Oh good. There have been few more oppressively onerous ideas than that of the 'real you'. Nice to see it being done away with. — StreetlightX

Says who ?

Anyone with any sense. Still, have a read of the first chapter of this.

I'll now say that the Nobel Committee was full of Swedish shit — Bitter Crank

I looked it up - skitsnack. I don't have any real objection to giving Dylan high accolades, even the Nobel Prize in songwriting. But it's not lichchurchur. I can't believe there's not some great Malawian poet or Thai novelist who deserves the recognition before the committee stretches the definition to allow entry to an American celebrity.

Hey, wait a minute - I just remembered - Dylan is from Minneapolis, isn't he! Always rooting for the hometown boy.

Anyone with any sense. — StreetlightX

Nonsense.

a pretty pared back bundle — Amity

I don't know what that phrase amounts to, but all the stuff I said in my reply, not just part of it paraphrased.

In an autobiography, obviously I'm going to focus on actions, events, experiences, etc. It wouldn't be a philosophy text about personal identity.

In an autobiography, obviously I'm going to focus on actions, events, experiences, etc. It wouldn't be a philosophy text about personal identity. — Terrapin Station

Not all philosophical texts about identity are so reductionist, are they ? You boiled it down to brain function. Is there not something more interesting and expansive - like what is it like to be you ?
What does it mean to be you ? The different senses of you...

My "real me" isn't something that I believe is ultimately under my control, — Terrapin Station

Well if the 'real you' is about dynamic brain function, then why would it not be under your control?

You boiled it down to brain function. — Amity

Body, actually, of which brain is a very prominent part, since that's the part where mentality obtains, and people usually focus on mental aspects when it comes to personal identity.

How would what it's like to be me/what it "means" to be me (whatever loose sense of "meaning" you're using there) not amount to my dynamic body?

Well if the 'real you' is about dynamic brain function, then why would it not be under your control? — Amity

For example, I didn't exist prior to the development of my body to make my body the way it is, did I?

Still, have a read of the first chapter of this. — StreetlightX

Like :up:

First Circle: “I AM WHAT I AM”

“I AM WHAT I AM.” This is marketing’s latest offering to the world, the final stage in the development of advertising, far beyond all the exhortations to be different, to be oneself and drink Pepsi...

WHAT AM I,” then? Since childhood, I’ve passed through a flow of milk, smells, stories, sounds, emotions, nursery rhymes, substances, gestures, ideas, impressions, gazes, songs, and foods. What am I? Tied in every way to places, sufferings, ancestors, friends, loves, events, languages, memories, to all kinds of things that obviously are not me. Everything that attaches me to the world, all the links that constitute me, all the forces that compose me don’t form an identity, a thing displayable on cue, but a singular, shared, living existence, from which emerges — at certain times and places — that being which says “I.” Our feeling of inconsistency is simply the consequence of this foolish belief in the permanence of the self and of the little care we give to what makes us what we are....
— Comite invisible

So, who are you ? — Amity

So, who is T Clark? Let's see:

• At a far distance, he is, just as we all are, and, as BC has noted, as everything else is too, an illusion.
• A little closer to home - the T Clark that can be spoken is not the eternal T Clark.
• In that same vein, we can just point to him, as if he were the moon.
• Closer yet - As you might guess, being who he is a pain in the ass. Do you think anyone would be this way on purpose? When he was 13, he realized that it wasn't going to get any better, so he'd better get used to it.
• He's tried, to be a good, normal person. Tried and tried and tried. As much as anyone I've known, he is what he seems to be. What you see is what you get. This is him, right here, no, over here. Look at him damn it.
• Ok, now. Right up close. He is his own experience of himself which, of course, is an illusion. So we're back where we started.
• Also, the 2017 winner of the Nobel Prize in Skitsnack, which he shared with @Bitter Crank. No money. No trip to Stockholm. The citation read "What a couple of assholes." According to Google, the Swedish word for "asshole" is "asshole. Who says America hasn't contributed anything to world culture other than Bob Dylan.

