|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Whose Right is it to Define the Self?
Harwood Fisher
Crry College Of The Crry University Of New York, 76071.2575{at}compuserve.com
Descartes founded the psychology of the individual with a mind! body distinction that calls for internal dialogue and interactive exchange. Individuals struggle with their nature through an intracommunicative system, emanating not from social exchanges, but, instead, from autonomous rules and constraints inherent in the machine of the body. The attacks on these ideas by social constructionists, such as Gergen, Harré and Shotter, impel me to write this paper. My purpose is to show how rejection of Descartes's Cogito; ergo sum, and of his idea that the human being struggles with feelings directed by the body and beliefs formed in the soul, eliminates criteria necessary for concepts of the self and the person. I argue that social constructionist reductions of mind and body to social process disallow a causal basis for self and its autonomously generated origins. The same reductions substitute contextual determination for cause and effect logic, clouding accounts of an individual's choices and decisions and making the attribution of personal moral responsibility impossible. I demonstrate that the bases for maintaining the criteria of self and person flow from the Cartesian tradition, have a wide support among many trenchant thinkers in psychology and remain logically necessary.
Theory & Psychology, Vol. 5, No. 3,
323-352 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/0959354395053001

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. Fisher
Categories and Embodied Objects: The Subjective Self and the Psychologist within Natural Psychology
Theory Psychology,
April 1, 2003;
13(2):
239 - 262.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. J. Stam
Introduction: Social Constructionism and its Critics
Theory Psychology,
June 1, 2001;
11(3):
291 - 296.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. R. Malone
Subjectivity and the Address to the Other: A Lacanian View of Some Impasses in Theory and Psychology
Theory Psychology,
February 1, 2000;
10(1):
79 - 86.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. Fisher
Postmodern Agency: You and I Can Show it; Not Own it
Theory Psychology,
February 1, 1999;
9(1):
103 - 112.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. J. Gergen
Agency: Social Construction and Relational Action
Theory Psychology,
February 1, 1999;
9(1):
113 - 115.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. J. Gergen
The Place of the Psyche in a Constructed World
Theory Psychology,
December 1, 1997;
7(6):
723 - 746.
[Abstract]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. E. Dodds, J. A. Lawrence, and J. Valsiner
The Personal and the Social: Mead's Theory of the `Generalized Other'
Theory Psychology,
August 1, 1997;
7(4):
483 - 503.
[Abstract]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Freeman
Groping in the Light
Theory Psychology,
August 1, 1995;
5(3):
353 - 360.
[Abstract]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Gergen
Postmodern, Post-Cartesian Positionings on the Subject of Psychology
Theory Psychology,
August 1, 1995;
5(3):
361 - 368.
[Abstract]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. Harre
The Necessity of Personhood as Embodied Being
Theory Psychology,
August 1, 1995;
5(3):
369 - 373.
[Abstract]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. J.M. Hermans
The Limitations of Logic in Defining the Self
Theory Psychology,
August 1, 1995;
5(3):
375 - 382.
[Abstract]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. Shotter
A `Show' of Agency is Enough
Theory Psychology,
August 1, 1995;
5(3):
383 - 390.
[Abstract]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. Fisher
Empty Sets or Empty Self: A Response to Comments on `Whose Right is it to Define the Self?'
Theory Psychology,
August 1, 1995;
5(3):
391 - 400.
[Abstract]
|
 |
|
|
|