Yet another thread about the 'Self'

[Nearly Sane]

Interesting article based around the work of Derek Parfitt. The 'republic of entities' currently writing this post wonders, following on from a couple of posts with torridon on the SfG thread, whether some of what people state is based on what it feels to be them, and that this experience is not as uniform as we tend to think.


https://quillette.com/2018/08/07/is-there-anybody-in-there-derek-parfits-criticism-of-the-self/

[Sriram]

I don't know why people are getting into such a tizzy about the Self.  It is YOU.

The more one analyses it or thinks about it the less we are likely to know it. 

When all objective thinking, all analysis, all memory,  even all awareness stops and only the Subject exists, that is the Self. 

[Nearly Sane]

Not in a tizzy at all. Info thinnest saying that you know about something by not analysing though is a meaningless deepity.

[torridon]

I don't know why people are getting into such a tizzy about the Self.  It is YOU.

The more one analyses it or thinks about it the less we are likely to know it. 

When all objective thinking, all analysis, all memory,  even all awareness stops and only the Subject exists, that is the Self.

That says nothing about what it is, only what it isn't. 

Can you say what it is, what is its nature, location, substance, form ?

If I have a head transplant, will my self go with my brain into the new body ?

[wigginhall]

I like the phrase, republic of entities.  A friend of mine used to write stuff about the self as group, although this relates more to sub-personalities, and the idea that there isn't a single point of awareness.  I used to also use the idea of a theatre or arena, in which various entities take up space, and seem to comprise me.   This was anticipated by Freud with his ego, superego, id,  split.   But is there one me?  I don't know.

[Sriram]

That says nothing about what it is, only what it isn't. 

Can you say what it is, what is its nature, location, substance, form ?

If I have a head transplant, will my self go with my brain into the new body ?

The Self is You. The intellect is a tool you use to understand external objects.  It cannot know you.   You can only BE you.

The idea of Self Realization is about eliminating all the things that we falsely identify as 'I'.  all these are in fact only qualities of the body or the mind or intellect.  By eliminating them we can SUBJECTIVELY KNOW our true self.

This is the most fulfilling task one can undertake....I know from my own experience. 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Just like I am suspicious of moral relativists who also prescribe moral behaviours I am suspicious of illusion of self proponents who write in the first person.

[Sebastian Toe]

Just like I am suspicious of moral relativists who also prescribe moral behaviours I am suspicious of illusion of self proponents who write in the first person.

I am suspicious if people who are suspicious of others.

[torridon]

The Self is You. The intellect is a tool you use to understand external objects.  It cannot know you.   You can only BE you.

The idea of Self Realization is about eliminating all the things that we falsely identify as 'I'.  all these are in fact only qualities of the body or the mind or intellect.  By eliminating them we can SUBJECTIVELY KNOW our true self...

Still only saying what it isn't, not saying what it is.

Is it a thing, if so what is its nature and what is the evidence to justify that ?

[Udayana]

What is a thing? Is an idea a "thing"?

[Sriram]

Still only saying what it isn't, not saying what it is.

Is it a thing, if so what is its nature and what is the evidence to justify that ?

You are in this trap of 'externalizing'.   The Ego, mind and intellect work that way.  You keep asking 'what is it'...as though it is some substance that you can analyse and understand. The intellect works that way.

I have told you that you cannot see it or feel it or analyse it because it is not external to you. It is you! You have to just BE you!

This is not something you can 'understand'.  You must first get into the Yogic process and try to understand your own internal structure (mental).  You will then get an idea of what I am saying. 

[torridon]

You are in this trap of 'externalizing'.   The Ego, mind and intellect work that way.  You keep asking 'what is it'...as though it is some substance that you can analyse and understand. The intellect works that way.

I have told you that you cannot see it or feel it or analyse it because it is not external to you. It is you! You have to just BE you!

This is not something you can 'understand'.  You must first get into the Yogic process and try to understand your own internal structure (mental).  You will then get an idea of what I am saying.

I can see this is going nowhere, I'm not going to have to the time to start doing Yoga just to clarify a point in a messageboard debate.

[Sriram]

I can see this is going nowhere, I'm not going to have to the time to start doing Yoga just to clarify a point in a messageboard debate.