There's no trick to this. There's no big mystery. That's what philosophy is all about - making the simplest things in the world complicated and mysterious.

Echoing Pindar, Nietzsche exhorts us: "Become who you are".

This doesn't make any sense to me.
Your dynamic body is not the whole of your identity. Your body and mind help make up the personal identity which is one aspect of you within your socio-cultural sphere, online and beyond.

Your dynamic body is under your control, unless something dramatic happens to you.
And then it might become another 'you'. With a different personality, exhibiting different behaviour.

The question of 'Who is the real you ?' becomes of practical and emotional relevance to you and family who will exclaim 'But that's not Terrapin Station !' or whatever your real name is.

Why did you choose the highly individual name: Terrapin Station ? What does it mean to you ?

“I AM WHAT I AM.” — Comite invisible

This is nothing new. This issue was fully addressed by that great American philosopher P.T.S. Mann in the 1930s.

Echoing Pindar, Nietzsche exhorts us: "Become who you are". — Fooloso4

And what does that mean ? How does that answer the question of who we are ?
Is it about working out who the 'Real' you is, or might be - and then some kind of self-realisation or actualization?

I was waiting for that. You didn't disappoint.
But who was Popeye, really ?

As it happens, the first three names on the list – and they are just alphabetical for now, with a public vote to pick the top 10 open – are all wrestling with identity. Naomi Alderman’s novel Disobedience, about a London rabbi’s bisexual daughter, explores how faith communities can find space for difference; Syrian architect Marwa al-Sabouni explains how deadly walls of misunderstanding in Syria grew up due to a dearth of public spaces; philosopher Kwame Anthony Appiah reconciles the importance of grounded identities with the need to protect vulnerable groups... — Tom Clark

I find this research intriguing and perhaps worthy of the Hanover award, not primarily because it references female bisexuality, but only because of that.

This should be open to a public vote. From a list of 5, compiled by the contributors and readers of this thread. Who can best answer the question 'Who Am I ?' :chin:
Not me. You. Who are you ? — Amity

This decision is too important to submit to democratic decision. The gods must decide. We shall submit this to lots, the drawing of a straw, rocks paper scissors, or perhaps we shall see if a designated witch drowns or survives.

perhaps we shall see if a designated witch drowns or survives. — Hanover

I Will Survive :starstruck:

I was waiting for that. You didn't disappoint.
But who was Popeye, really ? — Amity

Of course I was joking, but not completely. First - Popeye's explanation is as good as any of the others presented here. Second - It underscores how philosophy obscures things that are right out in the open. And third - I like to remind everyone how cute and funny I am.

:smile:
You do like your bullet points, doncha?
Almost :100: for cuteness and humour.

It underscores how philosophy obscures things that are right out in the open. — T Clark

The open sea can get quite rocky :vomit:

And what does that mean ? How does that answer the question of who we are ?
Is it about working out who the 'Real' you is, or might be - and then some kind of self-realisation or actualization? — Amity

Somewhere Nietzsche uses the analogy of the art of the sculpturer who unlike the painter who adds to a blank canvas, removes all that is extraneous, superfluous, and false.

At each step of becoming who you are it is you who is making that determination. The more skilled the sculpturer the less likely he is to remove what is integral to the work. But perhaps unlike the sculpturer working in marble who cannot replace what has already been removed, we are of a more forgiving material. Or perhaps once something has been removed we must work with what remains.

The question "Why would you even ask that?" or "What is the reason to ask such things".

I would say that the short answer is peace.
Because once that you truly understand that the "real you" is an actor that simply act the universe and there is no true difference between you and everything.
You are always part of something, not just anything but all that there is and that personally gives me some peace.

At each step of becoming who you are it is you who is making that determination. — Fooloso4

Not initially, if you are the person being sculpted or moulded by someone else.

