In Thomas Zoëga Ramsøy's recent review of “Synaptic Self. How our brains become who we are” by Joseph LeDoux he raises the issue of the definition of 'self' and 'personality' in cog science literature saying:- "Furthermore, LeDoux confuses existing definitions, using the terms ‘self’ and ‘personality’ for the same phenomenon. Contrary to this, in the scientific literature, these terms are quite distinct and are used for different aspects of a human being. The term ‘personality’ usually refer to a complex of all the externally observable attributes that characterise a unique individual. In contrast, ‘self’ is usually used to refer to consciousness about one’s own identity or ‘self-ness’. This means that self usually denotes a mental phenomenon, something that is only internally observable. From this view, even the title ‘Synaptic Self’ seems misleading."
http://psych.pomona.edu/scr/book_review_SynapticSelf.html
Both the definitions of 'self' and 'personality' alluded to above are objective ie as seen by one person observing the self in another. Personality, then, is a set of observable responses unique to a particular person.
But self and personality are unique entities when viewed subjectively as well. Definition and explanation are bound to become entwined when accounting for the word and phenomena together, but when laid out clearly they should separate nicely.
If self is the centre of intention - the ultimate initiator of intention and the ultimate experiencer, then the self is stable even when the personality changes, say from earliest memory through to old age.
When I recall an event from a time when I was 5-7 years old, I am a middle aged man recalling the activities of a child, so why do I feel it is 'me'? The self can be thought of as that part of the person which is constant.
The personality is the expression of that self. The expression varies with the environment and physical resources available at the time of expression. The self has, at its command, limited experience, only rudimentary processing ability, a body that is very reactive to stimulus and a mind that has a very short scope when a child. But the same self, in middle age, has a memory built up over decades, a mind capable of viewing a bigger picture, considered response capability and substantially better processing ability (but not as dynamic as a person half the age).
I'm using 'mind' as the workspace in possession of the result of processed sensory information and having access to various memory, from working to long term store memory.
The personality not only changes through life, partly as a results of the build up of experience, the changing environment (eg sand pit to executive board room), and the evolving physical resources, but one also has personality changes due to changing environments within the working week.
Let's start with the default personality. This is the set of responses, as a corpus, that one is most comfortable with. For the child carer, time is spent with the children. Laughing, attending to bodily functions and playing are readily shared. There is definitely a personality we adopt when around our own small children. There are a set of responses that we suppress and those that are freely and readily given.
The personality in the executive board room is almost the opposite. Emotionally expressive responses are generally suppressed. Purely verbal and precise responses are carefully thought out and then given in completeness (and without explaining the meaning of any of the big words).
Though it is common for a single person to draw upon both of these personalities in the same day, we would expect the non-default personality to appear a little contrived. This may be because the default personality does not need to be consciously scrutinised and checked for consistency whereas the non-default personality does, at least initially.
My default personality is as I am when in isolation. What is withheld and freely expressed become balanced with no bias toward one or the other.
The set of responses that is the personality is not always a freely acquired thing. In military training one is taught a formal personality that must be adopted when, for instance, on parade. This includes the greeting protocol, facial expression, gait, and even the manner and content of conversation.
Not only is such an obvious personality objectively observable, but subjectively one 'feels' and 'sees' the self (expressed in this way) as being distinctly different from, say, the casual self.
Personality and the Genesis of introspection: In maturation, the child observes the personalities of adults, particularly, say, when parents are entertaining. The child initially expects parents to act in exactly the same way when wearing a dinner suit and seated at the long table with esteemed guests as when in pyjamas and bouncing on the bed with you. But the parents seem quite different - acting differently, speaking differently, withholding expression and sounding extremely contrived when speaking.
Thus the child is exposed to personalities of people as distinct from some essential part that doesn't change (underneath, they still love me even when they act funny). As soon as the child can differentiate their own personality to respond differently according to the situation or the people to whom they respond they can also, potentially, begin to 'see' their own personality (as distinct from the self).
Initially, children name themselves and their personality together "baby broke the chair". Later it becomes "I". This could be mimicry (of adults, ie "they call me baby") except that the child may well differentiate "I" for things like "I want a bottle" and "me" for events involving a personality.
Children often seem to be trying to arrest control of the self from emotional outbursts and so refer to the self during, say, a temper tantrum in the third person "baby cried".
Altered States There is one condition associated with depression where a subject will discharge all personality variations and take on a fairly drab, almost expressionless personality that varies hardly at all with environment (similar to a person in shock or severe trauma). I only have first hand experience of this (observing myself and others) and am not sure on the correct clinical description.
One could describe the lead up to this condition as the development of a personality that "takes over" or becomes uncontrollable, or reacts in a way contrary to what the inner self actually wants. In other words, the self becomes a passenger without any authority. This may occur either due to a strong personality or a weak self. This is certainly a motivation for isolation (one of many!!) and, unfortunately, suicide.
As mentioned, the personalities, all, may simply do something analogous to dying. The self left behind does not have any of the fast response tools of the personality and so is very slow to respond and almost completely expressionless (no dynamic expressions such as short smile, responsive "ah huh" and so on) and totally exposed (no personality to greet and react to others).
The inner personality Apart from the personality that responds to social environment and changes gradually throughout life, there is the personality that is kept reasonably constant and associated with the self.
This personality is not the inner self (as it changes through life but the self does not) but is the repository of morals, beliefs, and a set of reactions that are superior to the outer personality.
In the course of one's employment one might spend millions of dollars without a second thought, might be frugal at home watching every penny, but regardless of any situation and its attendant personality, one may strongly disapprove and move to prevent theft or waste, or destruction of another's property.
One could say that the inner personality is a set of responses that does not change according to ones situation or environment. No doubt there is considerable conflict between one's dearly held inner personality and the personality that responds and changes with the environment one finds oneself in.
Balance: Note that whatever 'you' are it is not self generated. The outer personality is a response to the environment thus it is 'built' up of both the influence of the environment and the influence of the self. We would expect a bias toward the environmental influence on the outer personality, and a bias toward the self on the inner personality.
As the outer personality is built up from the influence of environment and inner personality it does not belong to the self. Though associated with an individual, it can not be generated or emulated independently of the environment in which it normally exists.
Understanding the balance between the physical substrate that includes the body and genetic predisposition, the self (a point that exists 'now' and is associated with control of the person), the inner and outer personalities is also an understanding of what it is to be human (the so called 'Human Condition'.)
In Sum: The self and personality are good divisions having both objective and subjective reality. Introspection as observable from "inside" is the self viewing the personality. Attention to body, such as looking into the mirror, worrying about clothes and hair, is the self concerned with the expression of personality ie self+environment in both transactional and actual expression. Note that we do with clothes and appearance what we do with personality - they can be considered two layers of the same thing - physical, emotional, and higher layers may include such things as actually being a police officer and not just dressing up and acting like one (as in fancy dress).
I don't see how self can refer to 'identity' unless that identity is the something that is consistent throughout life and in all social environments.
It seems to me that there are at least three layers of self to consider (from the inside): the common self, same through life; the personal self, how I feel about me independent of my social selves; the personality, which changes in response to social environment.
There are also variations with mood which would include response to trauma. Trauma clearly effects all personalities placing it on the personal level, but one may still feel like the same person (thus one seeks to cure the inner personality/self in the same way you would correct a broken bone).
© Robert Karl Stonjek 2002