Yes..I agree with that. But you can try to understand that it isn't as simple as asking 'what is it'?

[torridon]

For what it is worth, I see my 'self' as a phenomenon of mind, a mental construct, an aspect of conscious experience, a process, the feeling of personhood.  Vague terms, perhaps, but the concept is inherently slippery with multiple dimensions.  There is all the baggage that psychologists deal with, the entrenched personality traits, the preferences, the personal memories, all the things that typically differentiate me from Bob or Sally.  Then there is the phenomenological experience of being an active subject within the world right here, right now, seeing and hearing and thinking, having direct visceral experience of the wider world, feeling alive, having emotions. All of these aspects are subject to change over time; the things that felt important to me 10 years ago are not the things that feel important now; the sounds I am hearing coming out of the radio are not the sounds I heard 10 seconds ago. And yet through all this flux of varying experience, I feel my mind weaves together a continuity and a singularity; a mental narrative of a single 'me', a me that is subject to incessant change, but always a single subject, not multiple subjects, this coinciding with the fact that whatever limbs may come and go, I always have a single body that admittedly changes over time.

[Sriram]

For what it is worth, I see my 'self' as a phenomenon of mind, a mental construct, an aspect of conscious experience, a process, the feeling of personhood.  Vague terms, perhaps, but the concept is inherently slippery with multiple dimensions.  There is all the baggage that psychologists deal with, the entrenched personality traits, the preferences, the personal memories, all the things that typically differentiate me from Bob or Sally.  Then there is the phenomenological experience of being an active subject within the world right here, right now, seeing and hearing and thinking, having direct visceral experience of the wider world, feeling alive, having emotions. All of these aspects are subject to change over time; the things that felt important to me 10 years ago are not the things that feel important now; the sounds I am hearing coming out of the radio are not the sounds I heard 10 seconds ago. And yet through all this flux of varying experience, I feel my mind weaves together a continuity and a singularity; a mental narrative of a single 'me', a me that is subject to incessant change, but always a single subject, not multiple subjects, this coinciding with the fact that whatever limbs may come and go, I always have a single body that admittedly changes over time.

Ok...For what it is worth let me also explain what I and many other spiritual people think, especially Hindus.

We believe that we have two parts to ourselves. One is the constant part that we call the Higher Self. The second is the evolving part that we call the Lower Self.  The Lower Self reincarnates again and again in various bodies beginning from animals into humans and then further into more civilized and saintly humans.

At the final stage, the lower self merges with the higher self. This is normally called Self Realization when we realize or know or become the constant part. The other part disappears.   This is freedom or liberation after which no more rebirth.

What is the evidence? There is plenty of evidence but only of a subjective kind. You can't examine it with a microscope or some other instrument.

Out intellect naturally objects to this because it is tuned to sense and understand only external phenomena. That is why we need to separate ourselves from the intellect and see it as only a tool. After that we will be able to introspect, work with our mind and travel within to identify the true Self.

This is what all the Yogic science, Vedanta philosophy, Jainism, Buddhism, Gnosticism, Sufism, Theosophy are all about.   

That is as simply as I can put it.  Lots of questions I am sure....but then it is a very complex subject...and no easy answers.

Ok....ippy, I know you can't resist saying something about all this. Most welcome. 
 

[torridon]

Ok...For what it is worth let me also explain what I and many other spiritual people think, especially Hindus.

We believe that we have two parts to ourselves. One is the constant part that we call the Higher Self. The second is the evolving part that we call the Lower Self.  The Lower Self reincarnates again and again in various bodies beginning from animals into humans and then further into more civilized and saintly humans.

At the final stage, the lower self merges with the higher self. This is normally called Self Realization when we realize or know or become the constant part. The other part disappears.   This is freedom or liberation after which no more rebirth.

What is the evidence? There is plenty of evidence but only of a subjective kind. You can't examine it with a microscope or some other instrument.

Out intellect naturally objects to this because it is tuned to sense and understand only external phenomena. That is why we need to separate ourselves from the intellect and see it as only a tool. After that we will be able to introspect, work with our mind and travel within to identify the true Self.

This is what all the Yogic science, Vedanta philosophy, Jainism, Buddhism, Gnosticism, Sufism, Theosophy are all about.   

