Appendix 2.

Learning and Monitoring Log1

Name: Batayen, Christian Jade O. Student Number: 2018-12227

Email: christianbatayen@gmail.com Mobile: +(63) 977 755 1490

Week: 1 Lesson/Topic: Different Frameworks and Theories about the Self

Complete briefly and honestly each statement in relation to this week’s lesson/topic.

I used to think that the ‘self’ was a pre-programmed organism with an innate being,
influencing the world around it. I had a concept which was mostly similar to essentialism.
The biological nature of mankind was my greatest focal point in assessing human behavior,
and of course, for explaining my own behavior.

Now I know that the self is an experience beyond who we are born as, but is constructed
more by society (the social constructionism). The self is built by the society around it, affixed
with mores and taboos that proliferated as a result of cultural experience. The self, while still
bound by innate biological tendencies (such as arousal and hunger), it is the customs it has
been molded into that directs these tendencies. The subject of dualism has also been brought
up, which tackles how one’s concept of the self may be different from their performative
behavior, or is used to criticize personal actions by ‘creating’ a separate conceptual self. This
is, as mentioned, a discourse which ultimately leads to a social outcome.

However, I am not sure what the self would end up as if raised apart from society. It has been
pointed out to me that an individual if raised without a society, especially at a caretaker level,
they may not be able to survive into adulthood. There are movies and literature that attempt
to explore this though, but it seems that instead of showcasing an answer for an individual
without society their self, it has instead supplanted the human society for another form of
fictional proxy (such as the animals in Tarzan and The Jungle Book). Are we, as social
creatures, ultimately locked to a perception that a form of society will always be necessary
for a human? Is the explanation for the lack of an answer similar to how we can’t perceive
the higher dimensions because our existence is inherently limited, or am I looking at this all
wrong? I hope my question carries some validity with it, and not just a futile attempt at
bolstering essentialism.

I hope the following topics or matters can be improved:

1. Unifying of the three reading materials in a lecture
2. Application of the context directly to a Filipino setting

1
Modified from the Course pack of Prof. Portia D. Padilla of UP Diliman, College of Education.
These people helped me:
John DeLamater and Janet Shibley Hyde. “Constructionism in the Study of Human
Sexuality”.
-This reading introduced me to the discourse of Social Constructionism vs
Essentialism.
Peter Callero. “The Sociology of the Self”.
-The constructivist nature of the self.
Chris McVittie and Andy McKinlay. “The Self in Part V Social
Identities/Relations/Conflicts”.
-The self in discourse.

Overall, I feel curious about my ‘self’ because my preconceived notions before entering this
course have been shaken, and the new knowledge I can attain excites me.