After an endless night, it is finally day. Marc opens his eyes and with a jump, he stands up on the bed. He begins to run excitedly to the living room, with his eyes wide open, thinking that this year Santa Claus was going to bring him many gifts and candy, since he had done all his homework. However, when he arrived he was surprised to see coal next to a letter: “next year help mom and dad.”
One of the worst moments of childhood is the disappointment experienced by Mark However, that feeling does not arise from having received coal. The discomfort comes because Marc, who believed that he had behaved well, is being made to know that, in the eyes of others, he has behaved badly. So, Is Marc a good or bad child? Are your own eyes or those of others right?
The duality of identity
This duality reflects that there is a part of us that we are not aware of and is only communicated to us from the outside. While our conception of ourselves may differ from that of others, wee presents us with a duality in the perspective of identity In this sense, there is a perception of one’s own identity, but there are aspects of it that we can only access through others. Mead (1968) was one of the first theorists to differentiate a more personal identity from a more social identity (“me” and “I”), as two parts that coexist within the person and feed each other. Although he was trying to identify two elements, he was really pointing out a process; a continuous relationship of the person with the environment they form and of the person who shapes the environment.
We could say in a few words that, in the same way that we are aware that we have two eyes or a nose because we can touch them, only in the mirror do we see ourselves clearly. Following this line, Society is that reflection, thanks to which we can discern our way of being
Required reading: “Personal and social identity”
What is mine?
If you think that you are only you, I am going to start by trying to deny you and, for now, tell you that you are less you than you think. Identity is normally defined as a unitary set of traits that remain stable and allow for a self-identification; an iron core to hold on to.
Let’s imagine Marc growing up and how he becomes a gothic feeling misunderstood; and then a skater without getting involved in anything; and then a romantic looking for commitment; and then a bachelor with a crazy life; and then a businessman; and then… Where is that stability? However, the person is capable of perceiving it and understanding themselves in each of the contexts That is, each of us can understand each other in each of our stages. In Bruner’s (1991) terms, identity is situated – in a space-time – and distributed – it is decomposed into several facets. Not only is one able to understand each of the facets of his life, but he is also understood by others; Marc’s parents have understood him in every episode of his growth.
Self-concept and its relationship with identity
This fact opens the doors to mental model theory (Johnson-Laird, 1983). Although right now what we are has been questioned, it is true that we have an idea of ourselves in our head, a self-concept. Besides, andThis self-concept serves as a mental model of our repertoire of behaviors: We can imagine how we would act in different situations or with different people. Thanks to this, we can maintain internal coherence in what we think about ourselves and not fall into cognitive dissonance. This is how, in each interaction, we evoke to the outside part of what we are, since in this process we only evoke the features of our self-concept related to our environment, to our here and now – in a nightclub we would surely not show the same part of us than before an exam.
Continuing with another metaphor, let’s think for a moment about the case of an old painter, in a chair, with a canvas before him, behind a leafy meadow. No matter how many hours he spends sitting trying to recreate the landscape that surrounds him, You will never be able to accurately represent every detail that reality shows you There will always be a small leaf or some shade of color that will only exist in reality. It is because of this fact that, when painting, you are recreating reality, not creating it.
This is how, although we may believe ourselves to be a lot, what we are to others may be less. Right at this point I propose to change it, to tell you that you can be different than what you imagine
Let’s return to our previous metaphors. For example, Marc’s experience, in which thinking about whether it is “good” or “bad” is determined by whether doing homework or helping parents is more valued. Or more simply, in the case of the painter, who after finishing the painting each one will have their own impression of it.
The emission and interpretation of intentions
Along these lines, it is explained how in the interaction, our interlocutor develops a process of inferences This process is based on interpreting the semantics and pragmatics of the message, what and how it is said. From this, it does not interpret the message, but rather the intentionality of the sender, with what intention we are addressing him. Several studies show that communication features such as accent, formalism or others, create different prejudices of people about their status, competence, anxiety, etc. (Ryan, Cananza and Moffie, 1977; Bradac and Wisegarver, 1984; Bradar, Bowers and Courtright, 1979; Howeler, 1972).
Based on these indications, the receiver interprets our intention and thereby creates his own mental model of us Because in the same way that one imagines how one would act in different situations, a predetermined image of the other is also created that allows us to predict what they may do or say, think or feel; What can we expect from that person. It is one of the basic heuristics to process information more quickly: if I can predict, I can give a response sooner.
That is the same goal in the role of the receiver: give an answer In every relationship we have, the other person creates their feedback, their feedback, based on their interpretation of our actions. And if we have already said that our actions are somewhat different from what we would think and that the interpretation may be different from our intention, the feedback we receive may be totally different from what we expected. It can teach us parts of ourselves that we do not know or were not aware of; make us look different.
What do I decide to be?
In this way, as the third step of the process, I tell you that you are more than you believed, whether you want it or not, whether it turns out good or bad. We continually receive feedback from the outside, in every interaction we have with others, with the environment and with ourselves. And that message we receive is not ignored, because we also exercise the same process that they did with us: now we are the receiver. We interpret the intention behind it and that is when we can find that we can be treated in a different way than we thought
In the interpretation process, the mental model received from the outside comes into conflict with our own, that is, how they see us and how we see ourselves. Possibly, new, unknown information has been included in the feedback received, which does not correspond to the idea we have of ourselves. This information will be included and integrated into our mental model based on two features: emotional load and the recurrence (Bruner, 1991).
Returning to the painter, he may receive various opinions about his painting, but he will be shocked if all of them are only criticisms – recurrence of the same feedback – or if one of them comes from his wife who he loves so much – emotional burden -.
We then arrive at the danger zone. These two traits modulate the influence that “how they see us” has on us If it is also very contrary to our initial mental model, we enter into cognitive dissonances, into internal inconsistencies due to the contradiction they pose to us. Much of the psychological discomfort comes because we feel that “we do not receive what we give”, or that “we are not how we want to be” and the strength of these beliefs can cause a lot of suffering and psychological disorders such as depression if they become persistent and insidious.
But it is in this same risk zone, where the person can grow, where that feedback can add and not subtract. For personal development and growth, after defining this process, the keys are in the following points:
Finally, you may well be less, you may well be different, as you may also be more. But – and excuse me for the expression – I leave you in the most “fucked up” situation of all, and that is that you can be whatever you want to be.
