"Self" in Society

"Self" does not exist apart from society, as "self" functions within society in some form. But, a fully developed "Ego" is the only "human self". Society is formed by collective "selves", but society is not an entity itself, unless one is committed to something other than the "human".

Self-understanding is formed within societal structures. The first being the family and whether it is extended, and/or dysfunctional. "Self-understanding" is first understood within such an intimate "collective". The child learns how to love, be nurtured and what is of value within the family unit.

But, when the family unit is not functioning or functioning improperly, then the developing "Ego" has little to help form his self-understanding. The "getting over" the "Who Am I?" stage might never develop apart from intervention. And this is where society's structures might help the child to form a healthy self -understanding and image.

A child who hasn't learned appropriate behavior, or had good examples of care will develop behavioral problems or mental illness. Society suffers when its children are disadvantaged in this way.

"Self-understanding" in religious communities can be damning if the child sees himself as "evil". or has a personality that would tend to be exasperated, or hindered by such teaching. Such children might "act out" because they can never meet "perfection", or be reticient about thier interests for fear their very interests or passions are detours away from their first allegience. Such "self-understanding" is not healthy, but annihlates "self" altogether. Such messages are "self rejective" messages and are not the foundations to form a healthy and separate identity.

"Self" is where the distinctive person resides. "Self" is identity. The particularity of the "self" might never be known apart from "self"'s ability to free itself from the demands of a overly zealous religious consicence, where "self-denial" or the "culture of death" is applauded and promoted.

"Selves" that have not become "true selves" in their particularities are prone to over-react to threats to their identifying factors, whether it is a fundamentalist religious tradition, "Truth claims", familial identities, or political ideologies. All form a bulwark against "things that would challenge and bring self-reflection instead of promoting  the prevailling "self opinion". Change and maturation does not happen when such defensiveness is embraced. Such defensiveness should be understood when "self" is fragile and based on its defensive identification factors. "Self"s very existence is "felt" annilhlated, when, these dependent factors are undermined.

The human person cannot accomplish, grow and expeience his own accomplishments apart from distancing himself from such emblemic self understanding. "Self" must distance and then choose to embrace the chosen goals, values and purposes, for "self's own reasons. It is only then, that "self" has come into its own and become a "human being" and not a human clone or a human doing. It is the understanding of "self's existance apart from society, and then, the embrace of society that forms the adult "self" fully and functionally.

Otherwise, "self" remains only a functon of society and not understood as a being apart from society. "Self's" function must be a chosen one, apart from anyone else's value or goals.

Children of Divorce

My grandchildren spent 5 days with me recently, as their parents had to work and one night was spent in the hospital with our grandson for some testing. By the end of their stay, Hannah was asking for her Mommy and saying how she didn't ever want to leave her Mommy, "ever again". I knew she didn't say this because she had not enjoyed her visit with me, but because she had a real need for her "Mommy". When I asked her what she would do if she got married, she just smiled and said," I'll take Mommy with me."

I know they love me, as they express this often, but their hearts belong to their parents. and so it should be. What happens to such hearts when they face a loss "they can't imagine". Would it be the nightmare of their lifetime? And how would it affect the rest of their life?

I know of a case where the parents were divorced because of the husband's infidelity. The little girl was only 6, but was affected so deeply, a psychologist suggested regular counselling. But, how was a single mother to afford such an "extravagance"? This little girl had three other siblings; an older sister, a younger brother, and one yet to be born. This was the time when divorce was not looked upon lightly. It was a great stigma.

 The children and mother moved to a house beside their maternal grandparents, so the mother could work and the grandparents be ready made babysitters. The grandparents weren't too easy-going with the children's newfound anxieties. And with the newborn, it was almost too much.

Several years later, the mother and children moved to a small house near the hospital, where the mother held down a job. They were dirt poor, and had to make ends meet by sharing clothes and eating the bare minimum.

These experiences left deep scars on the children. All of them grew up with an unusual need for material security, and the "finer things in life", which I suppose was due to the shame they suffered from being so poor.

The good news is the mother got re-married when the children had become young adults. The oldest daughter marrying a year later and the next eloping a few months after that. A child was born to the eloping couple 9 months after their marriage. The mother was only 17.

How did that 17 year old mother think? Was she able to be equipped to parent her little girl? Wasn't she even in the best of circumstances at a grave disadvantage? And didn't her background make it even harder for her to "care and nurture"? What about her need for counselling that had not been met? Was this need exasperated by such stress as a teen marriage and teen motherhood?

I can't imagine how hard it would've been to be in her shoes. But, I do know the little girl could not have gotten good mothering. She couldn't have. And how did that affect her?

