Dewey's concept of the "active self" represents the core of the social capital formation model presented in this document. A central theme of this model is that social capital formation depends on voluntary prosocial behavior. In this dissertation I make the case that Dewey's model of the active self provides a useful and novel way of understanding voluntary prosocial behavior, which in turn can help us to understand the process of social capital formation. A better understanding of the process of social capital formation, in turn, may be very useful in helping us to design more effective programs for promoting the development of social capital in less developed areas.
Since Dewey's concept of the active self is the core of the social capital model I am proposing, in this chapter I will go into great detail in discussing what Dewey's active self model actually said. Following this, in the next chapter I will illustrate Dewey's theory of the "active self" with data from my fieldwork. In the following chapter I underscore through numerous examples how individuals seem to behave in a manner consistent with the active self model. I show how, in the process of setting up the community computer center in Colonia La Herencia, many individuals voluntarily step forward and make useful contributions to help to improve the computer center. I underscore through many examples the role voluntary prosocial behavior plays in helping social capital to accumulate. I also show how individuals use the process to influence how the computer center will operate, and how they assume social roles vis-à-vis the computer center. These individuals, upon realizing that these opportunities are available in the social domain, undertake voluntary prosocial behaviors in which they expend their own efforts to leverage these social resources in certain ways.
However before discussing the fieldwork data it would be helpful to first talk a bit about what Dewey said concerning the "active self" model. Dewey's "active self" is a very simple but powerful concept which explains a good deal about how social systems develop. The "active self" describes how individuals sometimes step forward and take actions "above and beyond the call of duty", to help solve problems within their social systems, and to try to make the world a better place. It is a theory about social leadership where individuals try to do more than just "go with the flow", but rather step out and try to achieve positive change, not out of regard for themselves but out of regard for the world they wish to live in. We are all familiar with the basic idea of the active self, even if we haven't read Dewey's description of it. When Joseph Campbell wrote about "The Hero With a Thousand Faces", he was describing the active self. When Rosa Parks refused to be humiliated by giving up her seat on that Birmingham bus, she was exemplifying the active self. When we as educators work with young people and hope to pass along to them the best our society has to offer, because we know that they are the future, we are hoping to help our students become active selves in the world. So even if one has never read what Dewey wrote about the active self, we all already basically have a working understanding of the concept of the "active self", even if we have never read how John Dewey put the idea into words.
The central idea of this theory of the active self, as expressed by Dewey, is that the self is not a "fixed or isolated quantity" but rather is something "in a continuous formation through choice of action". Every individual is always in a process of change. We create our social identities and our social systems through the actions we take and the efforts we voluntarily make, and in doing so each of us is engaged in his or her own way in trying to make the world a better place. In doing so, individuals are willing to make contributions to the social system even in cases where they are not being compensated to do so. In fact, and as most of us have doubtless observed in our own experiences, these individuals will at times be willing to make great personal sacrifices for a social cause. Within the model I am presenting I am arguing that these prosocial behaviors are the basic wellspring of social capital formation; and I use Dewey's active self concept as the conceptual basis to explain how this prosocial behavior comes about. Therefore before going any further it may be useful to say more about Dewey's active self model as I understand it based on what Dewey wrote.
Dewey talked about the "active self" theory and it's relationship to prosocial behavior in Chapter 26 of his book "Education and Democracy". Although it was written over ninety years ago, his explanation still seems to me to be some of the best analysis done on understanding the voluntary provision of social capital.
