Self-Knowledge as One of the First Steps in Developing Confidence - Admission/Application Essay Example

College Self-esteem Self-knowledge is one of the first steps in developing confidence or self-esteem in oneself, without which an individual is bound to feel confused about many things regarding their individuality or personal identity. Understanding the self is a very significant step towards identity formations and the more an individual is about who they really are the stronger their self-esteem (Rutherford 8); self-awareness is the knowledge an individual has about their own individuality. Identity formation is perhaps one of the most difficult stages in the growth and development process because individuals have to battle with many forces both within and without to establish their own stable identities. The environmental influences on individuals has a great impact on how individuals view themselves in relation to others, thus, the process of defining the self can be very confusing and frustrating to teenagers because they have to keep on second-guessing who they really are before they finally settle. Having a strong self-esteem or confidence in oneself is important because it enables one to approach life in a more positive way than having low self-esteem, which can be potentially harmful to individuals. People with self-esteem are more likely to achieve great heights of success than those with low self-esteem, especially when it comes to educational outcomes, and their general outlook of life is more positive; according to Latimes.com (“David McCullough…”), nurturing student’s self-esteem can eliminate social problems while improving academic scores. Conversely, people with a low self-esteem are bound to have a very negative outlook on life, which affects them negatively in nearly everything because they feel inadequate, and their educational outcomes are not quite impressive. Cultural backgrounds and contexts form the basis for personal identities and self-esteem levels within individuals, a factor that could be attributable to the varying cultural values that define different regions. In that regard, the cultural setting governs social interactions between individuals, thus, the varying individual personalities for people from different cultural backgrounds; the most remarkable distinction between cultural settings can be drawn from a comparison of the western and the eastern cultures, which are strongly opposed to each other. For instance, the western cultures are individualistic in nature, which means individuals are disconnected from each other, whereas the eastern cultures are based on collectivism that calls for positive engagement of individuals in social bonds. America provides a typical example of an individualist cultural setting because the Americans feel more happiness when they are disengaged from each other emotionally, whereas Japan is a concise example of a collectivism cultural setting, where individuals value closeness, friendliness, and respect. Consequently, the American notion of self-concept is extremely different from the Japanese notion of self-concept because whereas the American one is influenced by their individualized culture, the Japanese one is heavily influenced by their collectivism culture. For the Japanese, they derive their happiness from feelings of positive engagement so they tend to value closeness, friendliness and respect for each other whereas the Americans derive happiness from disengaged emotions of pride, and self-effectiveness. In this regard, the Americans have a sort of disconnected notion of the self, as opposed to the Japanese who value close relationships and collectivism, thus, they have a slightly lower self-esteem than the Americans do. Self-esteem is a significant factor that determines healthy human relationships, without which there are bound to be some gross hiccups and misunderstandings in the way people relate to one another; for instance, whereas high self-esteem is associated with positive human relationships, low self-esteem is more likely to cause discordance. When people feel strongly about themselves and everything around them, they are inclined to develop positive human relationships based on mutual trust and understanding that ensures cohesion and integration in society as opposed to when there is low self-esteem. People with a low self-esteem are more likely to feel disconnected and threatened by others, whom they deem superior than themselves, hence they may not be able to fit in with the rest, thus leading to conflicts within human relationships. High self-esteem is also associated with happiness because people who feel strongly about themselves are generally happier, more resilient, and show greater initiative in achieving success in life unlike people with low self-esteem who are usually sad, depressed, and emotionally unstable, and they have the least initiative in life. In this respect, people with low self-esteem are also prone to mood disorders and depression, which could easily trigger mental disorders and other complex and serious health complications. Developing a strong sense of the self and feeling strongly about oneself is thus a very significant aspect in life because it leads to a positive outlook on life, and healthy human relationships. Attributing causality It is usual for people to constantly want to provide probable explanations