During the day, I have a lot of time to think, if I take advantage of it. Today I spent a lot of time thinking about character and identity. Not just today, actually, but a lot of days I think about it. Usually I end up with questions like: what are the base elements of my character? What about others? This question seems to be a mind trap for me because I have a hard time distinguishing what is necessary to the essence of character (curse you, Plato!) versus the things that I do. After stewing on this for a few weeks, the problem arose again in a different way. (This may be a prime example of my roundabout and shoddy way of trying to explain things. Please bear with me.)
I got to the point where I believe that there are things that we do that explain our character. These things do not comprise our character themselves, but I do believe that they reveal truths about who we are. Think of it this way. If I eat a bowl of delicious Oh's, there are things that I can immediately tell about the cereal. It's sweet, it's tasty, and very grainy, like a small village brought in their entire harvest just so I could have a good snack time. However, these are just adjectives, they don't tell me what's in the cereal, just the product of those ingredients. In the same way, I think these significant actions (not all actions mind you! "I'm pretty sure the way you skip like a little girl says something critical about who you are!" = dumb.) are like tasting our character. They describe the collision and synthesis of qualities, quirks, and qualms that collaborate to create one, singular person.
But it came to me from the other direction, and I think that is the part that deserves at least just as much of my thought. Sometimes I find myself just a little dumbstruck at the fact that some people haven't done some things. This probably sounds odd, but hang with me. For instance, in my opinion, if you want to be a hippie, at least a good hippie (and who doesn't want that?) you better have read Walden. If they haven't, I don't know if I could count them as a good, real, hippie. Furthermore, if I have a clever friend who writes wonderful letters suddenly stops writing said letters, it would seem to me that this person is no longer whole. How will people know that they're so darn clever and can write so clearly? It's like someone punched the oats out of the center of my Oh's, and no one gets away with that. Again, this crucial action does not make the person a writer, it just makes them a clever, articulate person and those qualities are made manifest clearly in writing. One more example: I don't think I play music because I am a musician exactly. But moreover because I need to express myself in an articulate and creative way. I suppose I could do it in a different way, as long as that need is met. I hope this makes sense.
I've felt out of sorts quite a bit this last year, and thinking about these things makes me curious. Are there anything that I'm not doing (or doing, for that matter) that is contrary to my character? Have there been facets of myself that have been denied because of important things that I've forgotten to be? It's a curious thought. For instance, there was a time where I ran like someone was chasing me all the time. I haven't done it in a long time and I really miss it. But is there more to it? Is there an urge for introspection or self-betterment that is not being fulfilled? If there is, I feel like I should lace up my shoes right now, or at least find a way to do that. I don't like feeling incomplete. This seems like an important question.
As an afterthought, I think the actions are, in a way, just as important as the ingredients of character, because I can't understand what the qualities are in their purist (take that, The Forms!). I don't really care that Oh's has a healthy dosage of polymascotfomalate (it doesn't), I care that it tastes like magic. So it seems like maybe we should burn the candles at both ends? I don't really know. I feel like I'm running in circles now.
2 comments:
I have questions and thoughts about identity as well.
For starters, I think that there is a distinction between Action and Identity. There is a difference between What We Do as opposed to Who We Are. However, I am also of the opinion that there is a relationship between Action and Identity.
I am reminded of Behaviorism, which is a Psychological movement that attempts to attribute a great many things to some manner of (physical) Behavior. For instance, a Behaviorist might suggest that to be "in love" is actually to be in that state of being where this chemical of the brain collides and combines with this other chemical of the brain ... making one feel the emotion commonly dubbed "love."
There are many psychologists who would identify themselves as Behaviorists, today. However, there exists a slightly different train of Psychological thought that says something more like: When you feel love, then you are not experiencing mere chemicals colliding, but you are experiencing an emotion. The emotion of feeling loved may produce more chemicals which collide with other chemicals in your brain. Basically, emotion influences behavior, but behavior also influences emotion (which is why pills are effective).
I think that the distinction between What We Do vs. Who We Are is somewhat like that.
For example, I play soccer. Playing Soccer is something that I do. But it also affects Who I Am. It is part of eli, to be a soccer player. Or we can say that David-Walker Rice writes. It is part of what makes up David Walker Rice as a person. The more we do What We Do...I think the more it affects Who We Are. And if we stopped playing soccer and writing...then I think we would give up a small part of Who We Are.
But I still think that What We Do doesn't exactly make up Who We Are. Who We Are is strongly influenced by What We Do, but it still remains something separate from What We Do. I think this because if ... for example if I were to, tomorrow, cease to play soccer, basketball, or any sport of any kind, I would not cease to be an athlete. It is part of Who I Am, regardless of whether or not I do it. If Actions were all that comprised Being, then Who I Am would be rather dull...seeing as how I spend most of my days in the basement of a mansion entering invoices into a spreadsheet.
So that leads me to ask What Does Make Up Who We Are?
I think it would be very difficult for any one person to identify all the things that comprise Being. But I do think that desire must be an essential part. Desires, Wantings, Likings ... I think that these make up an essential part of Who We Are. Part of why I believe that I would not cease to be an athlete is because the desire to be an athlete would still remain. Part of Who I Am is that I really do not like spending a day entering invoices into a spreadsheet in a room with no windows one story below ground in a house filled with stuff. Desires ... make up Who We Are (at least part of Who We Are).
The only other thing that I can think to add at this point is that I think that Being is not a static thing. I think it can be influenced by things done or not done. I think that it is made up of Desires, and I think that desires can change. I think that Being is dynamic and that it changes.
I thought that grants post was intelligent, and then eli's as well. I just have to have a few minutes to be peaceful and try and swallow you guys' minds at work...
ps. we have internet now!
Post a Comment