You. Who are you?

[darkina]

Ok this has been in my mind a little while but I don't know how to put it and I'm not sure I'm inspired but...

Who are people exactly? Are they what they think they are, or what others think they are? Is it you who knows your real self, or do others see it more clearly? Is it a mix of both?

Like, when you don't know whether you should do something or not, and other people say it's really like you while your doubts are exactly that it doesn't seem like what you really are...

Also, is there a pattern of things that are "like/unlike you" and how difficult it is to get out of that role? How important is coherence? If something contradicts your principles are you flexible enough to do it anyway? (I mean something you don't mind doing, not something wrong).

Confusing, but if someone has something to say maybe conversation can take off...

[Alcadras]

Öhm.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existentialism

[darkina]

Hmm no Alcie I didn't mean in that sense... not society or stuff but other people, like your friends etc... do they see the real you, or you see the real you? Is the real you made of your gestures and expressions and what others see, or is it what you think you are which might be different from what others see...?

[CoBB]

Who are people exactly? Are they what they think they are, or what others think they are? Is it you who knows your real self, or do others see it more clearly? Is it a mix of both?

I see it a bit differently. Every person sees a different side of you, including yourself. Even if you see a lot more than anyone else, it is possible that you don’t notice something that an external observer might find obvious. If solely others defined who you are, you’d have as many personalities as many people you know, or at least as many groups you belong to. That doesn’t feel right to me, since even if I behave differently with different people, I still feel that these behaviours are just parts of something common. But I wouldn’t consider my own thoughts about myself as the ultimate truth either, since that’s still not an objective view, however well-informed. In other words, I’m just another observer who happened to get the best seat.

Én kicsit máshogy látom. Mindenki más oldaladat látja, magadat is beleértve. Még ha másoknál sokkal többet is látsz, lehet, hogy nem veszel észre valamit, ami egy külső szemlélő számára nyilvánvaló. Ha csak másokon múlna, hogy ki vagy, akkor annyi személyiséged lenne, ahány embert ismersz, de legalábbis ahány csoporthoz tartozol. Nekem ez gyanúsan hangzik, mert még ha különböző emberekkel szemben máshogy is viselkedem, még mindig úgy érzem, hogy ezek valami közös egész részei. De a saját magamról alkotott gondolataimat sem tekinteném végső igazságnak, hiszen az sem objektív nézőpont, akármennyire is jól informált. Másszóval én is csak egy szemlélő vagyok, akinek éppen a legjobb hely jutott.

[darkina]

If solely others defined who you are, you’d have as many personalities as many people you know, or at least as many groups you belong to. That doesn’t feel right to me, since even if I behave differently with different people, I still feel that these behaviours are just parts of something common.

Yeah, I guess that sounds about right.

But I wouldn’t consider my own thoughts about myself as the ultimate truth either, since that’s still not an objective view, however well-informed. In other words, I’m just another observer who happened to get the best seat.

This is where I wanted to get. Am I always the best judge on who I am or what I will be, or do others have a point?


On another note... in the Disney film Alice in Wonderland, when she meets that kind of worm/caterpillar thingy, in the Italian version he goes "TU...cosa essere tu?" which would sound about like "you...what be you?" How is it in the original version?

I mean this guy

[Psi-Lord]

Reminds me of those discussions about the distinctions between who you think you are, who others think you are, and who you actually really are.

[CoBB]

Am I always the best judge on who I am or what I will be, or do others have a point?

These don’t exclude each other. You certainly have the potential to be the best judge in this question, but part of that is to be able to listen to others and consider what they say. If you lack that kind of openness, you probably have a rather distorted image of yourself too.

Ezek nem zárják ki egymást. Egyértelműen benned van a lehetőség, hogy a legjobb ítész legyél ebben a kérdésben, de ebbe az is beletartozik, hogy képes vagy meghallgatni másokat és megfontolni a mondandójukat. Ha nincs meg benned ez a fajta nyitottság, valószínűleg magadról is elég torz képet alakítottál ki.

Reminds me of those discussions about the distinctions between who you think you are, who others think you are, and who you actually really are.

Only reminds? But this is one too.

Csak emlékeztet? Hiszen ez is az.

[KingHarvest]

There's, actually, a good Vonnegut quote about this, or at least a very related topic, from his book Mother Night: "I guess the moral here is: you must be careful what you pretend to be because in the end you are who you're pretending to be." The major theme of the book is that even if you're not really the person you're pretending to be, you're still responsible for how your actions affect other people.

[Glowim]

Philosophical darkina today! (:hmm: yesterday...)

