Glad that this experience has helped me learn a lil about both the psyche of human beings and also the motivations in which help us define who we are. Cited in Erikson's psychosocial theory is the conflict of one's search for intimacy vs isolation. Many of my cell members fall within this category. The fact of the matter is they have defined their identity as a person and are right now seeking for people to support and secure that identity in which they have built up. Hence the incredible search for one's life partner or perhaps even a community to solidify that sense of identity. Some might even use Maslow's hierarchy to parallel the needs of love and belonging in this category.
This shows the importance of community in one's life. The individual as itself is an important aspect but no one lives in isolation of one another. Imagine you citing yourself as the richest or smartest person alive and having no one to back that identity or position to compare yourself with. What use is that? Rene Descartes may have coined the phrase "Cogito ergo sum" which means "I think therefore I am" but are we really that individualistic? That we live in isolation without comparing ourselves and having others approve of who we are?
Balance is once again key... Our identity is both a mixture of who we are and who people define us to be. This again differentiates between the "I" self and the "Me" self. "I" self are the I know who I am based on my own definitions. "Me" self is the me who is defined by others. If your identity is entirely "Me" self, we have an individual that would change like the wind, completely malleable to the pressures of conformity and evaluations by others. On the other hand, you don't want to be a thick headed person who can't take a single advice from anyone would u?
Just some thoughts. Au Revoir
Posts
