Discover the fascinating ways social interactions construct who we become and how we see ourselves.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​  My mind went back to  how I usually sleep during my sociology class , half-asleep with a lukewarm coffee in hand, when the professor asked us something that made everyone pause. She wanted to know if we thought we were the same person when we were alone in our room versus when we were at a family dinner or hanging out with friends. The question seemed almost silly at first, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized how complicated the answer actually was. That moment sparked my fascination with how we construct our sense of self and how society shapes who we become.

The sociology of self is essentially about understanding how our identities are not just something we are born with but something we actively create through our interactions with others. This idea challenges the common belief that we have some fixed, unchanging core that defines us from birth to death. Instead, sociologists argue that the self is fluid, constantly being negotiated and renegotiated through our social experiences. Think about how you act differently around your boss compared to how you behave with your childhood friends. Are you being fake in one situation and real in the other, or are both versions authentically you?

George Herbert Mead, one of the foundational thinkers in this area, proposed that we develop our sense of self through social interaction. He suggested that we learn who we are by taking on the perspectives of others and seeing ourselves through their eyes. When I was younger, I never thought of myself as funny until my classmates kept laughing at my jokes. Their reactions became a mirror that reflected back an image of myself I had not previously recognized. This process of reflected appraisal is fundamental to how we understand ourselves. We internalize the judgments and expectations of others, and these become part of our own self concept.

The concept of subjectivity takes this even further by examining how we experience ourselves as conscious beings with agency and perspective. Subjectivity is about the inner life we all have, the running commentary in our heads, the feelings we experience privately. But here is where sociology makes a fascinating claim: even our most private thoughts and feelings are shaped by social forces. The way we interpret our emotions, the language we use to describe our experiences, even what we consider to be our authentic self are all influenced by the culture and society we live in.

Michel Foucault explored how power relations shape subjectivity in ways we often do not recognize. He argued that social institutions like schools, hospitals, and prisons do not just control our behavior but actually shape how we think about ourselves. When we internalize certain norms about what it means to be a good student, a healthy person, or a productive citizen, we are essentially policing ourselves according to societal standards. I remember feeling guilty for taking a mental health day from work, even though I desperately needed it. That guilt was not just my personal neurosis but a reflection of broader cultural values about productivity and work ethic that I had absorbed without even realizing it.

The relationship between individual identity and social structure is one of the central tensions in understanding the self. On one hand, we feel like autonomous individuals making our own choices. On the other hand, our options are constrained by social categories like gender, race, class, and sexuality. These categories are not just labels but powerful systems that shape our opportunities, experiences, and sense of who we can become. A working-class kid might internalize messages about their intellectual capabilities that limit their educational aspirations, not because of any inherent ability but because of how class shapes subjectivity.

Erving Goffman gave us the dramaturgical approach to understanding the self, suggesting that social life is like a theater where we perform different roles depending on our audience. We have a front stage where we present carefully managed impressions and a backstage where we can relax and be less guarded. This does not mean we are being dishonest, but rather that we are skillful social actors who adjust our presentation based on context. Who among us has not code-switched or adjusted their behavior when moving between different social settings?

What strikes me most about studying the sociology of self is how it complicates simple notions of authenticity. We often talk about being true to ourselves or finding our real identity, but what if there is no single true self waiting to be discovered? What if we are always in the process of becoming, always shaped by our relationships and social contexts? This does not make our identities less real or meaningful, but it does suggest that the self is more of a verb than a noun, something we do rather than something we simply are.

The implications of this perspective are profound for how we think about personal responsibility, social change, and human potential. If our subjectivity is socially constructed, then changing oppressive social structures is not just about external policy but about transforming the very ways we understand ourselves and each other.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Reference

American Sociological Association. (2019). Understanding the self and society: Sociological perspectives on identity formation. ASA Publications.

Cooley, C. H. (1902). Human nature and the social order. Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Foucault, M. (1982). The subject and power. Critical Inquiry, 8(4), 777–795. https://doi.org/10.1086/448181