Children of divorce are more likely to get divorced themselves. I have wondered the reasons. Is it because they haven't the example of commitment? are they emotionally immature? or is it that they sabatoge their own happiness? or do they fear intimacy? do they expect and perhaps, force abandonment? Do they mis-read and mis-communicate due to their anxieties? Do they manipulate for fear their needs won't be met? do they feel unworthy and have a low self-esteem? are they low achievers or driven persons?

I think all of these apply in indivdual cases. And even divorces that happen after children are grown still has a grave affect. I had a friend in her 30's suffer after her parent's divorce. She was disoriented. Her identity was traumatized. She didn't see it coming. And she worried for her own children's sake!

I have several other friends who live in the house with their husbands, but have no intimacy. Which is worse? What is the answer?

I have seen in my own family my grandmother, and three of her four children suffer divorces. And the dynamics that are normally difficult are doubly compounded. Divorce should never be taken lightly. It affects everyone.

The "Ideal": Is Never "the Real"

Our Founders understood that human nature is what it is, and this fact alone was what made for a great nation. Their structuring of our government was to put men under the rule of law, so that tyranny would not lead the nation, nor barbarianism undermine society's order. But, today, there seems to be another opinion about humans and it is the "ideal of alturism".

Alturism is defined as selfless concern for others. Idealists, whether religious or humanists believe that men can become alturistic, by habit formation. These believe that Aristotle's virtues meet Kant's categorical imperative. But, what does this mean practically in light of our Founders view?

Our Founders view was a realist view, as they understood that men were not to be trusted with power over others, or power within government that was not balanced. They did believe that humans were to be self-governing, that is, not by outside authority, but inside character. And that character is illustrated by the commitments that one values

 Parents were to train their children through every means available so that upcoming citizens would understand the needs of their nation, as well as their personal values of choice in vocation.  American youth can choose where they will go to college and what they will study. There has been no tracking in American education, as a whole.

Because the individual is valued because of liberty, the child is able to develop to his full potential, as well as his understanding of himself in personal interests. The blossoming young adult's identity becomes an ego strength that does not define thesmselves by group identification, or familial determinations, but personal values of choice. These adults can withstand  the diverse responsibilities of adulthood.

 In oppressive societies, there is an overintending authority that superintends the child's life, as well as the adult's. Ego development is not the goal of such governments, but a denial of indiviudality and liberty of choice, value and conscience. These forms of government believe that power is needed for social order to be maintained and their amibitions to be accomplished.

Unfortuately, our "free society" has also undermined the foundations that are needed for children to grow into independent adulthood. Our society is fraught with social ills of divorce, child negligence, poverty, drug and alcohol abuse, domestic abuse, and educational needs. These social ills affect the "ideals" that our Founders envisioned and inhibits societal flourishing. The problem becomes what to do about it.

Good government that allows liberty to develop is first and foremost, but the needs of the individual child is also important to value. Liberty cannot undermine society's need for stability, which social structures of marriage and  family bring. We are in a crisis in America because the family is broken and there is no way to make it work. Many families are over-stressed by various commitments that are not easily dismissed. A father/mother is still responsible to their employer and must meet their demands. But, these demands also undermine family time and the child's need for a secure and safe place.

The needs of our society are not the "idealist" dreams and hopes, of happily ever afters, or in oppressive means of training citizens through outside authoritarianism, but real world problems and needs that aren't easily addressed by government or life in modern society. 

Social ills should not undermine America's ideal of liberty, otherwise we will become pawns of a moralistic totaltalitarinism that would inhibit our very "way of life", in the name of the "common good" or "public interest"!

Words Have Diverse Meanings,

Words have meanings. That is understood, but humans don't always identify words to their dictionary meanings. Human experience is how children define words. And how these words are "felt" are the understood meaning. True communication means that one understands the individual's definitions, as well as the word itself.

Have you ever had a "reaction" or response to an event that went way beyond the actual event itself? Your emotions were "out of kilter"? Why do you suppose this happened? Memories that are recorded in the brain are "revived" by some "image" that parallels the present experience. One can have physical reactions to such experiences, whether good or bad. And such emotional responses have a lot to do with religious feeling.

How do you suppose that such "recordings" or "brain images" are transformed?

Children need nuture, not harsh discipline to grow to a fruitful maturity. Discipline should be age appropriate, and not demanding or overwhelming to the child. Childish fears should be respected, not by dismissing childish fears, but giving the child a means of self-responsibility. A flashlight that can be turned on if the "monster" invades his/her room, or a special "fairy wand" that makes a "magic space of protection, where the "monster" cannot see the child.

The religious child is trained to "pray to God" for protection and help. And the child's belief in "God's help" is really the parent's representation of "god" to the child. Good parenting should give the child a means to transferring his dependence on "god" (parental image) to "self".

Childish beliefs must be challenged, and children need to grow up to own their life, where fear doesn't inhibit healthy self-identity. Without self identity, the child will never grow to become and make a difference. He will be crippled and left to his childish imaginations where "monsters" (the Devil) invade his "world" and make bad things happen, or "God" invades his world and makes "good things happen".

