Self as Network

Roger Gould in his book “Collision of Wills”, specifically chapter “Honor and the Individual”, introduces an alternate approach to understanding the self. He proposes to conceptualize the self as a bundle of momentary selves that transcend both ways – into the past as well as the future. Therefore, Gould evokes a “networked” and “inter- temporally linked” version of self that connects the past, present, and future and offers useful insights for our discussion on the trans-situational continuity of an individual. He also draws a parallel between honor and modern market-based societies as both accord opportunities for individuals to be impulsive, the only difference being that such spontaneity is not necessarily rewarded in the case of latter. Overall, I would say that this is a very engaging and stimulating piece that does an exemplary job of explaining something so conceptually challenging and inherently abstract.

Gould proposes two distinct vantage points to conceptualize the self – one where the self is predicated on the past and one where the self emanates from the future.

The self is retrospective to the extent that it is preoccupied with the events in the past and thus oblivious to the consequences one may have in the future. As described by the author, people in honor societies exemplify the retrospective or backward-looking self. These people dwell in their past, fueled by the desire to undo their past mistakes including their obsession to seek revenge for the wrongs done to them, and are likely to be spontaneous in their conduct with an utter disregard for their future well-being. For example, a deeply resented employee openly criticizing his manager on the office floor for not promoting him knowing that it could very well cost him next year’s promotion.

On the other hand, the self could anchor itself in the future rather than being subservient to the past. That is, the self manifests itself as the progenitor of the future as opposed to the descendent of the past. Following this logic, people with prospective or forward- looking selves are far more sensitive about their future needs, deeply concerned about the consequences their actions could have on their future being, and thus operate with extreme caution – as opposed to impulsive – to insulate the future self against any negative spillovers. For example, a worker recently promoted to the position of manager may decide against his will to lay off his former colleagues to appear deserving of the promotion as well as strong-willed and professionally competent for any such future opportunities.

The discussion of the prospective self reminds me of our discussion about anticipatory socialization, where an individual tries to orchestrate their behavior taking into account potential risks and rewards. Here one could argue that actions take precedence over identity as it is the former causing the latter. But the way I understand it I think Gould, through his vivid description of the prospective self, is not alluding to a new identity being created to satisfy some short-term instrumental needs, but rather he treats the forward-looking self as a regulating mechanism that helps an individual coordinate multiplex of identities over time and space and ensures some continuity in action. The dichotomy between the prospective and retrospective self also corresponds to Turner’s work on the institutionalist and impulsivist self. I would say that they are related but not entirely analogous to one another. This is because Turner’s notion of impulsivist self lacks the temporal aspect, i.e., it is symbolic of a spontaneous self but with no definite anchoring in the past.

Gould further explains that individuals do not go extreme in either direction, i.e., neither are they too obsessed with the past self nor too anchored in their future self. Instead, the self oscillates between the two in search of a balance that helps the individual compose a continuous self that seamlessly transcends from past to present to future. In situations where this balance is not willfully achieved, external agents including the state often weave a regime (similar to what has been referred to as legalized situations by Zuckerman 2021) restraining individuals from excessively indulging in their present selves at the expense of future selves. This may include mandatory enrollment in the retirement saving plan or imposition of fines for reckless driving. This is how I think Gould ties into our overarching discussion on continuous individuals who are transported within and across situations.

Further, as I pondered how individuals strive to balance their past and future selves, I started to wonder how similar this is to an artist improvising a piece of music. This artist, while staying true to the original composition, searches for moments of magic. He carefully revises the existing notes, tempo, rhythm, and texture. In doing so, he achieves a delicate balance. His creation is distinct yet retains the essence of the original. It is a blend of the familiar and the new, coherent yet refreshingly different. This musical improvisation mirrors our own life’s journey: a continuous process of blending our past experiences with our future aspirations to create a harmonious self.

I believe this piece makes a significant theoretical contribution by proposing an alternate scheme to characterize the self as the network of temporally linked momentary selves. This contravenes the economic and rational perspective of self where the self is valued solely for its forward-looking instrumental nature. Instead, Gould argues that the self is a much broader and complex construct – it not only subsumes the future but also instantiates the past. As a result, Gould contends that it is imperative to take a balanced view of self without gravitating excessively in either direction