in response to why things happen the way they do, and particularly so if they have been faced with an entirely new situation or experience. From the explanations of people’s behavior one can easily make judgments about them, especially in response to their actions; for instance, one killing can be seen as an act of murder, manslaughter, self-defense or heroism, what determines how the killing will be defined is the kind of explanation given to it. Newswise (“Veterans who mismanage money…”) contends that veterans who mismanage money are four times likely to become homeless, thus, the explanation for their homelessness will definitely lead to the conclusion that they are spendthrifts. Attribution theory, therefore, provides the theoretical framework that underlies the explanations people make regarding others and the interpretation offered to these explanations (Spengler 2602). For instance, this theory can help in understanding unfamiliar or sudden occurrences such as a sudden drop in a workforce’s level of productivity; in this regard, plausible explanations might ensue such as progressive laziness of the workers, or a progressively inefficient workplace environment. Married people often try to analyze their partners behavior, and such explanations are heavily determined by their levels of satisfaction in the marriage; dissatisfied couples often provide explanations that maintain their distress for both the positive and negative actions committed by their partners. Misattribution is likely to occur when one misinterprets an action to mean something else that was never intended in the first place, like when a man misinterprets a woman’s warmth as a sexual consent, which could lead to a woman risking harassment or even rape. Research has proven that men are more likely to misattribute the significance of women’s actions than women will do, especially due to the false consensus effect, which leads men into thinking that their feelings are mutual with those of others. For instance, men will mostly be inclined into thinking that a woman’s courtesy smile means a lot more than it really does, that they are sexually attracted, which may not always be true; traditionally, men have always been attributed with strong sexual assertiveness because of misattributions. In all these cases, the attribution theory can help in understanding how individuals explain behavior exhibited by others; according to this theory, human actions can generally be attributed to two kinds of forces, internal and external. The complex relationship between the internal and external forces is what becomes revealed on the outside as observable behavior in human beings. The internal forces that motivate human behavior comprise of internal dispositions such as stable individual traits, motives, and attitudes, while the external forces comprise of all the external situations or conditions in the immediate environment. According to the proponents of the attribution theory, daily events and happenings in life can be explained from the common psychology perspective; for instance, an intentional act of murder can both be attributed to the internal disposition of an individual such as his/her mental state or to his external situations such as self-defense. In this case, the two main types of attribution are dispositional, when an act is linked to internal causes, and situational disposition, when an act is linked to external situations. For instance, Mason, and Zucchino report that Spark Nev, the Nevada school shooter, was motivated by bullying, which is a situational disposition. Research has proven that people’s intentions and internal dispositions can be inferred from their actions, thus, to understand human nature, it can be helpful to analyze the actions that normally would have been motivated by their internal forces, if not external. According to the theory of correspondent inferences, a person’s internal disposition cannot be inferred from their normal or expected behavior, but it can easily be inferred from their unusual or unexpected behavior, what is usually referred to as spontaneous inference. Individuals usually have a remarkably incredible capacity to infer the personality traits of others spontaneously even in a split of a second’s exposure to their behavior, without having to expend any energy at all. Common sense attributions are made basing on the information regarding the consistency of a person’s behavior, its distinctiveness, and the extent to which the behavior is similar to that of other people in similar circumstances. According to Harold Kelley, a pioneering attribution theorist, consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus are the three main factors that determine whether an individual’s behavior is due to internal dispositions or situational factors. Common sense psychology is a logical way of explaining the behavior of others, for example, if only on individual is consistently experiencing trouble with a car, then it is more likely that the problem is within the individual and not with the car, thus this behavior can be attributed to internal dispositions rather than the external situation in the car. Self-perception It is also possible for people to infer their own attitudes from their own behavior as would anyone observing them ( Haemmerlie 313), and the situation or circumstances under which the given behavior occurs respectively, a