Sculpture can involve: carving, modelling, casting, constructing.
Usually, there is a form in mind. We don't always have that. Sometimes, development is more organic. That might be less deterministic and more like free jazz. But yes, you still need to have the basic, core materials. Soft like wax, or hard like marble. Even the latter can portray a softness. The KISS by Rodin.

In 'Becoming', Michelle Obama reflects on the experiences that shaped her. And yes, it is still a process where there are moments of vital decision-making. Choices only we can make, for better or worse. And then there is this...

Or perhaps once something has been removed we must work with what remains. — Fooloso4

Perhaps particularly pertinent to ageing bodies with 'Bits-Falling-Off Syndrome'.

Why did you choose the highly individual name: Terrapin Station ? What does it mean to you ? — Amity

It's a Grateful Dead song/album. Here's the title track:



The Dead are one of my favorite musical artists. My avatar is also from Grateful Dead album artwork. It's from the Europe 72 box set.

Your dynamic body is under your control, unless something dramatic happens to you.
And then it might become another 'you'. With a different personality, exhibiting different behaviour. — Amity

Dynamic means that it's changing/it doesn't stay the same. You're constantly changing, your personality is always in process of changing a bit, etc.

The question of 'Who is the real you ?' becomes of practical and emotional relevance to you and family who will exclaim 'But that's not Terrapin Station !' or whatever your real name is. — Amity

That's about other persons' concepts, and specifically, it's about what they'd consider the "essential" features for them to christen something by a particular name.

Not initially, if you are the person being sculpted or moulded by someone else. — Amity

But the extent to which you allow this to happen is determined by you.

Usually, there is a form in mind. — Amity

Right, some form or shape or of yourself as you are and as are are to be. But of course this may take shape or change over time.

That might be less deterministic and more like free jazz. — Amity

Right, it is not deterministic but free jazz, despite what it may sound like, requires disciplined practice and the ability to hear and respond. One does not begin with the ability to play freely. So too, one does not begin with the ability to live freely.

Perhaps particularly pertinent to ageing bodies with 'Bits-Falling-Off Syndrome'. — Amity

Or are not where they used to be.

There is no Real you because your personality is simply a compilation of your tastes with your experiences and both of those things are beyond any type of reasonable control. — Filipe

You are just begging the question. If I define the real me as "a compilation of my tastes and experiences", then according to you there is a real me/there is no real me.

Then, if the universe is real, I am real.

there is no true difference between you and everything. — Filipe

I don't know about that. I think a toaster can make toast much better than I can, but the toaster didn't do a very good job when I asked it to write this post for me. I had to do it.

Dynamic means that it's changing/it doesn't stay the same. You're constantly changing, your personality is always in process of changing a bit, etc. — Terrapin Station

Everything changes to some extent. Action > Reaction.

That's about other persons' concepts, and specifically, it's about what they'd consider the "essential" features for them to christen something by a particular name. — Terrapin Station

I meant also to include the reaction of ' That's not me. That's not who I am '

This defensive exclamation can apply when someone tells it like it is. 'You're a racist'.
Sometimes we really don't know who we are. Or don't want to accept it.
Of course, some do. 'I'm a racist. So what ?'

Interesting thought about your given name and surname. Does it affect who we become. And does changing it mean that we aren't comfortable in that skin. Why do people stick with their forum name and others change. Stability, continuing reputation v Flexibility, renewal.

The Grateful Dead - quite the favourite with certain members. Our music, art, book collection reflects part of who we are at any given time. Some are core.

Thanks for sharing part of who you are.

But the extent to which you allow this to happen is determined by you. — Fooloso4

Not always possible. Think circumcision.

One does not begin with the ability to play freely. So too, one does not begin with the ability to live freely. — Fooloso4

For sure, we start off with little.
As we grow, a few might still not have the ability or capacity to play music or live freely.
Depending on many factors- physical, geographical, political circumstances.

However, a child or someone with limited abilities, knowledge or talent can still sing, dance and jam without constraints of rule following. They are being themselves.

As you said, we work with what we got.