Dewey starts out by dispensing with two common myths about why people behave unselfishly in social situations. The first myth is that people who appear to be behaving unselfishly are really doing so for intangible rewards such as social approval. The second myth is that they are behaving in this way because of a selfless lack of regard for their own interests. To illustrate these two common misconceptions Dewey presents a hypothetical illustration of a doctor faced with serving a community beset by a highly contagious disease. The doctor is faced with a serious dilemma. If she continues to treat patients she runs a high risk of contracting the disease herself and possibly dying. If she isolates herself and refuses to treat patients during the epidemic many more people may die. Yet the doctor decides to continue to treat patients anyway. According to the two myths mentioned above, her prosocial behavior can be misunderstood in one of two ways. The first myth would have us believe that the doctor's behavior is really selfish, because she must be receiving intangible or psychic gratification for doing what she is doing. The second myth attributes the doctor's prosocial behavior to the opposite cause, saying that she is completely selfless and is not interested in her own well-being. Dewey highlights the error in each of these two myths and then goes on to present an alternative explanation based on his active self theory.
With regard to the idea that the doctor is motivated by intangible psychic rewards such as social approbation, Dewey points out that no amount of intangible rewards would really justify that sort of behavior. Similarly, the doctor's behavior could not be merely a question of unselfishness, because "why would any rational individual ever find it convenient to be that unselfish?". So Dewey dispenses with both of these common misinterpretations of voluntary prosocial behavior.
As an alternative explanation of prosocial behavior, Dewey proposes his model of the "active self". The "active self", according to Dewey, is not a "fixed or isolated quantity" but rather is something "in a continuous formation through choice of action". Rather than being something "fixed antecedent to action", Dewey says that the self is something which is constantly changing based on the choices that are made and on the self one prefers to be. In essence Dewey's active self is someone who is constantly answering the question "Who do I say I am?" by means of choice of action.
When the person is thinking about choosing between alternative courses of action, in essence each alternative course of action can be thought of as implying an alternate social system and an alternate social identity from within an array of possible options. What distinguishes one alternate social system/social identity from another is the extent to which certain interpersonal relationships are recognized versus denied, and the ways in which her personal resources and the social resources will be used. In deciding which path to select she tacitly must answer a number of questions, including "who do I say I am?", and "who do I say society is?" via a process of action involving continuous self-formation. Going back to the example of the doctor, Dewey says:
"When the physician began (her) career (she) may not have thought of a pestilence; (she) may not have consciously identified (her)self with service under such conditions. But, if (she) has a normally growing or active self, when (she) finds that (her) vocation involves such risks, (she) willingly adopts them as integral portions of (her) activity. The wider or larger self which means inclusion instead of denial of relationships is identical with a self which enlarges in order to assume previously unforeseen ties."
It is interesting to note within the above example how Dewey's model of the "active self" relates to the provision of social capital. Dewey says that:
"The generous self consciously identifies itself with the full range of relationships implied in its activity, instead of drawing a sharp line between itself and considerations which are excluded as alien or indifferent; (and) it readjusts and expands its past ideas of itself to take in new consequences as they become perceptible."
When Dewey says above that the active self "readjusts and expands its past ideas of itself", in essence this is what I have been referring to as the provision of social capital. The individual in a given situation realizes a previously-unrecognized role or relationship, and she or he may step up to that relationship and be willing to assume the social role with its incumbent obligations.
The individual is not trying to maximize utility, but in effect deciding who she wishes to be, and she is also tacitly recognizing social relationships she might otherwise have denied and thus influencing the nature of her social system. She is thinking about being a doctor, but her role as a doctor is a social role which effects many persons beyond herself. She is deciding who she wishes to be in the context of an alternative social system. In deciding to interpret this role as involving service at a personal risk to herself, she is recognizing social relationships she might otherwise have denied. In essence it is via this process that our identities and the identities of our social systems are realized.
A key point in understanding this model is to realize that the individual does not effect this process of identity-formation in a vacuum. Rather we create ourselves through social systems. In this respect the social system becomes a medium for the individual. Dewey's solution is similar but not identical to common ideas of utilitarianism. It's important to understand that within this model what holds utility for an individual is a social system. The individual is not primarily interested in herself, and she is not primarily interested in everyone else. Rather, she is interested in a prospective social system into which she projects herself, and it is this system which is also of interest to the wider society.
