Avoid Merging Me
Many theories in social psychology have attempted to define the “I”, or “I’s”. From Williams James at the end of the 19th century, who distinguished the “I” as the object of experience and the “I” as an observer, to the most orthodox psychoanalyst. The I is this self-referential part of our being. It assumes a sense of our identity. So, it depends on whether we see ourselves as the heroes of our life experiences. However, we must avoid the fusion of the I’s.
Although the human being has a single essence, he is not shaped by a single I. Within his person, there are a multitude of roles and facets, the I’s present, past and future. A good way to maintain high self-esteem is to be aware that there are all of these roles.
We must value them, accept them but not merge with them. Non-fusion implies that the person understands that neither of them begins and completes their definition at the same time.
This means that if, in my life, due to several experiences, one of my depicted roles is diminished in a way, I don’t have to feel completely unhappy. The rest of the selves, which have not been damaged, can largely compensate for this pain.
However, if I merge too much with one of my selves and find myself in a disruptive circumstance for that role, my whole self will be threatened. This will make it more complicated for me to operate on a daily basis. Here are some theories that have emerged in psychology. They are interested in the definition of the ego and its relation to affect and self-esteem.
The Self-Divergence Theory of the I’s (Higgins)
Higgins’ theory of self-divergence focuses on the subject of egos as guides of the self. This author asserts that the ego is not a unitary concept. Thus, to define the different components of the ego, he refers to two parameters: ego domains and ego points of view. In the latter, we find the perspective of the person on himself.
The real ego for Higgins would be the basis of our concept of self. It is what we know about ourselves as well as others know.
Self-esteem will always be maintained at its peak if and only if there is not too great a divergence between the selves. Also, if we pay more attention to it or merge more with one ego than with another, we are likely to experience certain emotions.
For example, if I felt a fusion with my Self that should be more relevant, if some circumstance came to truncate it, I would feel too guilty. If I am obsessed with my ideal Self and fail to achieve the goals that guided me to it, I can end up frustrated.
The Theory of Self-Complexity (Linville)
Linville has formed a model that relates the multiplicity of the ego or self-complexity with affective variability. It has four hypotheses.
The first asserts that the ego is cognitively represented in terms of many aspects. These aspects depend in part on the number of social roles a person has in their life. For example, she can be a wife, mother and lawyer at the same time. They also depend on:
- The type of interpersonal relationships she establishes: coworkers, rivalry, supportive and mothering)
- Activities she performs (playing Mus, swimming, writing)
- Superordinate personality traits (ambitious, creative)
Each of its aspects of the ego organizes a set of propositions and characteristics about itself:
- Personality traits
- Physical characteristics
- Skills
- Preferences
- Goals
- Autobiographical memories.
Thus, the ego aspects differ from each other in that they encompass different sets of characteristics.
In this sense, it is normal that we feel good with certain roles that we exercise and not so much with others. For example, a person may feel proud of themselves as a mother but be ashamed of their involvement in their role as an employee.
If I maintain a high self-complexity, in other words, many well-differentiated selves , my affective reactions will be less extreme when one of my selves is “punished”. What touches me as a mother should not have an influence on me as an employee, daughter, sister or friend.
Conclusion
It is healthy that throughout our existence, we maintain certain guides of the ego. That was what Higgins was proposing. These guides allow us to set ourselves challenges or vital goals. They also help us maintain consistency and work towards what we want to be and what we think we deserve. Moreover, as Linville asserted, it is desirable to have several I’s without necessarily going through fusion. This makes it possible to maintain a high self-complexity.
Thus, the ups and downs of life would affect us much less. It’s about not putting all the eggs in one basket. In other words, not to achieve a fusion of all the I’s. Whatever happens that might affect any of our roles, there will always be an I that will remain intact. This can mitigate the consequences on mood and self-esteem. According to Linville: “high self-complexity protects you in bad times but also allows you to keep your feet on the ground in good times”.
Our thoughts Self-concept and self-esteem are two different realities. How is the former important for a child’s academic performance?
