The Creation of Social Identity

Existence in a world of inter-subjective meaning imposes on the person a number of societal norms which impinge on the way in which he attempts to convey his own identity. We in turn, are forced to play a role depending on the context we are in. For instance, a person who acts a certain way in situation “x” will act a completely different way in “y”, due to the various obligations and rights associated with each particular institution. In this case, the environment is the formative agent whereas the agent himself paradoxically becomes mechanical according to the rules in the particular situation. For example, we might see that a person acts a certain way in a church because the conduct in that association demands a particular demeanor, procedure, etc.. If a person in a church were not to follow such rules they might be said to soon become an outsider in that community, and if such behavior was severely deviated from the groups mandated rules and regulations, they would be claimed to be heretical and excommunicated from the church.

Notice, however, that what applies to churches also applies to other institutions in the associational realm. Certain conduct is expected under the auspices of a business, at school, and even at home. As Searle argued, society creates the introduction or rights and obligations pursuant to the type of role which you serve. And if one were to spurn the standard conduct in each of these respective institutions we would venture to say that expulsion could be the result. The question is, what remains of a coherent picture of the self from the imposition of such standards? Don’t human actors create such institutions in the first place? Or are we all really pulled along with just the illusion of free will while we float down the same stream to a predetermined fate? I must say, I do not believe the average citizen has much of a chance to affect the formation of institutions, and therefore the definition of the self in such cases is determined by the environment in which one lives.

The degree of social determinism becomes more extreme depending on the type of political philosophy in place, i.e. cultural relativism. For instance, communitarian and collective societies such as China and the theocratic regime in Iran certainly maximize the degree of environmental determinism and acculturation. Factors such as governmental control over the levers of transparency such as the press, media, and education system also play a significant role in shaping and forming citizens' perceptions of the world. Although pluralism is heightened in a free society, the relative homogeneity of American culture imposes with it a certain standard on the person which constricts the ability of the self to choose. Indeed, American civics courses teach a dialogue of "freedom" and "individualism" which become the rhetoric of choice, so we are are raised with the notion that collective societies are somehow backwards or otherwise deficient. But it can be argued that this strong belief in individualism and limited government is only another form of acculturation. By any means, our civics texts do not possess any degree of higher order impartiality but rather are value-laden and highly centered on western dominance. This has led some post-modernists to claim they are simply meta-narratives or subjective stories that we tell, only one lens of seeing history. Are democratic citizens made, or do they emerge? (Josh Miller wrote a very good senior research on this a few years ago)

“The German philosopher, Hiedeggar, has two important concepts that pertain to this discussion in a very powerful way: “thrown-ness” or “historicity” and “fallen-ness.” The former suggests that we are simply thrown into this world, a world that does not care for our desires or us. We were thrown into the bosom of our parents, into a certain culture and time period. Also, that we were simply given a certain personality and temperament. Then there is the enculturation and the indoctrination that simply “happen” to us through our parents and friends, society and media, religion and education. But, what makes human condition and existence even more horrific is the latter notion, “fallen-ness.” That is, once thrown, we fall into tasks or roles making our existence inauthentic, shallow and superficial. Even our thinking becomes calculative. We put on various masks such as being a teacher or a student, a husband or a wife, a waiter or a waitress and many others, and by falling into all sorts of roles, we lose authenticity and ourselves because we begin to identify ourselves and who we are through the masks that we wear.” (http://www.laney.peralta.edu/apps/comm.asp?Q=30570)