That is as simply as I can put it.  Lots of questions I am sure....but then it is a very complex subject...and no easy answers.

Ok....ippy, I know you can't resist saying something about all this. Most welcome. 

That is more an exposition of Hindu beliefs than a first-principles description of the nature of personal experience. Imagine you were born into a different time and culture, never heard of Hinduism or yogic practices, you'd have to answer the question, what am I, without reference to those beliefs.  We all have the experience of being alive, but we tend to describe it through the lens of whatever culture we are in.

[Stranger]

Ok...For what it is worth let me also explain what I and many other spiritual people think, especially Hindus.

We believe that we have two parts to ourselves. One is the constant part that we call the Higher Self. The second is the evolving part that we call the Lower Self.  The Lower Self reincarnates again and again in various bodies beginning from animals into humans and then further into more civilized and saintly humans.

At the final stage, the lower self merges with the higher self. This is normally called Self Realization when we realize or know or become the constant part. The other part disappears.   This is freedom or liberation after which no more rebirth.

Which firstly, doesn't actually say what a self is, and secondly, in common with many religious ideas, is riddled with wishful thinking.

It's a nice enough story but rather trite.

What is the evidence? There is plenty of evidence but only of a subjective kind.

So, no evidence then. To be fair, evidence of exactly what a self is and how consciousness works is rather difficult to imagine. If we had a hypothesis and say it enabled us to construct a machine with consciousness and a 'self' and it acted like it did have them, would that be evidence enough?

Evidentially your big problem is that it relies on something non-physical whereas all the evidence is that a sense of self is what brains do.

Out intellect naturally objects to this because it is tuned to sense and understand only external phenomena.

Most selves are external to me.

That is why we need to separate ourselves from the intellect and see it as only a tool.

Sounds like a good excuse to peddle intellectually hopeless arguments...

[Sriram]

That is more an exposition of Hindu beliefs than a first-principles description of the nature of personal experience. Imagine you were born into a different time and culture, never heard of Hinduism or yogic practices, you'd have to answer the question, what am I, without reference to those beliefs.  We all have the experience of being alive, but we tend to describe it through the lens of whatever culture we are in.

Yes...I agree that it is basically a Hindu philosophy. But it is not limited to only Hindus.  Hindus only happen to be the most serious and accomplished community in this area. This has become a way of life for almost everyone. 

Many other esoteric branches of philosophy and mysticism also believe in the same basic process but have retained it as some kind of a secret branch of knowledge.

It is about what we experience and not about beliefs.  Once we get into the process of internal analysis, it is all the same whether Hindu or Christian or Muslim or Buddhist or whatever.

[ekim]

That is more an exposition of Hindu beliefs than a first-principles description of the nature of personal experience. Imagine you were born into a different time and culture, never heard of Hinduism or yogic practices, you'd have to answer the question, what am I, without reference to those beliefs.  We all have the experience of being alive, but we tend to describe it through the lens of whatever culture we are in.

I think you will find that it's a different perspective.  The question can't be answered because questions come from the mind as do answers.  Both are thought forms rather than the reality of the inner experience of Self with a capital 'S'.  There are a variety of yoga techniques and meditation methods which are used to lead to an inner stillness so that 'Self' awareness is realised.  There is no real description just analogical pointers.

[ippy]

Ok...For what it is worth let me also explain what I and many other spiritual people think, especially Hindus.

We believe that we have two parts to ourselves. One is the constant part that we call the Higher Self. The second is the evolving part that we call the Lower Self.  The Lower Self reincarnates again and again in various bodies beginning from animals into humans and then further into more civilized and saintly humans.

At the final stage, the lower self merges with the higher self. This is normally called Self Realization when we realize or know or become the constant part. The other part disappears.   This is freedom or liberation after which no more rebirth.

What is the evidence? There is plenty of evidence but only of a subjective kind. You can't examine it with a microscope or some other instrument.

Out intellect naturally objects to this because it is tuned to sense and understand only external phenomena. That is why we need to separate ourselves from the intellect and see it as only a tool. After that we will be able to introspect, work with our mind and travel within to identify the true Self.

This is what all the Yogic science, Vedanta philosophy, Jainism, Buddhism, Gnosticism, Sufism, Theosophy are all about.   

