The
philosophy of self
defines, among other things, the conditions of identity that make one
subject of experience distinct from all others. Contemporary discussions
on the nature of the self are not thereby discussions on the nature of person hood, or personal identity. The self is sometimes understood as a
unified being essentially connected to consciousness. below are philosophic ideas we can relate to in questioning who we are or what our purpose is or why we feel somethings.
1, Introspection:
Introspection is one of the most fundamental necessities of trying to
understand who you are and what your place in the world is. It should
be necessary to everyone to explain to themselves in a satisfactory
manner a) why they believe in what they believe b) is there a
possibility of them being completely and utterly wrong in their
conclusions. In addition, being able to examine your own internal
process from a non-involved vantage point while it’s happening is
extremely helpful in creating a complete idea of your self-identity.
2. A sense of internal pluralism.
The mental landscape of the human mind is not a singular thing, it
can be best described as a debate by an inconsistent committee of
contradictory opinions. I dare say that most people don’t realize that
they have more than one internal voice, especially since it’s
considerably easier to go along with the conclusion of the most vocal
one at any given time. Just recognizing the fact that you do indeed
have, as it were, an angel on one shoulder and a devil on the other,
helps to give you a sense of who you really are.
Just for clarification, I’m not talking about hearing voices. I’m
talking about the fact that there are different parts in a person’s
mental make-up, otherwise there wouldn’t be much sense in the idiom “to
argue with oneself” or in the concept of self-doubt. The non-involved
vantage point that I mentioned earlier basically means that a part of
you notices when you’re arguing with yourself and can observe the
process.
3, Solipsism
For any of this to make sense, every adult person should have a
satisfactory rational explanation as to why they can say that an
external world beyond their own internal world exists in the first
place. Without having done so, one’s opinions on the external world seem
rather pointless to begin with, so it is an essential foundation to
build everything else on.
4. introspective Illusion
We humans tend to trust our own introspection to a greater extent
than that of anyone else, because we have no direct means of observing
the latter. What this really means is that we tend to evaluate our own
actions based on our underlying internal motives, and everybody else’s
based on the consequences of their actions. The net effect of this can
be devastating, as thinking along these lines makes it impossible for us
to appreciate the internal motives of anyone else. To give a prosaic
example: if you slip on, say, a wet surface, you’d think to yourself “it
wasn’t my fault that I slipped, the conditions were surprising and
unfavorable” but someone observing the incident might simply think
“whoa, that dude is really clumsy.” When you extend this to a
confrontational situation, you end up with some of the bloodiest
conflicts possible; people only realize their own justifiable
motivations for aggression, misunderstanding, or simply not caring about
those of the opposing party. This results in rhetoric like “we are
simply trying to defend ourselves from an external threat (own internal
introspection), which was originally instigated by Those Evil People
because they’re a bunch of Really Nasty Bastards (simplification of
introspection of other party).” The results of this kind of thinking can
be seen in every genocide that has ever befallen our species, because
just observing the consequences makes it a lot easier to label someone
evil. This mode of thought is endemic to being human, but at least you
should have a mental warning signal going off in your head when you
notice yourself doing something like that.
One more example to illustrate the point; you lend your car to a
friend, who ends up accidentally crashing it. He/she’ll be saying how
sorry they are and how they didn’t mean it, but you’ll still be angry,
because f**k, you crashed my car. If the situation were reversed, you’d
be exhorting how you didn’t mean to do it, but the person from whom you
lent the car would be pissed off, maybe even more so because of your
‘excuses,’ and you’d wonder why he couldn’t relent even a bit, because
you really didn’t mean to do it. The reason is quite simply because your
explanation has to do with your motives, but his/her perspective is
based solely on the consequences. You have fundamentally two completely
different perspectives in that given exchange. Sounds quite familiar
when put like that, doesn’t it?
5. Relativism
Once you start with introspection, and realize the possible fallacy
that you’re unwittingly committing by downplaying those of other people,
you quickly run into the possibility that everything you think and
believe might be utterly and completely wrong, or at least not as
absolute as you previously thought. This usually results in either
taking a healthier perspective regarding your own opinions or a
full-blown existential crisis.
Have a lovely week people...
Article inspired by
kick ass.
