More ink has been spilled in the fields of psychology, sociology, anthropology, philosophy, biology, neuroscience, physics, theology, and literature on the topic of the self than anyone can even imagine. The psychologist-turned-philosopher, William James, believed we have multiple selves, including the biological self, the personal self, the social self, etc. In the early years of social psychology, the notion of the self, as formulated by personality psychologists, was completely rejected in favor of the social influence and power of the situation. Other psychologists, as well as certain sociologists such as Erving Goffman, believed in the idea of a “looking-glass self,” fully determined by the way others perceive us. Later, social psychologists admitted to the existence of a self as an interaction between the individual and the social environment. The change vs. stability (non-change) of the self is another favorite issue, particularly among personality psychologists. And the notion of the self is also linked to such concepts as consciousness, identity, self-concept, and self-esteem. Erik Erikson would say there is a search for self (i.e. identity) and that search, while conducted by the individual, depends to a great extent on environmental influence. Thomas Szasz believed that mental illness is an illusion caused by the excessive pressures and demands placed on people who may not socially and politically conform to the rigid norms of their society. If anything, it is “society” that is ill, not its members: a notion proposed by Rousseau and Goffman. Not that the self, according to Szasz (or Rousseau), is a “noble savage” that should be left to its own devices. As the quotation states, it must be created and cultivated, but not by a repressive government.
