The idea that individuals can maintain a stable sense of identity despite social forces working to change it has been debated since ancient times. Authenticity and morality have traditionally been viewed as antithetical concepts, but recent research suggests they may be related.
This connection is limited by the assumption that identity is fixed and cannot be influenced by external factors. This paper argues that people's identities are continually shaped through their interactions with others, so authenticity does not necessarily correspond to moral significance.
1: The Self as Constantly Negotiated
People develop their self-concept through interactions with others and physical environments, including family, friends, school, work, and culture. Their beliefs about themselves evolve based on these encounters, forming an ever-changing matrix of ideas and emotions. As such, the self cannot be considered permanent or independent from its context. Individuals constantly alter their views and behaviors to match those around them, making it difficult to determine what constitutes genuine action versus artificial behavior. In addition, material possessions like clothing, hairstyle, home decorations, jewelry, cars, etc., contribute to one's image, influencing how others perceive us and our own perceptions of ourselves. These influences make up who we believe ourselves to be and create conflicts between inner convictions and public images. When someone changes their appearance or actions to meet societal expectations, do these choices represent a compromise in authenticity? If so, can they still maintain a sense of integrity despite these concessions?
2: Authenticity vs Morality
Philosophers have long debated whether morality has objective standards or subjective interpretations. Objectivists argue that there are universal principles governing right and wrong, while relativists contend that ethics vary according to culture or individual perspective. This debate relates to authenticity because individuals must decide whether certain actions align with their values.
Suppose someone believes lying is immoral but engages in deception for personal gain. Is this inconsistency a violation of core principles? Similarly, if someone denies their sexual orientation for social acceptance or convenience, is this action moral? These questions highlight the complexity of identity formation and reveal the difficulties inherent in assigning moral value to authenticity.
Self-awareness is vital in determining which actions align with an individual's belief system, regardless of external pressures.
Can authenticity retain moral significance when the self is constantly socially and materially negotiated?
Authenticity refers to the extent to which an individual can identify with their true inner self as well as demonstrate this identity through behaviors and actions that are consistent with personal values, beliefs, and experiences.