As interpreted by Dewey, there are two common forms of utilitarianism which might be characterized as the "individualistic" form and the "universalistic" form. The individualistic or simple form of utilitarianism says that individuals act based on what is pleasing to themselves personally. The universalistic form of utilitarianism says that we take into account the needs of others in determining what is pleasing to ourselves. John Stuart Mill, in his classic essay on the subject expresses this notion of universalistic utilitarianism as follows:
"I have dwelt on this point, as being a necessary part of a perfectly just conception of Utility or Happiness, considered as the directive rule of human conduct. But it is by no means an indispensable condition to the acceptance of the utilitarian standard; for that standard is not the agent's own greatest happiness, but the greatest amount of happiness altogether; and if it may possibly be doubted whether a noble character is always the happier for its nobleness, there can be no doubt that it makes other people happier, and that the world in general is immensely a gainer by it. "
So whereas individualistic utilitarianism suggests that we act for our own happiness, universalistic utilitarianism argues that we act in such a way as to maximize the aggregate happiness of everyone. Interestingly, these two forms of utilitarianism can be seen as corresponding to the two common misconceptions about prosocial behavior mentioned above by Dewey. Those who say that prosocial behavior is due to self-interest are arguing for individualistic utilitarianism; and those who see prosocial behavior as unselfish are ascribing it to universalistic utilitarianism.
Dewey's model of the active self may be seen as occupying a middle ground between individualistic utilitarianism and universalistic utilitarianism. The individual acts prosocially not out of self-interest and not out of a vicarious interest in the self-interest of others, but rather out of an interest in a social system into which she or he projects her or himself. The fact that a mutual interest in potential social systems connects the interests of the individual with the interest of the larger society is not surprising, given that we are by nature social beings. In this sense the individual cannot think of her or himself except in the context of a social system. As Dewey said in commentary on Mill:
"We cannot think of ourselves save as to some extent social beings. Hence we cannot separate the idea of ourselves and of our own good from our idea of others and of their good. "
Thus we might refer to Dewey's active self model as a "social utilitarianism". When the person is thinking about being a doctor she is not just thinking about something that is of interest to her; rather she is thinking about something that involves a social system of interest to her and to society, where she will fit into society and it will be of interest to both her and society. She isn't thinking about her own interests per se, nor is she thinking abstractly about the interests of others per se. Rather, she is thinking about a social system in which she will be a part and which will be of interest to society. Hence I refer to this dimension of the active self theory as social utilitarianism.
Thus Dewey's model provides a way of understanding prosocial behavior which neither assumes that the individual is selfless, nor that they are driven by a desire for social approbation or other intangible reinforcements. Social utilitarianism thus provides a new way of thinking about social capital formation. In essence Dewey's model says that we act prosocially in order to realize previously denied relationships, assume a new social identity and to help to bring about a new social system more in keeping with our subjective vision of the way the world should be, (or to avoid losing these things if what needs to be done involves maintaining an already established identity).
As understood in this way, prosocial behavior occurs when we see a social system at hand which is possible and which is better than its alternative systems, based on our own subjective vision of the way the world should be, and we see that we have a part in the new vision or social system. For the active self, as defined by Dewey, these moments are golden because they provide an opportunity for actions which actualize parts of the self previously latent in the old social arrangement. They provide the self with the opportunity to become in some sense a different person, a better person than one had been previously, or to continue to be the person one wishes to be, and for this reason the self is willing to do what is necessary to bring about the desired state of affairs.
In the following chapter I use this active self model as an analytical lens to discuss my field experiences in helping to set up the community computer center in Colonia La Herencia. As I said above, I show how many individuals voluntarily step forward and make useful contributions to help to improve the computer center, illustrating the active self theory in a practical setting in many particular ways which I could not have anticipated prior to entering the field.
Very preliminary draft: Please do not quote without permission.
Comments welcome at KenDaniszewski@yahoo.com
© Copyright by Kenneth Stanley Daniszewski 2004