Talk:Self (psychology)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 Portal |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, which collaborates on Psychology and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.
|
||||||||
Contents |
[edit] Self (philosophy and psychology)
The self (philosophy) article is currently an uninformative stub. If it were to be fleshed out it would largley duplicate this article ("self (psychology)") as the two are derived from each other (or so it seems to me at this point). Thus I propose merging both articles either under the title "Self (philosophy and psychology)" or "Self" (with the disambiguation page being "self (disambiguation)". Hyacinth 20:19, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I have now also discovered Self-concept. Hyacinth 07:01, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- The Other, as in self/other, used to redirect to Subject-object problem. Hyacinth 07:32, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Jungian Self
I was linked to the Self (psychology) article from the Archetype article dealing with Jung's theory. This article doesn't seem to have a lot to say about Jung's use of the word "Self" as an archetype. Unfortunately I am a stranger to the subject. Does the article explain Jung's "self" at all? If it does, should this be labeled? Or does a Jung section need to be added? --Instant Classic 23:03, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Hyphenated vs. non-hyphenated self terminology
In WP there appears to be a mixture of hyphenated and non-hyphenated 'self' terms. It could take a lot to track them all through; in the short-term it might be best for those working on this page to help ensure there are redirects e.g., self concept -> self-concept and vice-versa, etc. Jtneill - Talk 07:36, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Foucault - needs work
Commenting this out for now; needs to be written/explained more clearly: The quantifying and classifying process is referred to by Michel Foucault (1975, 1977) as being the issue of ‘the calculable man’: when the masses are classified they can be exploited as individuals and it is individuality that allows this to occur. Jtneill - Talk 08:09, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Postmodern self (or selves rather)
Where does this fit? What I mean, simply put, there has been a push among postmodernists (e.g., Kenneth Gergen) within the area of psychology suggesting the notion of humans having a healthy multitude of selves which contextually change, or work together, everyday. Switching roles; for example; the nurturer to sex object. The proponents maintain that the 'different selves' relate to different aspects of the multifaceted human life. Once again... Where does this fit? Or has it already been discussed elsewhere?
[edit] No-self
I think, we should include a brief overview of the buddhist concept: No-self. - Nearfar 16:02, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Self (Psychology)?
It doesn't seem like anyone has been talking about this page for awhile. I'm pretty new to contributing to Wikipedia, so please feel free to push me in the right direction if I do or say something wrong. The Self is an ENORMOUS topic in psychology (both personality and social psychology) and this page needs a major overhaul to reflect that importance. First off, the self in psychology should be distinct from that in philosophy. While there are some intersections (e.g. James, Freud), each discipline has such a thorough treatment of the topic that it would be impractical to fit all of that content into one article. Second, I think this article would benefit from a historical overview of the term in psychology, which has gone through multiple interpretations throughout the decades. A historical overview might begin with William James' (1900) distinction between the I and the Me, and end with the distinction that personality vs social psychologists currently place on the term. Thirdly, Kohut's formulation of selves, while interesting, are by no means the crux of psychological research and theory on the self. At the most, two or three sentences on his contributions are merited. Additionally, the second section of the article is more or less either not psychology or not about the self. It should be entirely stricken from the article. Fourth, I would suggest merging the self-concept article with this one. This is more a suggestion based on my own experience with the construct, though I can understand how others might wish to keep the concepts distinct. I make the suggestion because the more broad topic of "the self" (in social psychology) encompasses other constructs like self-concept, self-image, multiple selves, etc. Anyhow, I'm just worried about this page because it is the first site to show up when one google's "the self," and the information provided in this article is by no means representative of how the self is studied in psychology. It requires more than a couple revisions, in my opinion. I'm just hesitant to go about doing a major deletion spree before consulting hopefully more experience wikipedians.Chrono.Psych (talk) 03:25, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
