Reply Mon 12 Apr, 2010 09:33 pm
Who am I? If I were to answer that I am a composition of thoughts feelings and matter, always changing and never reproducible in any of its forms. This would be correct if I am a sum of everything that makes me and would mean that who I am this millisecond is different to who I am by the time I finish answering this question.

If we are to identify ourselves by qualities such as our values and beliefs which are largely changeable and a product of our environment then we would not be doing justice to explaining the "essence" of ourselves. There was a case of a woman who after suffering coma regained conciousness but could not remember her past, she was apparently a "completely different" person after the incident and her marriage did not survive as she was no longer the person her husband had loved.

In cases of brain damage someone who previously had a docile nature would now be aggressive.

where as if someone asked me who I am, my natural inclination would be to define myself by my beliefs "I am a vegetarian, I am an atheist". Yet a more accurate assessment of your constant qualities would be to define yourself by your genetic predisposition "I am a brown eyed woman". With the advancement of science I believe that genetic predispositions in the future might be subject to manipulation.

In cases where people have suffered severe neglect and lacked human interaction the people in question behave as a wild animal so another very factual answer might be "I am an animal"

My point is the things we usually define ourselves by are not the most constant of our qualities.

What are others thoughts on this?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,685 • Replies: 6
No top replies

 
HexHammer
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Apr, 2010 10:24 pm
@classicchinadoll,
classicchinadoll;151200 wrote:
I believe that genetic predispositions in the future might be subject to manipulation
Uh! Very interesting, I like such siencetific view on life.
classicchinadoll
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Apr, 2010 02:38 am
@HexHammer,
HexHammer;151214 wrote:
Uh! Very interesting, I like such siencetific view on life.


I do try to draw on what I know of science (which I admit is limited) when I form philosophical ideas. I have a great respect for science. I am just a "beginner" in philosophy, while I probably used it throughout my life I only recognized my interest a couple of weeks ago.
0 Replies
 
amist
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Apr, 2010 04:35 am
@classicchinadoll,
Existentialism is a Humanism, Jean-Paul Sarte 1946

You will probably find this very helpful. Don't be alarmed it has little to nothing to do with Marxism, if you're the type of person who is very off put by anything remotely Marxist.
classicchinadoll
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Apr, 2010 05:45 am
@amist,
amist;151275 wrote:
Existentialism is a Humanism, Jean-Paul Sarte 1946

You will probably find this very helpful. Don't be alarmed it has little to nothing to do with Marxism, if you're the type of person who is very off put by anything remotely Marxist.


Thank you very much amist, I had come across the word existential recently and was curious to know what it meant and thanks to you now I know. I believe I have a lot of existential views if my understanding was correct.
A while ago I came up with my own personal quote;

"If we are to deem it our right to condemn another according to our own personal standard then we would have to accept it each individuals right to condemn according to their personal standard. If we were to exercise that right not one of us would escape condemnation."

I don't know if I am right but to me that sounds quite existential.
0 Replies
 
fast
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Apr, 2010 07:34 am
@classicchinadoll,
classicchinadoll;151200 wrote:
Who am I? If I were to answer that I am a composition of thoughts feelings and matter, always changing and never reproducible in any of its forms. This would be correct if I am a sum of everything that makes me and would mean that who I am this millisecond is different to who I am by the time I finish answering this question.
What you are composed of and who you are is not the same thing.
0 Replies
 
Khethil
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Apr, 2010 09:05 am
@classicchinadoll,
classicchinadoll;151200 wrote:
Who am I? If I were to answer that I am a composition of thoughts feelings and matter, always changing and never reproducible in any of its forms. This would be correct if I am a sum of everything that makes me and would mean that who I am this millisecond is different to who I am by the time I finish answering this question.


Yea, I'd say that jives pretty well with the way I see it. I like your thinking in this; who we are is elusive, complicated and difficult to nail down. But on a general level I'd say it's the unique combination of thoughts, feelings, experiences, filters, behaviors that is distinctly different from everyone else. Such a thing defies a simple answer and - to my mind - would be virtually impossible to answer fully without several hours (at least).

And yes, experiences (particularly in the slant we, each of us, taste them) are a large part; not the whole, but significant to be sure. Each experiences modifies - if only slightly - our perceptions and even values. Emotion, the most wild wild-card of them all, further slants, seasons, discards or over bloats the impact on every other aspect.

Perhaps the best, if one would pardon the apparent bluntness, would be to answer: I am me

Good teaser, thanks
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Who am I?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/18/2024 at 06:33:25