Self Identity: Opportunities for Personality Development - Essay Example

H1: Self Identity Essay: Opportunities for Personality Development

In the social sciences, the term identity can be found in different ways and meanings to affect the major impact on the national culture. There is talk of personal, social, public, cultural, family, or ethnic selfidentity of a person, or it will be of individual gender identity, the social or national identity of entire groups of people. First, it is about the image that people have or make groups of themselves and what they identify with.

Personal selfidentity means that the self-reflective process understood by which a person has their own creates (real or ideal) individual identity. It happens in such a way that they have their different situations, contexts, and the time family experiences about themselves processed in such a way that individuals identify themselves with themselves experienced.

In this way, people identify themselves and the object in one certain person. To speak of “identical” for individuals only makes sense if two things are put concerning each other.

In this way, selfidentity as a concept of a certain relationship does not only say something about

“Who am I?”, but also about “Who am I here compared to there?” or “Who am I now compared to back then as an individual?” or “How would other people like to see me and how would I like to be seen?” or “Who would I like in ten years compared to today?” For this self identity essay, in the foreground is the inner individual perspective (i.e., the self-awareness of the person) and the differentiation from others in terms of their own specific features, peculiarity, or even uniqueness of individuals.

That doesn’t affect out social family responses to one’s own individual behavior as well as externally attributed personal characteristics, categorizations, and role assignments to help build this personal selfidentity. Personal identity is also partly based on the actual affiliation to certain groups (e.g., family, culture, age, gender or professional groups) or identification with certain groups that you don’t necessarily have to belong to, in which but you orient yourself (e.g., political groups, sports clubs), individually constructed. The actual ones are important for the selfidentity or desired certain common characteristics with relatives of these groups. In this respect, it is of social selfidentity or group identity of individuals to be considered actually.

Besides, identity can be according to the respective content as well according to the criteria constituting selfidentity. The content in question can be roughly physical (e.g., gender, skin color, genetic “fingerprint”), social (e.g., student, mother, employer, family member) and classify psychologically (e.g., intelligent, independent, extraverted). Individual identity is characterized by individuality, i.e., through the manufacture and display of uniqueness. There is individuality (“Be yourself!”). In individualistic societies, this has become a culturally required norm, in contrast to collectivist societies. Only attributes can affect selfidentity from the point of view of the person constitute their distinctive individual character, which therefore has discriminative relevance.

Second, selfidentity is defined by distinct consistency, i.e., after a relationship between the components valid across situations of self-awareness in family and culture. This touches on the question for many people: “How can I still be one and the same person, even though I’m in different situations, behave very differently in different roles?”

Personal or selfidentity of individuals can be consistently preserved in two directions: firstly based on their own experiences and goals, and second, according to cultural norms. In both cases, it is self-consistency to ensure that both self-consistency over

situations as well as individual consistency with cross-situation orientations of how norms and values ​​affect results. So the question arises after balancing between adapting individuals to an

outside world and the design of this outside world by the person.

Third, selfidentity of an individual is defined by continuity, i.e., one with “Remaining the same to yourself” and thus temporal stability of identity-building features of family and culture. This is about the question: “How can I still be the same person even though I am constantly changing?” Accordingly, continuity is expressed in the ability of an individual to “own oneself to experience as something that has individual continuity, that remains the same, around to be able to act accordingly in front of other people.” Fourth, the effectiveness and control of individual experiences are considered certain central dimensions of identity. People are different in their general position as individuals to be able to influence their own situation or to be helpless.

The construction goes beyond these criteria and presentation of identity always about (self-) evaluations. You are proud of yourself or ashamed of yourself; you are with yourself satisfied or dissatisfied, has a high or low individual self-esteem. Efficiency and self-esteem represent and complement motivational and emotional parts of selfidentity of individuals within the cognitive components of individuality, consistency, and continuity.

How can the family identity of individuals be based on the definitive paraphrase of other related terms such as self, self-concept, and demarcate personality? It was William James who died in 1890 that applied the individual concept of self-awareness of individuals to present a first theoretical approach to this issue. He made a distinction between Leibniz and Kant on the individual concept of the “pure self” and the “empirical self.” He presents the “empirical I “as” Me “against the” pure I “as” I, with a separation between the reflective part of the person (pure I) and the individual object of reflection (empirical self or self-awareness) of family and culture. More precisely, he differentiates between individual “me” (knowledge about the own self) on the one hand, and the “I” (the self as knowing) on the other hand.

The individual self-concept of culture, on the other hand, defines and reduces itself to the cognitive one concept of generalized self-perception for people. Such is in the framework of social cognition research the self-concept as one of the individual memory representation understood in the self-concept, the totality of perspectives is formed cognitively to affect a person of himself. But with that, does the self-concept just part of the issue of many people as individuals.

Related to the term, individual identity is that of personality for people. Here

personality defines through the unique qualities that can be observed within an individual. These qualities form the basis of his identity. In contrast to identity, the personality concept the totality of the psychic characteristics of a personality. In addition, identity is different from personality - self-constructed and rooted in the consciousness of the person.