phenomenon that is usually referred to as self-perception. Mohan highlights a study that indicates how individuals infer their attitudes by stroking their ego on Facebook, thus altering their self-perceptions. The theory of self-perception, which was advanced by a pioneering scholar in Psychology named James William, whose works have greatly influenced the field contents that humans infer their attitudes from their behaviors in face of uncertainties. In this regard, just like an outsider might observe one’s behavior and then proceed to attribute that behavior to their internal disposition including their attitudes and traits or to their situational context, one can also attribute their own behavior to their internal dispositions or their environment. Similarly, emotions such as fear and anxiety can also be inferred from one’s own behavior in response to a given stimulus, for instance, if one hears the growling of a bear at night then their body reacts by releasing adrenaline in their system, they automatically infer that they are afraid. In this case, it is evident that self-knowledge is best acquired through action as opposed to contemplation or thinking; by doing a particular action, one is able to gain an insight to who they are, their attitudes and internal dispositions. It is also possible that behavior can modify or alter one’s concept of the self because actions affect people’s attitudes; for example, a first time smoker might eventually take to smoking because their attitudes towards smoking change through self-observation and justification. Actions influence one’s behavior through a three-step process that goes from self-presentation, where an action takes place, to self-justification, where one rationalizes the reasons for their actions, to self-perception, when one observes themselves and infers an attitude towards their action. At the stage of self-presentation, an individual expresses himself/herself through an action such as smoking, for instance, and at the stage of self-justification, an individual will undergo an inner struggle trying to rationalize the act of smoking. After justifying the act of smoking, an individual will start to feel inclined to repeating the action because of their altered attitudes regarding the action, thus, by self-observation, they are more likely to infer their new attitudes, a function of self-perception. Many experiments have been coined around facial expressions to validate the effectiveness of the self-perception effect; facial expressions usually tend to trigger feelings that match those particular expressions. In this regard, when an individual is induced to make a smiling face when reading cartoons for that matter, they are more likely to find the cartoons more humorous and exciting to read than when they are induced to make a frowning face while doing the same action. In this facial feedback effect experiment, it is evident that actions can affect emotions significantly, thus, one can influence their inner dispositions by manipulating their actions to ensure that they correspond to the desired feelings or emotions; for example, if the desired emotion is happiness, it can be acquired by making a happy facial expression. Studies have also revealed that imitating the facial expressions that people make in certain situations makes it possible for one to experience exactly what they are feeling, for instance, if an individual was to imitate a pained expression made by someone who is in deep pain, they would also experience the feeling of pain. When imitating or acting out a pained person’s facial expression gives individuals the feeling of empathy towards the person in pain, especially because they are able to sense how painful their suffering is. Generally, by simply observing the facial expressions made by others, one is more likely to mimic them unconsciously and naturally so too, by synchronizing his/her movements, postures, and even voice with theirs. In this respect, even though one would be mimicking other people’s facial expressions naturally and unconsciously, they will automatically get in tune with what they are feeling, thus, forming an emotional connection. In that case, it is possible for people to transfer their emotions onto others around them, especially feelings of happiness or sadness, which are easily transferrable from one person to another through emotional contact. For example, when an individual is feeling depressed, it is easy for them to transfer their feelings of depression to other people around them, and this is true for when they are happy for they also make others happy. In this regard, staying around people who are sad only makes you sad and staying around happy people will most likely influence how you feel by making you happy because of the emotional contact that forms. Norms Norms are simply the standards of acceptable behavior that everybody is expected to abide by in a given cultural context, and they are significant because they draw the boundaries that regulate human behavior and interactions within human systems. Every culture has its own set of governing rules that control people and determine what is considered acceptable and expected or suitable behavior for the members of the community; every member is, therefore, expected to abide by these standards of accepted behavior. Different cultures will have different ideas concerning what