Self

Abstract: The reflexivity of modernity extends into core of the self. Put in another way, in the context of a post-traditional order, the self becomes a reflexive project. One concerns the primacy of lifestyle — and its inevitability for the individual agent. Lifestyle is not a term which has much applicability to traditional cultures, because it implies choice within plurality of possible options, and is 'adopted' rather than 'handed down'. Lifestyle choices and life planning are not just 'in', or constituent of, the day-to-day life of social agents, but form institutional settings which help to shape their actions. Of course, for all individuals and groups, life chances condition lifestyle choices. Life planning is a specific example of a more general phenomenon that author shall discuss in some detail in subsequent chapter as the 'colonisation of the future'. In the reflexive project of the self, the narrative of self-identity is inherently fragile. Moreover, the pure relationship contains internal tensions and even contradictions.

Abstract: Preface Part I. Identity and the Good: 1. Inescapable frameworks 2. The self in moral space 3. Ethics of inarticulacy 4. Moral sources Part II: Inwardness: 5. Moral topography 6. Plato's self-mastery 7. 'In Interiore Homine' 8. Descartes's disengaged reason 9. Locke's punctual self 10. Exploring 'l'Humaine Condition' 11. Inner nature 12. A digression on historical explanation Part III. The Affirmation of Ordinary Life: 13. 'God Loveth Adverbs' 14. Rationalised Christianity 15. Moral sentiments 16. The providential order 17. The culture of modernity Part IV. The Voice of Nature: 18. Fractured horizons 19. Radical enlightenment 20. Nature as source 21. The Expressivist turn Part V. Subtler Languages: 22. Our Victorian contemporaries 23. Visions of the post-romantic age 24. Epiphanies of modernism 25. Conclusion: the conflicts of modernity Notes Index.

Abstract: This article presents a theory of how different types of discrepancies between self-state representations are related to different kinds of emotional vulnerabilities. One domain of the self (actual; ideal; ought) and one standpoint on the self (own; significant other) constitute each type of self-state representation. It is proposed that different types of self-discrepancies represent different types of negative psychological situations that are associated with different kinds of discomfort. Discrepancies between the actual/own self-state (i.e., the self-concept) and ideal self-states (i.e., representations of an individual's beliefs about his or her own or a sitmifieant other's hopes, wishes, or aspirations for the individual) signify the absence of positive outcomes, which is associated with dejection-related emotions (e.g., disappointment, dissatisfaction, sadness). In contrast, discrepancies between the actual/own self-state and ought self-states (i.e., representations of an individual's beliefs about his or her own or a significant other's beliefs about the individual's duties, responsibilities, or obligations) signify the presence of negative outcomes, which is associated with agitation-related emotions (e.g., fear, threat, restlessness). Differences in both the relative magnitude and the accessibility of individuals' available types of self-discrepancies are predicted to be related to differences in the kinds of discomfort people are likely to experience. Correlational and experimental evidence supports the predictions of the model. Differences between self-discrepancy theory and (a) other theories of incompatible self-beliefs and (b) actual self negativity (e.g., low self-esteem) are discussed.