I had to post this comment from a previous post. It was posted by bwinwnbwi, and thank you for the comment. I love the idea that even the inconsistency in our identities matter.
I agree totally. The theoretical basis for why I agree can be found below; however, I am also suggesting that the real significance found in inconsistency, i.e., identity diffuseness, is more about the locus of self where cognitive objects acquire salience, then it is about exploring multiple “me’s”. Thanks for your inconsistent selves post.
If the genesis of ambivalence can be located in the differentiating space [to paraphrase Thom’s (1983, p.187) description of Simmel’s concept of a person], arising between what is simultaneously social and individual, social, in the form of the product of sociological categories, and individual, as the stranger existing outside of sociological categories, then the defining condition of ambivalence/self becomes identified with a “neither this nor that” circumstance. It is for this reason that ambivalence, in its most primitive form, becomes objectified as a “flight from ambivalence.” This “flight from ambivalence,” in turn, may be understood to be a powerful contributing factor to both the closing of the mind of the bigot, and, the modern penchant for division, domination, order, and technology.
In modern society’s matter-centered universe a human being’s “so-called” value and worth is never far removed from some objective measure that claims to be able to scientifically predict and explain human behavior. In this research project I propose to challenge this idea by putting forth a theory of self that recognizes ambivalence to be the locus of self where cognitive objects acquire salience…