That is as simply as I can put it.  Lots of questions I am sure....but then it is a very complex subject...and no easy answers.

Ok....ippy, I know you can't resist saying something about all this. Most welcome. 

Some of those yoga positions would, well the male proponents, would enable them/you to see the bollocks intimately.

Regards ippy, see, I haven't disappointed you Sriram

[Sriram]

Yes...I agree that it is basically a Hindu philosophy. But it is not limited to only Hindus.  Hindus only happen to be the most serious and accomplished community in this area. This has become a way of life for almost everyone. 

Many other esoteric branches of philosophy and mysticism also believe in the same basic process but have retained it as some kind of a secret branch of knowledge.

It is about what we experience and not about beliefs.  Once we get into the process of internal analysis, it is all the same whether Hindu or Christian or Muslim or Buddhist or whatever.

What I am talking about are indeed in the nature of personal experiences....not beliefs.   These philosophies are also not just some ancient ideas brought down by one set of 'scriptures' that are held as sacrosanct.   These have been reiterated time and again over the ages up till very recent mystics and philosophers. That is the way Hinduism works.

Most Hindus of today will also vouch for the experiences and the correctness of the interpretation.  As mentioned earlier, similar ideas are found in almost all traditions around the world though they may be regarded as secret teachings. 

It is amazing how stubbornly insulated some of you manage to remain in spite of such wide spread awareness in today's world.

[Stranger]

What I am talking about are indeed in the nature of personal experiences....not beliefs.

No, they are interpretations of experiences, so definitely beliefs.

These philosophies are also not just some ancient ideas brought down by one set of 'scriptures' that are held as sacrosanct.   These have been reiterated time and again over the ages up till very recent mystics and philosophers. That is the way Hinduism works.

Most Hindus of today will also vouch for the experiences and the correctness of the interpretation.  As mentioned earlier, similar ideas are found in almost all traditions around the world though they may be regarded as secret teachings. 

So it's a successful meme.

It is amazing how stubbornly insulated some of you manage to remain in spite of such wide spread awareness in today's world.

The problem is that you are jumping from how things feel to totally evidence-free ideas about reincarnation and so on.

[ippy]

What I am talking about are indeed in the nature of personal experiences....not beliefs.   These philosophies are also not just some ancient ideas brought down by one set of 'scriptures' that are held as sacrosanct.   These have been reiterated time and again over the ages up till very recent mystics and philosophers. That is the way Hinduism works.

Most Hindus of today will also vouch for the experiences and the correctness of the interpretation.  As mentioned earlier, similar ideas are found in almost all traditions around the world though they may be regarded as secret teachings. 

It is amazing how stubbornly insulated some of you manage to remain in spite of such wide spread awareness in today's world.

A billion times zero will always remain zero no matter how many will it to be something other than zero!

Regards ippy

[torridon]

Yes...I agree that it is basically a Hindu philosophy. But it is not limited to only Hindus.  Hindus only happen to be the most serious and accomplished community in this area. This has become a way of life for almost everyone. 

Many other esoteric branches of philosophy and mysticism also believe in the same basic process but have retained it as some kind of a secret branch of knowledge.

It is about what we experience and not about beliefs.  Once we get into the process of internal analysis, it is all the same whether Hindu or Christian or Muslim or Buddhist or whatever.

We don't see christians and muslims, let alone atheists, 'vouching for the correctness' of the view that the self is some reincarnated being that lived previously inside other people.  I think you are muddying the distinction between belief/interpretation, and experience.  I can experience nothing in my self to suggest I was once someone else; rather the opposite is the case, all aspects of my self seem derived from the particularities of this body with its particular history, and I can see nothing that is independent of these formative factors.

[ekim]

We don't see christians and muslims, let alone atheists, 'vouching for the correctness' of the view that the self is some reincarnated being that lived previously inside other people.  I think you are muddying the distinction between belief/interpretation, and experience.  I can experience nothing in my self to suggest I was once someone else; rather the opposite is the case, all aspects of my self seem derived from the particularities of this body with its particular history, and I can see nothing that is independent of these formative factors.

That's what the 'spiritual' transcending practices are about - ceasing to identify with the 'self/ego' resulting from that karmic history and identifying with the 'Self' which is revealed.