CounterpointStimulating debate with the British Council

 

Is it true that the unexamined life isn’t worth living? Annoyingly, and often painfully, it probably is. Anyone who compulsively exaggerates their status or earnings, or cries tears of confused jealousy and impending self-hatred on their sister’s wedding day, would benefit from knowledge of what is driving them.

In the context of cultural relations, a deeper understanding of the self is far more than a personal luxury; it is essential. Only if we can understand how individuals operate can we investigate the differences in how people experience selfhood across different times and places. And why would we want to do that? To understand cultural divisions, there is little of more importance than an understanding of the motivations of the individuals driving them. 

Intercultural dialogue is crucial at a time when cultures are becoming increasingly interdependent but often simultaneously estranged. But how can we attempt intercultural dialogue without understanding the people we speak with? Without a greater and deeper mutual understanding, doesn’t intercultural dialogue resemble a discussion between well-meaning brick walls?

So far so good. But here comes our first problem.  ‘The Self’ is not concrete. It is highly abstract, hard to pin down. And the questions we most want to ask can’t be directly asked.

For example, we cannot ask, ‘So, how do you conceive of yourself?’  because generally the answers won’t get beyond basic emotions such as ‘happy’ or ‘depressed’.  Most individuals cannot see themselves objectively enough to give a true insight into their own individual identity.

The questions we actually want answered are along the lines of, ‘Would you say you consist of a coherent whole? Or is your selfhood more divided, unrationalised? Is your self inherently independent, or enmeshed in a collective? Do you feel that your self is logical? That there is a certain and absolute ‘truth’ underlying the way in which your identity is constituted? And that possibly this may be the same as your neighbours, or business partner in Belgium? What do you think Mr Smith, and what do you think Signore Gibellini?

So, there is a problem of method. How can we engage with various experiences of self-hood? Psychoanalysis allows us to consider that an individual cannot access their own self, and that the self consists equally of the way we think and the way we don’t think.

For example, the girl who tragically loses her father at sixteen and takes her boyfriend to the place they had always holidayed a year later, really does just think she’s doing it because it’s a nice place, until she gets there. It is the processes involved in getting herself into this situation which she can’t tell us, but can reveal so much of her individual identity.

And, if the refugee protects himself enough, he can be sure that his inability to understand why his twenty-year-old daughter wants to leave home, is because she is spoilt. He can’t tell us of his underlying fear having lost his whole family forty years before.

So, psychoanalysis makes us realise that the individual cannot always tell us about his or her own identity directly. It tells us to look instead for clues through behaviour, coping strategies, relationships and recorded memories. In this way we may uncover how individual identity is conceptualised, and possibly look for differences across cultures.

For example, if we probe marital and parental relationships we can learn a lot about individual identity within the family. Examining a record of trauma can illuminate the different coping strategies people use. Is death dealt with head on, or is there an emphasis on carrying on? Similarly, an autobiographical record can give away a lot about how independent an individual is, or how much they feel part of a larger group.

This process is not easy. But it is essential. Cultural differences in individual identity can underpin the divides we cannot bridge. A psychoanalytic awareness lets us acknowledge the importance of these differences, and provides some of the tools we need to understand them. In the context of cultural relations, I would ask: How can you have a conversation when you don’t know who you’re talking to?