<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>sociology of roles &#8211; Dr. Daniele Trevisani &#8211; Formazione Aziendale, Ricerca, Coaching</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.studiotrevisani.it/tag/sociology-of-roles/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.studiotrevisani.it</link>
	<description>Formazione Aziendale, Coaching, Counseling, Ricerca e Sviluppo</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Aug 2015 09:56:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>it-IT</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0.6</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>Video &#8220;One Soul many Me&#8221; ed. 01</title>
		<link>https://www.studiotrevisani.it/video-one-soul-many-me-ed-01/</link>
					<comments>https://www.studiotrevisani.it/video-one-soul-many-me-ed-01/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DR. DANIELE TREVISANI]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Aug 2015 09:56:04 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Video]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DAMS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[daniele trevisani]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eerving Goffman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human potential]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[identity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[identity and roles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microsociology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[multiple identities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sociology of roles]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://studiotrevisani.wordpress.com/?p=7774</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;One Soul many Me&#8221; is an experimental approach to Human Resources and Human Factor focused on the Multiplicity of Personal Roles in Life, interpreted by Dr. Daniele Trevisani http://www.danieletrevisani.com &#8211; It derives from Drama Studies conducted at the world&#8217;s most ancient University Institution, the DAMS (Disciplines of Arts, Music and Performance) in Bologna University (Alma &#8230;</p>
<p>L'articolo <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.studiotrevisani.it/video-one-soul-many-me-ed-01/">Video &#8220;One Soul many Me&#8221; ed. 01</a> proviene da <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.studiotrevisani.it">Dr. Daniele Trevisani - Formazione Aziendale, Ricerca, Coaching</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;One Soul many Me&#8221; is an experimental approach to Human Resources and Human Factor focused on the Multiplicity of Personal Roles in Life, interpreted by Dr. Daniele Trevisani http://www.danieletrevisani.com &#8211; It derives from Drama Studies conducted at the world&#8217;s most ancient University Institution, the DAMS (Disciplines of Arts, Music and Performance) in Bologna University (Alma Mater), and Communication Studies in Micro-Sociology, regarding the increasing variety of Roles playied by Social Actors in life, and the struggle for generating a unifiying Soul, a sense of Identity that goes beyond any given role.</p>
<p>We tend to identify ourselves in one of the several roles interpreted in life, without considering that any role is a transition, is momentary, ad will sooner or later vanish. We should look at our identity as a coninuously evolving and compresence of several roles, unified by a soul that gives us a life-purpose of which we can be more or less aware.<br />
In philosophy, identity, from Latin: identitas (&#8220;sameness&#8221;), is the relation each thing bears just to itself. The notion of identity gives rise to many philosophical problems, including the identity of indiscernibles (if x and y share all their properties, are they one and the same thing?), and questions about change and personal identity over time (what has to be the case for a person x at one time and a person y at a later time to be one and the same person?).<br />
It is important to distinguish the philosophical concept of identity from the more well-known notion of identity in use in psychology and the social sciences.</p>
<p>The philosophical concept concerns a relation, specifically, a relation that x and y stand in if, and only if they are one and the same thing, or identical to each other (i.e. if, and only if x = y). The sociological notion of identity, by contrast, has to do with a person&#8217;s self-conception, social presentation, and more generally, the aspects of a person that make them unique, or qualitatively different from others (e.g. cultural identity, gender identity, national identity, online identity and processes of identity formation).<br />
Metaphysics of identity.<br />
Metaphysicians, and sometimes philosophers of language and mind, ask other questions:</p>
<ul>
<li>What does it mean for an object to be the same as itself?</li>
<li>If x and y are identical (are the same thing), must they always be identical? Are they necessarily identical?</li>
<li>What does it mean for an object to be the same, if it changes over time? (Is applet the same as applet+1?)</li>
<li>If an object&#8217;s parts are entirely replaced over time, as in the Ship of Theseus example, in what way is it the same?</li>
</ul>
<p>The Law of identity originates from classical antiquity. The modern formulation of identity is that of Gottfried Leibniz, who held that x is the same as y if and only if every predicate true of x is true of y as well.<br />
Leibniz&#8217;s ideas have taken root in the philosophy of mathematics, where they have influenced the development of the predicate calculus as Leibniz&#8217;s law. Mathematicians sometimes distinguish identity from equality. More mundanely, an identity in mathematics may be an equation that holds true for all values of a variable. Hegel argued that things are inherently self-contradictory[citation needed] and that the notion of something being self-identical only made sense if it were not also not-identical or different from itself and did not also imply the latter. In Hegel&#8217;s words, &#8220;Identity is the identity of identity and non-identity.&#8221;<br />
More recent metaphysicians have discussed trans-world identity—the notion that there can be the same object in different possible worlds.</p>
<p>An alternative to trans-world identity is the counterpart relation in Counterpart theory. It is a similarity relation that rejects trans-world individuals and instead defends an objects counterpart &#8211; the most similar object.<br />
Some philosophers have denied that there is such a relation as identity. Thus Ludwig Wittgenstein writes (Tractatus 5.5301): &#8220;That identity is not a relation between objects is obvious.&#8221; At 5.5303 he elaborates: &#8220;Roughly speaking: to say of two things that they are identical is nonsense, and to say of one thing that it is identical with itself is to say nothing.&#8221;<br />
Bertrand Russell had earlier voiced a worry that seems to be motivating Wittgenstein&#8217;s point (The Principles of Mathematics §64): &#8220;[I]dentity, an objector may urge, cannot be anything at all: two terms plainly are not identical, and one term cannot be, for what is it identical with?&#8221; Even before Russell, Gottlob Frege, at the beginning of &#8220;Sense and reference,&#8221; expressed a worry with regard to identity as a relation: &#8220;Equality gives rise to challenging questions which are not altogether easy to answer. Is it a relation?&#8221;<br />
More recently, C. J. F. Williams has suggested that identity should be viewed as a second-order relation, rather than a relation between objects, and Kai Wehmeier has argued that appealing to a binary relation that every object bears to itself, and to no others, is both logically unnecessary and metaphysically suspect.</p>
<p>L'articolo <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.studiotrevisani.it/video-one-soul-many-me-ed-01/">Video &#8220;One Soul many Me&#8221; ed. 01</a> proviene da <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.studiotrevisani.it">Dr. Daniele Trevisani - Formazione Aziendale, Ricerca, Coaching</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.studiotrevisani.it/video-one-soul-many-me-ed-01/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