they consider appropriate or acceptable behavior and what they consider inappropriate or unacceptable behavior. Norms are like silent rules that are always in operation but are hardly ever noticed because they execute their functions with extreme subtlety; nonetheless, norms are quite effective because they successfully restrain and control individuals so that they can behave appropriately according to the set standards and expectations of the wider society. When you interact with different cultures of the world, it quickly becomes obvious that many differences exist in the way in which they do things and in the manner in which your culture does things. For instance, you start to notice that whereas certain things would pass for acceptable and expected behavior in your culture, they may be unacceptable and inappropriate behavior in other cultures (Jenkins & Bryan 24). In this regard, the best way to learn about the norms that govern people in other cultures is to interact with people in that culture to see the differences that exist in the way they do things in comparison to the way you do things in your own culture. For example, when you interact with Europeans, it would occur to you that they consider eating meat with their folks facing down in their left hands culturally acceptable, whereas the Americans, on the other hand, do not for they would rather cut the meat first then transfer the fork to the right hand before eating. In this regard, the act of eating meat in these two cultures is governed by norms, and however peculiar the people from each one of them might think the other one is, it does not matter at all because that is what is expected of them, as the appropriate and acceptable behavior. Norms might seem unimportant to strangers but they are very significant aspect of cultures and for individuals to fit in with the people of a given culture, they are expected to conform to their standards of acceptable behavior. Conformation to cultural norms is a way of blending in with the rest, failure to which one is cut off from the rest because their behavior will be in conflict with the acceptable standards of behavior in the respective culture. In this respect, people who do not conform to cultural norms are deemed misfits, whose behavior is unacceptable and inappropriate according to the standards stipulated, thus, their behavior stands as peculiar to the rest of the members. For instance, Lopez reports how a skateboard attacker sexually battered women, an act that is very unacceptable, thus, would be considered anti-social behavior. Social behavior is governed by norms, and in that case, socially acceptable or appropriate behavior is behavior that conforms to the cultural norms, which is expected of all members of the society. Social interactions occur smoothly when norms are reinforced properly and are operational in the society, because they lead to acceptable social behavior; however, when norms are not reinforced properly, there are bound to be conflicts and confusion in the society that could potentially trigger misunderstandings among people. The norms that govern social behavior in different cultural contexts can be distinguished from each other based on four main aspects and these include expressiveness, punctuality, rule-breaking, and personal space; expressiveness has to do with how an individual is perceived by others, whether they are warm or cold, charming or dismissive, and efficient or efficient, among other traits. Punctuality has to do with how responsive individuals are to time with some cultures being overly obsessed with time consciousness while others have no sense of punctuality at all; the rule-breaking factor comes into play in cultural norms because individuals are more likely to be inclined to breaking rules when they see rules being broken than not. Personal space is also an important aspect of cultural norms and different cultures will have different ideas of an appropriate personal space that should be maintained between individuals depending on their level of familiarity, and whether they are strangers to each other. Works Cited “David McCullough Jr.'s speech takes on the self-esteem movement.” Los Angeles Times June 13, 2012. Web. Oct 23, 2013. “Veterans who mismanage money four times likely to be homeless.” Newswise. Oct 22, 2013. Web. Oct 23, 2013.  Haemmerlie, Frances M., and Robert L. Montgomery. "Self-Perception Theory, Salience of Behavior, and a Control-Enhancing Program for the Elderly." Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 5.3 (1987): 313-29. Jenkins, Richard A., and Bryan Kim. "Cultural Norms and Risk: Lessons Learned from HIV in Thailand." Journal of Primary Prevention 25.1 (2004): 17.  Lopez, Robert J. “Skateboard attacker sexually battered women, LAPD says”. Los Angeles Times. October 22, 2013. Web. Oct 23, 2013. Mason, Melanie and Zucchino, David. “Bullying may have motivated Nevada school shooter.” Los Angeles Times. October 22, 2013. Web. 22 Oct. 2013. Mohan, Geoffrey. “Self-affirmation: Facebook may stoke envy but it also strokes your ego”. Los Angeles Times. March 22, 2013. Web. Oct 23, 2013. Rutherford, Markella B. "The Social Value of Self-Esteem." Society 48.5 (2011): 407-12.  Spengler, Thomas, and Joseph Egger. "Potential Vorticity Attribution and Causality." Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences69.8 (2012): 2600-2607.  Read More