonomous and egocentric, is generally taken as a point of departure. Non‐Western (concepts of) selves—the selves of the people anthropology traditionally studies ...

  6. The Origins of Self: An Anthropological Perspective on JSTOR

    It is a question that has exercised human minds throughout most of our species' existence, and it was probably first asked when we were still hunter-gatherers living in Africa - or, possibly, even earlier, before Homo sapiens had even evolved. Yet the fact that a self can ask questions about its own nature is an unexpected and inexplicable ...

  7. Anthropology of the Self: The Individual in Cultural ...

    It is a form of 'dialectical pragmatism', as Edward Conze described it (1951:15), that enables a person to achieve a sense of detachment from the inherent problems of existence. We may well initially pose the question - as many scholars have done - whether Buddhism is a religion or philosophy. Some have suggested, following Edward Tylor ...

  8. The Origins of Self: An Anthropological Perspective, Edwardes

    The Origins of Self explores the role selfhood plays in defining both human society and each individual in that society. It considers the genetic and cultural origins of self, the role that self plays in socialization and language, and the types of selves we generate in our individual journeys to and through adulthood. Martin P. J. Edwardes argues that other-awareness is a relatively early ...

  9. The Origins of Self

    View Item; JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it. The Origins of Self. An Anthropological Perspective. ... Self; Selfhood; Anthropology; Psychology; Linguistics; Evolution; anthropology; philosophy. DOI 10.14324/111.9781787356306. ISBN

  10. Culture theory essays mind self and emotion

    Table of Contents. Preview: a colloquy of culture theorists Richard A. Shweder Part I. Culture Theory: An Introduction 1. Anthropology's romantic rebellion against the enlightenment, or there's more to thinking than reason and evidence Richard A. Shweder 2. Properties of culture: an ethnographic view Robert A. LeVine 3. Cultural meaning systems Roy G. D'Andrade Part II.

  11. (PDF) Review of Anthropology of the Self: The Individual in Cultural

    Throughout this book we have tried to stress individual pollution-related problems. The details of these topics can be found in various chapters. A list of these subjects already discussed is ...

  12. Module 3- Anthropological Perspective OF THE SELF

    After the learning session, the students are able to: 1. increase awareness of the various dimensions of anthropology and its influence on self-concept; 2. understand how each culture develop a unique cultural lens; 3. examine their own cultural identity from a global perspective; and 4. demonstrate critical and reflective thought in analyzing ...

  13. NARRATING THE SELF

    Abstract Across cultures, narrative emerges early in communicative development and is a fundamental means of making sense of experience. Narrative and self are inseparable in that narrative is simultaneously born out of experience and gives shape to experience. Narrative activity provides tellers with an opportunity to impose order on otherwise disconnected events, and to create continuity ...

  14. Anthropology of the self : the individual in cultural perspective

    Yet anthropology teaches us that an individual approach is only one of many ways of looking at ourselves. In this wide-ranging text Morris explores the origins, doctrines and conceptions of the self in Western, Asian and African societies passing though Greek philosophy, Buddhism, Hinduism, Confuscism, Tao and African philosophy and ending with ...

  15. Anthropological View of the Self

    Anthropological View of the Self. Observe your own culture. What is the beauty of your culture? Compare your culture with another culture. Does your family religiously practice your cultural customs and traditions, like celebrating fiestas, Christmas, etc. or everything has changed because of consumerism (the actions of people who spend a lot of money on goods and services)?

  16. Essay on Anthropological Perspective Of Self for Students

    The 'self' is a concept we all understand, but it can be tricky to define. It's the idea of who we are as individuals, our thoughts, feelings, and actions. In anthropology, the study of humans and cultures, the 'self' is seen in a unique way. This essay will explain the anthropological perspective of self in simple terms.

  17. Anthropology of the Self

    Anthropology of the Self: The Individual in Cultural Perspective. Brian Morris. Pluto Press, 1994 - Philosophy - 222 pages. Western society is individualised; we feel at ease talking about individuals and we study individual behaviour through psychology and psychoanalysis. Yet anthropology teaches us that an individual approach is only one of ...

  18. Anthropology of the Self: The Individual in Cultural Perspective

    Brian Morris - 1991 - Berg Publishers. Anthropology: a continental perspective. Christoph Wulf - 2013 - Chicago: University of Chicago Press. The scientific landscape of religion: Evolution, culture, and cognition. Scott Atran - 2006 - In Philip Clayton & Zachory Simpson (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Religion and Science.

  19. Sociological and Anthropological Perspective of Self

    The term concept is an abstract idea which gives meaning to what it represents. Therefore, self-concept is how we define our self, based on the characteristic we know and the values we hold to ourselves. These values and characteristics are linked to various aspects of our self-concept such as self, Download Free PDF.

  20. The three key components of the anthropological perspective

    Overall, the anthropological perspective seeks to understand the diversity of human experiences across time and space while also recognizing the interconnectedness of all aspects of human life. There are three key components of the anthropological perspective - they are comparative or cross-cultural studies, holism and cultural relativism.

  21. 4.2B: Sociological Theories of the Self

    First one must participate in the different social positions within society and only subsequently can one use that experience to take the perspective of others and become self-conscious. 4.2B: Sociological Theories of the Self is shared under a CC BY-SA license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by LibreTexts.

  22. Sociological and anthropological view of the self

    3. Self as Social Constructs The Sociological and Anthropological View of the Self • Anthropology - the inclusive study of the human race, its culture and society, and its physical development (Heacock, 2009) • Sociology - scientific study of human life, social groups, whole societies and the human world whose subject matter is our own behavior as social beings in relationship with many ...

  23. Anthropological Perspective Essay.pdf

    Anthropological Perspective My key insights about the anthropological perspective is that the self is influenced by a cultural background whether it may be part of a group or from an individual. As we all know, we, people, will never fully get to understand the self as it is an evolving thing influenced by a lot of aspects in our life such as culture which falls under the anthropological ...