Influence- Are we ever truly ourselves?

Forums: Philosophy, Social Philosophy
Email this Topic • Print this Page

I was thinking about how the terms"Be Yourself" and "Choose for yourself"

Several questions quickly came to mind..

What does it mean to be yourself? and in a world that constantly influences you(your way of thinking, choices and so on)
Is it truly possible to be yourself?

Are we not all just products of influence?

Is it possible not to be influenced?

I am not positive where this thread should go and didn't see anything similar so I am hoping that it is okay here. I believe that even with the ability to decide things for ourselves that in reality the previous influences and relations we have with others really decide these things. Obviously, you can defy someone else's thinking for your own, but isn't your own the product of genetics and influence also?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,569 • Replies: 18

No top replies

@Kage phil,

Before we ask the question "Can we ever truly be ourselves", perhaps we should ask what our "true selves" are?

1 Reply

@Kage phil,

Isn't the question "Is there such a thing as your "true self" also relevant?

A quick definition look up for "Self"

your consciousness of your own identity
a person considered as a unique individual; "one's own self"

For the first definition, I think "Are we the product of another identities?"
For the second "Is it possible to be One's own self?"

0 Replies

@Kage phil,

One way of looking at it is to say that "being yourself" is acting consistently in relation to your perceived identity.

1 Reply

@patchouli phil,

I think be yourself and be true to yourself are or more closely related to the other maxim, "be your best possible self". Self creation is the same thing as self awareness.

1 Reply

@GoshisDead,

GoshisDead wrote:

I think be yourself and be true to yourself are or more closely related to the other maxim, "be your best possible self". Self creation is the same thing as self awareness.

So then to be our "best" true self, wouldn't we have to eliminate all limiting beliefs and attitudes? Refuse to believe in realism?

edit: I'm not claiming realism. I hope this post is clear.

0 Replies

@Kage phil,

Kage wrote:

I was thinking about how the terms"Be Yourself" and "Choose for yourself"

Several questions quickly came to mind..

What does it mean to be yourself? and in a world that constantly influences you(your way of thinking, choices and so on)
Is it truly possible to be yourself?

Are we not all just products of influence?

Is it possible not to be influenced?

I am not positive where this thread should go and didn't see anything similar so I am hoping that it is okay here. I believe that even with the ability to decide things for ourselves that in reality the previous influences and relations we have with others really decide these things. Obviously, you can defy someone else's thinking for your own, but isn't your own the product of genetics and influence also?

Sometimes, we sacrifice being ourselves to fit in. When ya come to realize that it doesn't really matter if you fit in or not, then maybe you can be yourself. Hard thing to do if you really care about what others think about you.

1 Reply

@Elmud,

to throw another maxim out there that covers them all, be who you want to be. there is no negation of limiters, simply a statement of we are who we want to be.

edit; or rather we can be what we want to be, as a generalization not ignoring environment and circumstance, hence the be your best possible self, the possibilities are limited by circumstance.

0 Replies

@Kage phil,

Kage wrote:

What does it mean to be yourself? and in a world that constantly influences you(your way of thinking, choices and so on)
Is it truly possible to be yourself?

Are we not all just products of influence?

Is it possible not to be influenced?

These are good, good questions and speak direction too our concepts of self. If we look at it in it's purest, most 'disconnected' form I'd have to say: We're all products of influence - to some extent or another - but it's that very specific mix of my particular set of influences, values, ideas, dysfunctions, etc. that is what I call 'Myself'. No two mixes are the same - not even close.

So even though I think we are products of influence to some extent, that doesn't preclude (or devalue) the notion that there IS a "myself".

Here's what "Be Yourself" means to me: When I act, make a decision, open my mouth to speak or react I endeavor to do so in accordance with my conscious intellect - that part of me that is self critical, rather than just react. It's this "take control of myself"-aspect that, when exercised, I can feel proud enough of to call "This Is Myself".

This isn't to say that 'simple-reaction' isn't also just as unique, just as discerning; it does mean that when I act with Eyes as Open as They Can Be, rather than just knee-jerk act and react I am so much the more a product of my conscious will

Neat topic, thanks.

0 Replies

@Kage phil,

So in a way "Your Self" is the unique mix of qualities and influences. Obviously there are things you can choose not to be influenced by and things you can't. So whereas we're many pieces of different things, in the end we are what we are.

1 Reply

@Kage phil,

It may be that being true to oneself is recognising the genuine motives for behaviour, whether we choose those motives or not. Very much Freudian, and even if this were the case the difficulty would be defining the sufficient qualities of "genuine motives" - I do not think the interpretations of a psychoanalyst suffice.

