• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe

How should a person define themselves?

Sure, watching your own mind is a step towards mindfulness, but I know you can go beyond that. (Most people aren't even conscious that watching their own mind will result in a slowing-down of their mind--hell, most people aren't even conscious that their problems are the result of their mind going a million miles a minute).

To me, the step following 'watching the mind' is learning that life and everything in it is a game. To make this post pertain to this thread: once you forgo the ego-centric definition of "self" (and thus, everyone else's definition of you), you're able to develop any character you see fit for this game. This is convenient because you can fit into any situation at any time-- there is no need for you to feel awkward or askew in a certain situation because you previously defined yourself as this or that...

edit: (surprising succinct for being intoxicated :D )
 
Last edited:
Changed said:
Sure, watching your own mind is a step towards mindfulness, but I know you can go beyond that. (Most people aren't even conscious that watching their own mind will result in a slowing-down of their mind--hell, most people aren't even conscious that their problems are the result of their mind going a million miles a minute).

To me, the step following 'watching the mind' is learning that life and everything in it is a game. To make this post pertain to this thread: once you forgo the ego-centric definition of "self" (and thus, everyone else's definition of you), you're about to develop any character you see fit for this game. This is convenient because you can fit into any situation at any time-- there is no need for you to feel awkward or askew in a certain situation because you previously defined yourself as this or that...
Click to expand...
I agree in a way, but "strictly speaking", you can't go beyond that. There's a point where you stop "pushing the boat" altogether -- and quite honestly, that IS going beyond.
 
Changed said:
But isn't trying to not define yourself, in a way, defining yourself as un-definable? :D
Click to expand...
Yes it is. Actually this is a very common trap. "I have to not define myself" is just another more subtle way of the ego.
It's very hard to say anything that would really sound as it is meant to sound, using language, because language is inherently dualistic... If I would say "let go" or "drop the defining" the mind again will make it into something we can do and we start thinking: "How can I let go?" or "How will I drop it?"...
 
being said:
Yes it is. Actually this is a very common trap. "I have to not define myself" is just another more subtle way of the ego.
It's very hard to say anything that would really sound as it is meant to sound, using language, because language is inherently dualistic... If I would say "let go" or "drop the defining" the mind again will make it into something we can do and we start thinking: "How can I let go?" or "How will I drop it?"...
Click to expand...
Indeed... letting go of something or dropping something is actually the easiest thing in the world, but the problem is that volition isn't involved.

To let go of or drop something -- simply lose interest.

All that can be let go of/dropped is mind stuff (which is memory-stuff), and interest/investment of some kind is what keeps memory and emotion repeating the same tapes over and over and over.
 
I find myself agreeing with a lot of what Changed has to say. I have also been simplifying my life over the past few years. Got rid of most of my possessions, dress plainly, and stopped having sex. I'm not really opposed to sex, but it no longer has any appeal to me unless I am with someone who I really love, and I haven't known someone who I could trust like that in a long time. I've also started questioning everything that anyone tries to convince me of, starting with my own beliefs. I used to be a tree-hugging hippie type, but I realized that wasn't really who I am. Yeah, I am a vegetarian and I smoke pot, but I also like guns and pretty much have the "from my cold dead hands" stance on gun control. My brother says that I am a man of contradictions, but I don't really see any holes in my philosophy (won't eat what I wouldn't kill unless I needed to, will kill anything that tries to kill me).

Politically, I pretty much just want to be left alone. I think that people who participate in the political process have about as much effect on the outcome as sports fans do on the winner of a match. I've found most people have lots of opinions on things that they really can't defend without just repeating what someone else told them, or what they heard on the TV or radio. Its like people are afraid to NOT have an opinion, or to think something different from the two sides that get air time in the media. Worse yet, it seems like everyone is terrified that the opinion the talking box told them to believe might be wrong. Having our beliefs questioned is how we learn, though. I think that if the world is going to survive, we need to abandon the labels, cliques, and parties and just have open discussion. Seems like the ego and the definition of self needs to go with it. Otherwise, the small quiet voice of reason gets shouted down.
 
Last edited:
The contents of this thread are all one needs to find a brief moment of enlightenment :)
 
thesoundofmotion said:
Does the self need to be defined at all? I think once we start to define it or label it we just mess it up even more to be honest.