Words have meanings and true communication means that individuals seek to understand the meanings, images, messages of the words that are used, so that understanding and true communication can happen.

The Super-Ego and the Id

Scientists today are interested in "altruism". How do humans who are made to "survive" based on their personal interests to take interests in others? Religion and tribal/cultural understandings of formation of the Super-Ego have been understood to help along the "ultimate good", "pubic good", or "moral imperative". But, is societal "good", the "collective" the greatest value one is to value? This is the question posed to moral philosophers, psychologists, sociologists, diplomats, and theologians.

Freud made popular the terms Id and Super-Ego. These terms are used to identify how individuals naturally are pre-disposed and how they become due to societal/cultural impact. Whenever there is a coflict between the Id and Super-Ego, the Ego uses defense mechanisms to "cope" with anxiety.

The child needs a nuturing environment to survive. And as Western society has lost its sense of responsiblity and obligation to its young, Western culture has suffered the dire consequences. The family is the first formative community that the child encounters to teach and train. As the child grows and experiences his teachers, and others that impact the child, the child learns to trust or mistrust "life". Is life to be embraced, explored and trusted, or is life to be a challenge to life itself due to impoverishment, whether physical or social? These are the social problems that face the West. And it becomes the question of the developing Id and Super-Ego.

I think that whenever the individual, whether a child or adult, is undermined through subversive means, then it is an undermining of the stability that will bring about "altruistic concern". How can one who has not recieved the proper nourishment from society, be or become what society needs to further the goals of human flourishing?

Human flourishing has to begin at the individual level for the individual to "give back" and bring about human flourishing for another. The "super-ego" can be a gift or a curse depending on how that has been formed in early childhood. Has the environment been nurturing or punitive? And how has the parent handled the child's innate desires? Have they been affirmed as far as possible, without subverting the child's "good"?

Parenting the child's "Id', his innate desires is an important part of developing the child's gifts. If the parent is too afraid of the desires of the child because of some punitive understanding of religious doctrine, then the child becomes malformed and may sabatoge his own happiness later in life.

I think that religion can be prohibitive to healthy development due to a "fear of God". If one has certain natural desires, then one is "doomed to be punished". Happiness is not to be sought in the development of what one desires, because one must sacrifice for 'God. This is seen as the ultimate in service to God. But, sacrifice and subservience is an unhealthy understanding of faith. The fundamentalist appraoch to faith demeans the "human".

Transitions to New Realties

Change and transition are always a part of life. But, when transitions happen in one's life before the development to integrate them, it causes harm and great pain. I am speaking in personal terms of child development and the social realities of the family.

Since we are physical and historical beings, we are bound to develop within real historical realities of family, which is influenced by the culture it entertains.

In American society, where culture is diverse, there are many kinds or types of families. And these families are free to choice how they will raise their children, as long as it does not interfere with society's laws.

Society protects individual's, including children, from abuse. There are child protection agencies and social services that seek to intervene when family fails. And domestic violence groups protect women from abusive partners.

Psychologists and anthropologists have understood that we are social animals. We need social groups to meet human needs, as we develop personal identities. Experience in groups are what make for identification.

In fact, in studying Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, it was found that soldiers form a more formiable bonds to their fellow soldiers, than previous family bonds. This reality brings much heart-ache and re-adjustment to the military family, when the solier attempts to transition back into civilian life.

Adoptive and foster parents have discovered and sometime been forewarned that some children develop "attachment disorders" because of their chaotic or abusive families.

Teachers are aware of how much the parents involvment or uninvolvment affects the child's success in school. And problems at home distract student learning.

These realities are challenges to all of us, so that society will remain stable. And children can develop to fully functioning human beings.

Although family affects how the child develops in his "self-identity", i.e. who he is, what he stands for, and what he believes in and why, professors are bound by duty to expose their students to the wider world of knowledge, where children grapple with ideas and ideals that form and shape the world. These are no small or insignificant goals.

Our free society allows for free exchange of ideas and ideals. We should value more the "intellectual journey" of young adults. These are the future of America and the world. We should support those that attempt to form them in their thinking and not circumvent or suppress free information.

The Church has been challenged in this regard , in its understanding of faith, tradition and science. Today's reality of Darwinian evolution is no less daunting. And some deem this as an attack on faith altogether.

America was founded on the understanding that The Church is not the epitome, but man is. Man is created by his creator with certain inaleinable rights. These rights must be protected and sacralized by the Church. Otherwise, we disregard the person for Tradition. And Tradition is what needs changing, if it inhibits personal and societal development.

Our government forms policy that creates our political and social realities. Govenment must be protected from undue pressure from special interests groups. America or any free government needs to make policy on fact, not fiction, fantasy or fanaticism.

I think the family is a good start.