What do we mean when we refer to the "I"? What is the self fundamentally? Nietzsche instructs us: "become who you are." But how is this possible? In becoming, I am changing, and thus I am different after I change than I was before. But it was I who changed, and so the I is in some sense a constant.
Descartes says, "I know that I exist; I seek now who is this "I" whom I know?" This is the essential question. Descartes goes on to suppose that the"I" is a thinking thing; no more, and no less. (Incidentally, the I is not the same thing as a human being, and so he is not saying that a human being is a mind.)
But am I a mind? Some people identify with their body, and Descartes supposes this is incorrect. Is it similarly incorrect to identify with the mind? Descartes observes his mind, and a distance -- a distinction -- is required to see. But what is it that sees? It cannot be the mind, for the mind does not have a vantage point with which to see itself. Further, the mind is constantly changing, but the I that considers the mind seems to have a strange calm, a continuity. In the Yoga Sutras they call the "I" at the most fundamental level the seer. But this seeing "I" seems to be able to catch no glimpse of itself. It is like a man in isolation without a mirror. It looks without, but it cannot consider itself. What, then, am I? Is it possible to ever know?
Descartes says, "I know that I exist; I seek now who is this "I" whom I know?" This is the essential question. Descartes goes on to suppose that the"I" is a thinking thing; no more, and no less. (Incidentally, the I is not the same thing as a human being, and so he is not saying that a human being is a mind.)
But am I a mind? Some people identify with their body, and Descartes supposes this is incorrect. Is it similarly incorrect to identify with the mind? Descartes observes his mind, and a distance -- a distinction -- is required to see. But what is it that sees? It cannot be the mind, for the mind does not have a vantage point with which to see itself. Further, the mind is constantly changing, but the I that considers the mind seems to have a strange calm, a continuity. In the Yoga Sutras they call the "I" at the most fundamental level the seer. But this seeing "I" seems to be able to catch no glimpse of itself. It is like a man in isolation without a mirror. It looks without, but it cannot consider itself. What, then, am I? Is it possible to ever know?
1 comments:
Thomas
This is a good post and it's topic is one that should be at the forefront/priority of every man's thinking. There is nothing more intimate and personal or of greater consequence for man then his own identity.
Post a Comment