Insight Into Identity

So when we last left our discussion of cognitive theory, I had given an overview a review of direct and indirect understanding. This model seems to apply to all the ideas we hold. That is, for any idea we can think of, our understanding is either direct, indirect, or some blend of the two. My understanding of computers, for example, is blended - some things I understand directly (basic ideas about computer operation and function), and some I understand indirectly (router functions, networking, and how my computer interacts with my ISP).


Now one particular bit of understanding that is a major component of how we function is our understanding of ourselves - our self-concept, or self-identity. Like any other idea, we can understand ourselves directly or indirectly. Initially, we learn a lot about ourselves indirectly through our parents, friends, and general environment. Over time, however, we usually begin to form our own ideas about ourselves which are to some degree independent of our environment. These new self-concepts are understood directly - they are our ideas about ourselves, we own them, and we determine how they change. For the sake of simplicity, I will call ideas we hold about ourselves directly our direct identity, and ideas about ourselves we get from others our indirect identity.

For most of our lives, we have a blend of direct and indirect identity. We often feel it most keenly in adolescence, when we really start trying to assert a more direct identity over the indirect identity provided by our families and general culture. We never fully gain a completely direct identity, however, and for good reason - we are often wrong about ourselves. I may believe myself to be an eloquent writer or brilliant singer, only to have others contradict my understanding. At that point, I need to assess whether or not I am right about my understanding of myself - perhaps I really don't sing as well as I think I do. On the other hand, maybe those critics are just jealous of my incredible talent. It is sometimes hard to determine which understanding most closely matches up with reality, and we spend much of our lives trying to figure that out.

One aspect of identity that concerns the work we do with IRI is the relationship direct and indirect identity has to control. If you remember from last time, if I have a direct understanding of something, I am in control of that idea - the idea is mine. I can change, modify, and adapt it as I see fit in order to bring it into alignment with everything else I understand about the world (ideally, this brings it into better alignment with reality, but sometimes we get really, really confused). An indirect
understanding, however, leaves control of the idea to whoever is teaching me. I can't do any more with computer repair, for example, than what the IT specialist tells me. The IT specialist has a direct understanding, but my understanding is only indirect. Thus - and this is critical - direct understanding allows me to control an idea, while indirect understanding leaves control in the hands of others. Now, apply this principle to direct and indirect identity, and what do we get?

What we end up with is a direct correlation between direct and indirect identity and personal agency. The degree to which I have a direct identity (I understand myself directly), is the degree to which I have control over my life (barring, of course, aspects of our environment we cannot control - no matter how direct my identity, getting hit by a tornado will end badly for me). To the extent I have an indirect identity, someone else (the entity which gives me my identity) has control over my life. This is, again, exemplified well in adolescence, where teenagers struggle to not only define themselves, but also escape from their parent's control. In short, my sense of identity (direct or indirect) directly impacts my sense of agency, and the associated sense of responsibility. If I have control over something (like myself), I have a responsibility to properly manage that thing. If I do not have control over something, then I am not actually responsible for it.*

Since our goal at IRI is to help people take control of their lives so that they can improve their situation, we are constantly working to bring people from an indirect to a direct identity. This work has led us to some interesting theories about why many cultures are suffering socially and economically right now, where the problem comes from, and how it can be fixed. That's going to be quite a heavy load to cover, however, so it will have to wait for next time.
 
------------------------------------------
* As a side note, this is one reason why mismatching authority and responsibility in business is both demoralizing and dangerous. If I am given responsibility without the power to change the situation I am responsible for, I become nothing more than a scapegoat. If I am given power with no responsibility, I become a monster. Neither situation is really beneficial to anyone involved.