0 Replies

@Kage phil,

The external influences can only be a part of you. Because you can decide whatever is right or wrong... once you see, you know, thats all there is to it. It might or might not change the way you act or think of yourself.

0 Replies

@Parapraxis,

Parapraxis wrote:

Before we ask the question "Can we ever truly be ourselves", perhaps we should ask what our "true selves" are?

yes, and merely the fact that youring trying to be yourself can be a contradiction because that an influence drove you to try and be who you are.

0 Replies

@Kage phil,

Kage;56014 wrote:

Is it truly possible to be yourself?

It is not possible to ba anyone other than yourself. You have no choice but to 'be' in accord/as your 'nature'/context.
The universe doesn't 'influence' you, you are an integral feature of the universe; the entire universe is the context that defines you (completely), every moment.

1 Reply

@nameless,

I believe in self-definition - defining yourself through the choices you make

But I also believe we are one: everyone is a composit of everyone else

Hence why we sometimes see ourselves 'mirrored' in other people's behaviour

0 Replies

@Kage phil,

Kage;56014 wrote:

I was thinking about how the terms"Be Yourself" and "Choose for yourself"

Several questions quickly came to mind..

What does it mean to be yourself? and in a world that constantly influences you(your way of thinking, choices and so on)
Is it truly possible to be yourself?

Are we not all just products of influence?

Is it possible not to be influenced?

I am not positive where this thread should go and didn't see anything similar so I am hoping that it is okay here. I believe that even with the ability to decide things for ourselves that in reality the previous influences and relations we have with others really decide these things. Obviously, you can defy someone else's thinking for your own, but isn't your own the product of genetics and influence also?

Someone told me one time to just be yourself. I have no earthly idea what that statement means.

1 Reply

@Elmud,

Some of this is pretty good. For me, this whole idea became pertinent first in my photography. I was studying the work of others, in an effort to be a "better" photographer. What I found more and more frequently though was that I was not having original ideas. Rather, I was looking for examples where I could reproduce the ideas I had gleaned from my heroes. I came to recognize this as one of the fallacies in my effort to produce original work. The real idea was to use the methods without reproducing the results.
This led to a lot of changes. First was to stop studying the work of others, and to get myself out in the field, in pursuit of my own authentic works. This soon led to the same attitude in all inspiration. I stopped reading philosophy, and most other things that carried the philosophy of the author. I stopped watching television. In short, I stopped seeking influences. The goal became much bigger than to just be an authentic photographer. Rightfully, it led to the pursuit of authentic existence.
One can never break free of influences. I believe that the key to being and knowing oneself is to constantly examine what is influencing one at any given time. Developing an authentic world view is intrinsic to this, and it's no easy task. It has to be done deliberately.

1 Reply

@sparrowminded,

I think the idea of a self is a very problematic one for philosophy, one which is very very interesting. It seems to be a question both of identity and of agency.
For identity it is a question of having a defined and self-conscious sense of identity, it seems to me that to have this sense of well defined identity then what is integral is a sense of continuity. The problem here is that we all forget parts of our past, and some people forget all of it due to mental conditions, so this sense of continuity is at least partly an artificial one.

Then of agency, this seems a more satisfying approach to defining ones self identity, one defines himself by his decisions and actions. Of course this to does not completely bypass the causal affects of influence from others as there are often a number of factors influencing your decisions and actions.

0 Replies

@Kage phil,

Kage;56014 wrote:

I was thinking about how the terms"Be Yourself" and "Choose for yourself"

Several questions quickly came to mind..

What does it mean to be yourself? and in a world that constantly influences you(your way of thinking, choices and so on)
Is it truly possible to be yourself?

Are we not all just products of influence?

Is it possible not to be influenced?

I am not positive where this thread should go and didn't see anything similar so I am hoping that it is okay here. I believe that even with the ability to decide things for ourselves that in reality the previous influences and relations we have with others really decide these things. Obviously, you can defy someone else's thinking for your own, but isn't your own the product of genetics and influence also?

what would happen if nothing influenced us in any way at all? in itself, i dont see being influenced as objectionable, as long as we understand when we are in fact being influenced and by what. if nothing were to influence us, we would not learn or grow.
i do find it hard to imagine anyone can be 'original' as a thinker, because as you say genetics and heredity and even more, such as prenatal conditions, still play a part in everyone's makeup both mind and body whether they are considered to be two separate things or one whole.
'be yourself' is a funny expression-can i be yourself? can you be myself? it must have been intended to express the thought, 'be natural' or 'allow yourself to be'.

0 Replies

Influence- Are we ever truly ourselves?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know