After all it appears that the view of the self is all a social construct anyways.

I often wonder about transgendered people this specific question because it sort of bothers me. How would they know what it feels like to be the opposite sex? After all the opposite sex or gender should I say is only really defined through whatever society deemed it to be throughout history.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Please help me understand if I'm ignorant, and I don't want to be insensitive, but I've truly never understood the transgender phenomena. If having the surgery and undergoing hormone therapy genuinely makes them more happy then I support their choice regardless, but on a fundamental logical level I neither understand why the surgery should make them happier nor what the rationale is for using the term "transgendered" to describe the result of the change. If the surgery could give those who have it sexually functional alternative equipment it would be different, but the fact is the difference is merely superficial. There is no chromosomal change, no functional change, and, even more, the superficial changes are rarely effective enough to cause others to perceive those who undergo them as the opposite gender, i.e. none of the features that centrally define "gender" are meaningfully transformed. Surgery doesn't exist in nature so the plastic changes induced by undergoing it hardly constitute something defensible as a distinct natural category either. If I felt like I do now but I had been born a female, I have to imagine I'd be much happier being able to sexually get off properly as a woman who feels like a man than I would be merely having my anatomy altered to vaguely appear superficially as male. It's extremely unfortunate that so many people are so unhappy with the sexuality they're born with that they're willing to take such drastic measures to look a little different, but in my judgment "unfortunate" is all there is to it since gender reassignment technology simply hasn't advanced far enough to do anything practical about it. If I'm missing something big here I don't know what it is.
 
Last edited:
slightly off-topic:

As you suggest, gender identity is psycho-social, the body functioning as the main site through which gender is expressed. To the extent that one identifies as trans, he or she is uncomfortable with the lack of congruence between their ascribed gender and how they fell in terms of immediate identity and desire. While physiological techniques can facilitate transition toward outward expression of this gender-identity, they are just the tip of the iceberg, as those who can successfully pass in drag demonstrate. So why manipulate the body at all? Well, hormonal therapy, top surgery, and bottom surgery all mold the body into something that appears and functions more congruently with their internal identity. Put simply, it's easier to perform socially as a woman when one can more easily 'pass' as being female. Also, many patients report the mental effects of hormonal therapy leading them to feel more comfortable in their own skin, for whatever reason.

If the surgery could give those who have it sexually functional alternative equipment it would be different
Click to expand...

Er, the results of 'bottom-surgery' are indeed functional, and most patients retain the ability to orgasm. If we're talking about "function" in terms of procreation, well, this is just a small part of sex for a lot of people.

the superficial changes are rarely effective enough to cause others to perceive those who undergo them as the opposite gender
Click to expand...

How have you determined that? It's the nature of passing as another gender that people will not be able to visibly identify the individual as transgendered. I actually have a couple of trans friends who rather easily pass as their chosen gender. The rate of identification as trans is roughly .3% of the population, so if trans people were widely unsuccessful in their social performances, you'd be spotting a far higher number of 'unsuccessful' transgendered performances walking down the street.

It's extremely unfortunate that so many people are so unhappy with the sexuality they're born with that they're willing to take such drastic measures to look a little different, but in my judgment "unfortunate" is all there is to it since gender reassignment technology simply hasn't advanced far enough to do anything practical about it. If I'm missing something big here I don't know what it is.
Click to expand...

It should also be noted that not all individuals who identify as trans undergo hormonal therapy, top surgery, or bottom surgery. And not all identify as the opposite gender; some reject the gender binary entirely, identifying as "both", "neither", "gender queer", etc. I think what is unfortunate is that our culture has adopted such a strict system of binary gender that it is hard to negotiate life as transgendered without firm identification as the opposite of one's biological sex. Our current system of gender is not culturally ubiquitous, so it seems that it may later evolve (or be actively transformed) to allow for a wider spectrum of gendered performances. Under such circumstances, identification as transgendered would be another animal entirely.

And this is not getting into the non-trivial incidence of intersex individuals (the rate is roughly 1/2000).

ebola
 
Changed said:
Sure, watching your own mind is a step towards mindfulness, but I know you can go beyond that. (Most people aren't even conscious that watching their own mind will result in a slowing-down of their mind--hell, most people aren't even conscious that their problems are the result of their mind going a million miles a minute).

