What I have learned from the sociological text we have read is that identity is made up of multitude of concepts such as how we see ourselves in the eyes of others, who our earliest influences are, positive and negative reactions of others, and understanding the time period in which we live. Mead contributes to identity formation, the idea that when “he becomes an object to himself only by taking the attitudes of other individuals toward himself within a social environment or context of experience and behavior in which both he and they are involved.” By this we are able to examine ourselves from the perspective of others and base our identities off of their views. Also Mead and many other sociologist stress the importance of communication, since without language we would not have an identity because we would not able to interact with others. Another perspective from Luckmann and Berger is that the earliest influence on ones's identity is what or whom they are surrounded by during infancy, termed primary socialization and from that as we age, we advance to secondary socialization. From the textbook, I learned that positive and negative linguistic reactions of authoritative individuals, and peers, along with particular social environments act as guidelines for identity. Through experience and maturity, we tend to realize that our identities usually depend partly on circumstances and what individuals are present and what is appropriate in particular situations. Throughout the five stages of life—child hood, teenager, young adulthood, midlife, and lastly old age—our social perceptive's change and therefore, encourage us to identify with new and different concepts as we age. Mill's emphasizes the importance of being able to grasp history and biography and the relations between the two within society. As a result, one can not understand their life as an individual without understanding the history of society. It is within the intricate connection of world history and patterns of our lives that we find our identity. In conclusion, there is not just one key aspect that forms identity.
I have learned that in order to accomplish the task given to you, one has to know what is expected of from you. I believe that is why I was satisfied with my score on the first essay because I incorporated what was asked of me, I read the rubric, knew the prompt beforehand and came prepared with an outline the day of the in class essay. I think that as a writer it is vital that know how to project your thoughts into the essay which is one of my weaknesses as a writer, so knowing the prompt was an advantage, being I was able to organize exactly how I wanted to write my essay beforehand. As a reader I learned that when I am engaged with the reading I am able to understand the material better, and therefore allows me to draw from the reading and integrate into an essay properly. I also noticed that when I give explanations and examples it makes it easier to get my thoughts across and hopefully also makes it easier for the reader to fully understand what I am saying. When reading if I do not understand something I tend to reread it or skim through what I read before I came across what I did not understand, which usually helps. Also annotating the text was helpful because I did not have to look too hard the second time around when I needed a quote or something to that extent. As a critical thinker when I have a question, I try to ask myself how the author would answer the question, and also use what was provided in the text to see if my conclusion was logical. Or I think to myself is that what the author wants to me to think, if so I try to put myself into the authors shoes.
No comments:
Post a Comment