Essence January 26, 2007
Posted by m5 in Life.trackback
I have been asking myself, “Who are we, essentially?”
I’m taken with two contrasting points of view. One, that we do have an essential self, that if embraced, will let us relax into the ease of being ourselves. Sonia Choquette says, “… you cannot actually be whatever you want. You can only be who you really are, and only you can give yourself permission to express it.” And on the other hand, there is the idea that in spite of tendencies, these can be sublimated through conscious choice; you can be whatever you want. I find both views comforting…
I was recently out social dancing and commented that I usually try to adapt my style to somewhat match my partner. But it could also be viewed that my partner is bringing out an aspect of style that I always had, but don’t normally express. More generally, different people, different situations evoke different parts of ourselves. Is what comes out intrinsically ours, or is it a synergistic product with our current environment?
Regardless, there are so many sides of us that remain unseen by the majority of the people we interact with. It’s startling to consider how many missed connections may exist with people we already know, casual acquaintences, passersby, simply because of this.
This sounds like a contest between determinism and existentialism. If ‘essence’ is some a priori condition that determines the character of your existence, then the determinists can call you one of their own.
There’s a wonderful Joe Frank program called “Thank You, You’re Beautiful” where Joe postulates.. “The truth about a person lies in what he or she hides. What’s a human being except a miserable little pile of secrets? And although what people hide is really pitiful, what’s even worse is what they don’t know about themselves. That’s the way I feel. You may not agree.” I figured this was better than a Camus or Goethe excerpt.
Cool to hear this related back to philosophical movements. Thanks, Sam, resident philosopher [Ah! Upon further inspection, you are not the Sam who is getting a masters in philosophy! Thus, based on the two Sam's I know, I conclude that Sam's have a predilection for philosophy :)].
Ah yes, how much we don’t know about ourselves… but I think what matters is striving to know, to grow.
There’s a very nice Goethe quote on this topic, but I can’t remember where I read it… So feel free to post one – I’ll appreciate it!
You too can be a philosopher! Just think.
Goethe spoke mostly in Kraut, but the gist of one of his philosophies is that your situation greatly influences your decisions, and your decisions determine who you really are. His advice was to try to look at important situations out of their current context. I think the metaphor he used was that you must face life ‘naked’. I further believe he summarized this philosophy with a statement like “Our whole trick is that we must give up existence in order to exist”. I can’t tell you what book he said that in, but hopefully the Philosophy student Sam can add to what the sys admin Sam has to say (in a graduate student’s copious spare time). I did a web search for Goethe quotes, and I didn’t find this sentiment in the first few hits. It could be a fabrication, but I choose to believe it.
If you believe your situation determines who you are, you should really check out the social psychologists. Their message isn’t necessarily uplifting, but it’s supported by observable evidence, and has predictive value. Check out the URL from my first post if you think you’d be into that.
It feels necessary to quote Decartes now: “I think, therefore I am.” :)
The results of the prison experiment don’t surprise me. But this would be an apt time to bring up the oft mentioned example of Victor Frankl, who rose above his circumstances in a WWII concentration camp…
I recommend you consider the viewpoint of maverick philosopher Spinoza. He wasn’t particularly keen on Descartes, or most of his predecessors. It’s hard to get down to the sound byte quality of Descartes, but basically Spinoza said that if a stone rolling down the hill had consciousness, it would believe it was rolling of its own free will. If you’ve been looking for a big name Determinism philosopher, Spinoza might be a good pick.
Victor Frankl is an interesting case. I’d never heard of him before! Too many philosophy electives, not enough history. Heroes are rare, and often uncelebrated. Thanks for pointing him out!