To me, the step following 'watching the mind' is learning that life and everything in it is a game. To make this post pertain to this thread: once you forgo the ego-centric definition of "self" (and thus, everyone else's definition of you), you're able to develop any character you see fit for this game. This is convenient because you can fit into any situation at any time-- there is no need for you to feel awkward or askew in a certain situation because you previously defined yourself as this or that...

edit: (surprising succinct for being intoxicated :D )
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Except in the most simplistic sense this is just yourself inauthentically authenticating your actions. This is only useful if you're a person who has a strict code of ethics or morals (etc). Otherwise it's just a redundancy. Part of 'waking up' is realizing how much impact your actions have on the external world and how freedom is responsibility.

*Example: Like W.W.J.D. bracelets.
 
Last edited:
Enki said:
Some of our identity is the narrative we relate about ourselves, even to folks that are "ships in the night"

We are the story we have made up about ourselves, and likely a lot more. The story is important though. I don't know how many times I've heard someone say they don't care about status and then go on to establish their credentials.

Our identity is relational and narrative for the most part which equals ever changing.
Click to expand...

/this

:)
 
Transgenered people probably mkae s many conclusions of thier private poarts that dont involve who they ar5 fondamental
 
The first think that came to mind upon reading the title, is "Kak". Kack. Cack. Rhyming with back.

Apparently it is slang for shit. And also means "Sir" in other languages. In my head it was a "word" for what I am, and not something in a language I heard, but hey.
 
Last edited:
Philosophically - I've been reading Locke recently and your "personal identity" is literally identical with your consciousness or how you experience things. In other words it all comes down to how you identify your self or what you're aware of in yourself. It is a part of your experience, it is a part of your identity. If you could put your idea of experiences into words then you certainly could define yourself but I've found that labels are tedious and unnecessary. If you sort of like the same gender then you should act on that. What does it matter how you label your sexual preference?
 
I've always felt like identity is fluid and constantly in flux. It's also strongly influenced by one's environment. Adaptation is often an essential element of survival. Subconsciously, I suspect people base their identity on their surroundings, because one's actions need to change based on their external environment. For example, if you live among the Inuit tribes of Northern Canada, you'll act significantly different than someone who lives in a metropolitan city like Toronto. Perhaps I'm a bit of a behaviorist. At the same time, I wonder if everyone has a "spark" or "soul" that would produce a similar character, regardless of external environments. Would the Inuit and Metro-man still be a "good person" if their inner nature was inclined to such behavior? I've also learned, from the realm of mental health and addictions, that one's past traumas will strongly influence their likelihood of developing maladaptive coping mechanisms, which ultimately influences one's entire existence. It's amazing how a childhood experience of sexual assault can have a ripple effect, leading to an entire life damaged by trauma. The same can be said about soldiers who ended up with PTSD, or anyone with PTSD. So perhaps it's a few pivotal moments in one's life that leads to a sense of identity, and the one's that can create a large impact on behavior are unfortunately the traumatizing ones, as compared to the victories? Or maybe the amount of victories vs. traumas can influence whether or not a person's identity is resilient and perhaps more stable...? Just some random thoughts on this fascinating subject.
 
My identity builds and just gets stuff added on to it.
Preference for variety and openness to experience
 
IMHO, humans tend to label everything and if we don't have a label for something then it doesn't exist. think about it, something exists only when you can name it.
so it's kinda hard not to define yourself in a way or another, because it's how we human think.
also, trying too hard to be "original" or "alternative" is another way to define yourself.
you should just "be" as we should (IMHO) and that would mean to live as pure awareness.
hope it makes any sense.
 
I've always thought it interesting that people ask, when first getting to know you, "What do you do?" and that we answer with "I am". Instead of saying, I do engineering we say, I am an engineer (or I am an artist, I am a mom, etc.) What we do is not necessarily who we are but we treat it that way. We are the story that we tell and we are the story that others tell and we are not either of those things. To me, self-definition detracts and distracts from the experience of living, of being. Gender identification, sexual identification, role identification and image identification are all fluid if you perceive them to be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top