Analysis of the Self: The Structure of Self-Validation

Cycle of Action:

goal creation –> goal progression –> consequences (good or bad) –> response to consequences

Response to Behavior:

insecurity over behavior –> reinterpretation of behavior (results vs. intentions) –> rationalization of behavior –> experience of self-validation

Self-Validation Steps:

analyze results and original goal –> decide what to focus on (goal or means to reach goal) –> rationalize past or future actions

Expanded Cycle of Action:

reception of stimuli –> perception of stimuli –> use of stimuli (goal formation) –> will formation –> stimuli creation (goal progression) –> reception of new stimuli –> perception of new stimuli –> insecurity –> reinterpretation of stimuli, goals and goal progression –> rationalization of action –> experience of self-validation


Insecurity:

The desire for self-validation ultimately stems from a person's beginning insecurity. This can grow slowly over time or appear in an instant. The most common reasons for insecurity are the existence of unintended consequences from one's behavior and the lack of positive results. What insecurity does is trigger an evaluation of behavior through the feeling of uneasiness and the desire to follow certain goals without failure.

Reinterpretation:

In the reinterpretation step, results are analyzed, but this step is partly done through the reaction to the effects of the behavior. If results do not correlate with intentions, then one must decide if the intentions or the results are more important in this instance. If intent is more important, then the human partakes in rationalization. If different effects are more valuable, the human will attempt to change future behavior to reach these desired effects, possibly requiring a rationalization of a new type of behavior before it is attempted.

The first example of self-validation is an adjustment to one's goals, goal being the rationalization of past behavior. The second form of self-validation is an adjustment of how one reaches one's goals. Self-validation exists as validating either one's ends or as one's means, and the need to validate ends is usually a more emotional response (as it involves accepting one's emotions) while the validation of means is more a task of logic. We can either validate ourselves by acknowledging and approving of our past behavior, or approving of our future behavior. The big difference is that the latter acts as a form of self-correction, while the former can act as a way to correct others through self-defense.

Rationalization:

People can self-validate through the rationalization of both previous behavior and future self-correcting behavior, but they cannot be done at once. Part of the rationalization stage is the analysis of past or present behavior, which is used to figure out whether such behavior is good or bad, right or wrong. It is not used to figure out what steps should be taken in the future, as the thought process for this is different. It is not the same as figuring out what should have been done originally. In fact, a common conclusion of rationalization is that such steps aren't needed at all, that previous actions were justifiable.

This is an example of emotional self-preservation that satisfies the desire to be right, but what can occur as a result is that one's original goals are abandoned or become unobtainable due to the lack of corrected behavior. If changing one's actions is necessary to reach a goal, then a new instance of reinterpretation and rationalization must occur, which likely never will occur without that feeling of insecurity. That feeling of insecurity will not reappear unless the individual remains dedicated to the said goal over time.

Rationalization can occur for both the past and the future. It is also possible during present action, but would exist as part of a different model due to the lack of results from the behavior. People do not usually rationalize current behavior unless previous examples of that behavior exist. People can and often will rationalize what they believe they will do in the future (they have already formed the will to pursue it), and the rationalization of future options can also occur before any decision has been made. Neither necessarily mean that the person will follow through with the behavior, though, as one can easily be interrupted during this process by the environment or other people.

Even if such actions are not yet grounded in reality, it is important to form a distinction between moments when one rationalizes an option and when one rationalizes an option already decided on. If the decision comes before the options are compared, it is more an aftereffect of the first form of self-validation: the validation of ends. If the decision comes after the options are compared, it is a part of the second form of self-validation: the validation of means.

Self-Validation:

Self-validation, as stated, deals with both means and ends. Validating a past means is how a person figures out that their action was correct, and that there is no need to change behavior. Validating a future means is how a person decides the best way to correct a past mistake, at least in the model used. If occurring during goal creation, this is simply a part of the decision-making process. Validating an end can also be a part of the decision-making process, but as a result of action, it exists as someone concluding that they were not mistaken in their behavior as it was driven by positive intentions, even if it did not produce a positive outcome. The difference between the validation of an end and a past means is that the validation of an end does not put emphasis on future means, while the validation of a past means emphasizes that future means are not needed to correct something.