Misconstrued Social Identity Explained by Mike Ratner

M.O.R.B is my acronym for the Modus Operandi of Rational Behavior which is an interpretation of personage in terms of relational being and selfhood in the modern age. It's the observation and study of the acts or mannerisms made by individuals existing within societal systems or structures that subject one to particular MORBID manifestations that can be best described as an artificial ego entitification


Entification is my word for a self-constructed identity that becomes a perceived entity on to itself (whew)!

This projection of a perceived “I” conjunctionally labels one's self perceived identity into what I describe a 'cringe' factors which (lets be honest) is then a mind manufactured strata or state that is suiting this so called MORB’s view (which akin becomes an imposed reality construction) that bifurcates or senses a Metaspheric socio-setting that it perceives 'itself' in - yes, it's a lot said and in due time - it all gets explained!


Social identity is the part of the self that is defined by one’s group memberships. Social identity theory, which was formulated by social psychologist Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the 1970s, describes the conditions under which social identity becomes more important than one’s identity as an individual.  My MORBology examines factors of social construction in identity, to say that an identity is only socially constructed is to deny that it has some “I” objective reality ascribed to it. 

Rather, MORB identity is the result of beliefs and practices in society or specialized segments of society and it may or may not have a factual foundation apart from those beliefs and practices.

The self is a complex and core subject in many forms of spirituality. In Western psychology, the concept of self comes from Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, and Carl Rogers where the self is the inner critic. When it comes to identity maintenance I want to examine what makes us MORBID.

In the book The Society of the Spectacle (French: La société du spectacle) which is a 1967 work of philosophy and Marxist critical theory by Guy Debord, the author develops and presents the concept of the Spectacle which I relate to the MEST (Matter, Energy, Space & Time) setting (explained later). Debord’s book is considered a seminal text for the Situationist movement. 

Debord published a follow-up book Comments on the Society of the Spectacle in 1988.[Debord (1988) Comments on the Society of the Spectacle.] Debord traces the development of a modern society in which authentic social life has been replaced with its representation: "All that once was directly lived has become mere representation."[Debord (1994) Thesis 1] 

Debord is saying that the history of social life can be understood as "the decline of being into having, and having into merely appearing." [Debord (1967) thesis 17] This condition, according to Debord, is the "historical moment at which the commodity completes its colonization of social life."[Debord (1994) thesis 42.]  I ask, who is the actor, the persona participant in the spectacle? 

In this analogy, I describe a denizen or MORBID member of the Mass Trance replicating the ‘spectacle’ of life in our daily existence or perhaps can be defined as a foci absorbed into itself - perception that is other than “I” Aware of its conditions or situation including its dire environment.

For myself, I feel it is vitally important that MORBall (humanity) as a self-reference wakes up therefore I posit studying the possibilities of self-liberation, awakening from the Mass Trance essential for our species and overall equitable planetary survival. We can look at MEST and Metasphere as a theory of knowledge which can (ought to be) applied in neo-sociology and communication theory as it examines the development of jointly-constructed understandings of the world that form the basis for shared assumptions about how MORB perceives its reality. 


This theory fits nicely with social constructionist ideas as it centers on the notion that meanings are developed in coordination with others rather than separately within each individual. [Leeds-Hurwitz, Wendy (2009). "Social construction of reality". In Littlejohn, Stephen W.; Foss, Karen A. (eds.). Encyclopedia of communication theory. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications. p. 891. doi:10.4135/9781412959384.n344. ISBN 978-1-4129-5937-7.] 


While some social constructs are obvious, for instance money or the concept of currency, in that people have agreed to give it importance/value, others will see what I am proposing as highly controversial and hopefully hotly debated, such as the concept of a MORB-ID self and persona projection that in its creation (I examine) is self-reinforced identity.[Jorgensen Phillips (16 March 2019). "Discourse Analysis" (PDF).] This articulates the view that people in society construct ideas or concepts that may not exist without the existence of other people or language to validate those concepts.["Social constructionism". Study Journal. 4 December 2017. Retrieved 12 May 2018.] 


There is weak and strong social constructionism.[khanacademymedicine (17 September 2013), Social constructionism | Society and Culture | MCAT | Khan Academy, retrieved 12 May 2018] Weak social constructionism relies on brute facts – facts that are not socially constructed, such as, arguably, facts about physical parcepts (MEST = matter, energy, space and time) – or institutional facts (which are formed from social conventions). [khanacademymedicine (17 September 2013), Social constructionism | Society and Culture | MCAT | Khan Academy, retrieved 12 May 2018]

Let's suppose that MORB fits the definition as a social construct where its derived meanings, notions, or connotation placed on its (noun) known reality of people, places, things and MEST events including that of it’s sphere in society is a set of views (bideck). In this regard as a theory of mind “adeption” allows for functionality and interaction of inhabitants of life's experience within the Mass Trance. Thus MORB by this theory or account has limited introspection into how they can view or deal with the objects of attention whether intentionally placed there or chance view. 


Similarly on this plane, my theory posits that phenomena won't have an independent foundation outside the mental and linguistic representation that MORB develops about itself throughout all life’s experiences making MEST accounts for shared reality. [Berger, Peter L.; Luckmann, Thomas (26 April 2011). The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Open Road Media. ISBN 978-1-4532-1546-3.] 


From a linguistic viewpoint, social constructionism centers meaning as ID, an internal reference within (meta) language (words refer to words, definitions to other definitions) rather than to an external reality. [Mallon, Ron (2019), "Naturalistic Approaches to Social Construction", in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2019 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved 2 October 2021][St. Clair, Robert N. (1 October 1982). "Language and the social construction of reality". Language Sciences. 4 (2): 221–236. doi:10.1016/S0388-0001(82)80006-5. ISSN 0388-0001.]


In this mini-thesis that can be found at (pasted in browser) I will also define ‘AREAS’ of MORB operation and how that affects BIDECK one of my new theories of mind that allows transactional functionality among MORB projected identities. 


MORB-ID = The Modus Operandi of Rational Behavior in the Mass Trance.

ID = Internal Dialogue (limited “I” awareness of thought, word usage and action perceptible) 

To be explained….

If this book idea interests you - please feel free to make contact!