I think noone can know you as good as you know yourself. Just because noone can know excatly why you do something, why you act someway: they can guess why, they can imagine, or they can interpret your explanation, but they don't know your thought,your feeling, your mood,and they can misunderstand your words.. Also your friend, your parents, your boyfriend/girlfriend.
Everyone can have a vision about you, but it can be very far from what you really are , and this pictures obviously can be very different one each other.
There is a theatre play, by an italian writer, Pirandello : "Uno nessuno centomila" (it means: "One, noone, one hundred thousand"), and it talks just about this: the very different visions people have about us. And it says that we are just what people think about us (but on this point I'm not agree).
I agree also with CoBB: sometimes (often? Who knows?) we don't have a correct vision of us: we don't really know why we act someway, etc. And also when we think to know it, sometimes we can be wrong, just because it's very hard to have a objective vision, staying inside us... But if you stay outside, as I have said, you don't have important information about our reason. So, noone knows who we are. But I'm asking: what does it mean: "what you are"? Peraphs there is no answer to this question...Peraphs this question doesn't have any meaning (I'm not saying this topic is stupid: on the opposite, it's interesting: one of the most interisting topic I have seen till know here )
If it means to understand our feeling or our behavior, well, in the end, I think we are always alone, on this sad world...

[Hoogstwaarschijnlijk]

Pirandello

According to Judith Butler you are made by how others see you and I think for a big part that is true, but there is also the dna-thing and your character and I don't know, it's such a difficult subject. I strongly believe that when everyone says to you that you are good at something, that you will be good at something, but on the other hand I don't think that can be true only in certain degrees. If everyone says you speak Spanish but you have never done that, it can't be.

I think it's wrong to speak about a real self, I don't think such a thing exists. I agree with what CoBB says about the different visions. I don't think though that you have the potential to be the best judge though, because you're too subjective, you yourself can't be the one that knows, you're too much into it. Unless you take a distance of yourself, get rid of your identity. omg I'm quoting my thesis now, let's stop

[hreru]

How is it in the original version?

In the book it says "Who ar you?" first, and "You! Who are you?" a bit later.

[linguaholic]

Maybe it's like a puzzle. How others see you are the pieces and only you are able to see the whole picture, depending on how well you know yourself. Maybe you can only see some pieces and have no idea what kind of picture will come out in the end, but then somebody says something that suddenly reveals another piece.

Maybe it is not only important how others see us but also how we see them and how we think they see us. After all, a lot of this thing called "identity" is comparing yourself to others, finding differences and similarities, labels to stick onto your forehead and groups to cuddle into. ("Language freak" is one of these, by the way... :p)

Would such thing as identity or personality exist if I was the only person on Earth? I'm not quite sure, but I think there's no need for an I if there's no you.

[Glowim]

@Vogelvrij: Do you know Pirandello? I haven't know that he was known outside of Italy... (actually I don't have any idea about which italian writers are known outside Italy...)

I think there's no need for an I if there's no you

Really nice affirmation!! I like it!!!
But I think that your identity would still exist if you were the last man on the earth, and it would be exactly the same (except that probably your expirience would be different, without interaction with people: I think that expiriences change our personality - but this is another issue). There wouldn't be just some "vision" of you, but your identity wouldn't change.

[linguaholic]

But if there had never been anybody else?

[Glowim]

I think that our personality, so our identity, is influeced by expiriences. Obviously, If you lived in a desert wolrd, you would have some expirience, and not some other ones (for example: no one could hit you, you couldn't fall in love ore be loved by someone, etc..). So you would actually be different. A part of that, you would have your identity, noone could observe you, but you would have your identity..

This point recall me the Heisenberg principle, in quantum phisic(in a few words all that I know about it, if someone observe a particle, observing he changes his properties..): it seems about the same: if you "observe" someone (and someway, interact him: if you want to know him well, you must have interactions with him), you change his personality...

Sorry for the quantum digression...

[KingHarvest]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_FZVD5lsAw

[Hoogstwaarschijnlijk]

@Vogelvrij: Do you know Pirandello? I haven't know that he was known outside of Italy... (actually I don't have any idea about which italian writers are known outside Italy...)

I study Literature, so yes. But I have never read something of him, although I was obliged to


If no one is left on earth except you, you're still existing right? Why wouldn't you have an identity, if you're reflecting and thinking about yourself, then there's your identity.

[Glowim]

] I study Literature, so yes. But I have never read something of him, although I was obliged to

I see. And I understand perfectly: any obligue remove me any desire of reading.. When I was at school,as homework for summer vacations, I had to read "The picture of Dorian Gray" by Oscar Wild, . "Obviously", I didn't do it, and the first or second day of school, I was called to talk about my "reading"... Well, I prefer to avoid any description of those terrible minutes...(and what my teacher said...). After that, I decided to avoid in the future to read that book (but I know it is very beautifull)

If no one is left on earth except you, you're still existing right? Why wouldn't you have an identity, if you're reflecting and thinking about yourself, then there's your identity.

On the opposite, you would have a lot of time to think to your identity! And to have same existential questions like : "Why I exist?" or "Where do I come form?" !!

[Hoogstwaarschijnlijk]

O, they don't care here if you read a book. I mean, of course they care, but they won't really find out and it doesn't matter much, it's your own responsibility.

And haha, so the conclusion is: the more you are alone, the more identity you got?

[Glowim]

And haha, so the conclusion is: the more you are alone, the more identity you got?

Well, it wasn't what I meant but... so it seems!!!
(but what a sad identity would you have?and what sad answers would you find?!?)