Who has a "Self?"

Post Reply New Topic

yes. i am aware of Hume. However i am most interested in the "intensity" in this respect - hence the relationship between the fragments or parts and the special interests.

I am an introspect, and I am always looking over my life. unfortunatly, the more I look over it, the more I hate it, my past that is.

Yes I am very introspective. I have always been a thinker. I get lost in my own head and don't know how to get out.

You just put pretty much what I tried to say in a few paragraphs into a few sentances.

Obviously, I totally agree.

That is an exceptionally good way of putting it.

Maybe I define myself based on what I have experienced and seen in the physical environment: physical experiences.

Other people might define themselves in terms of the people they've known: their social experiences.

I define myself quite a bit by my special interests: what it is I love.

Same here. I don't know how to describe my "self", it's just that I feel comfortable being who I am and doing what I do.

The initial post describes me exactly. I have a very fragile sense of self, and one that changes depending on what my intense interest happens to be at the time.

Self has many meanings, to most it is the relationship with others. Most see themselves in context only, their roles are them.

Hence the total focus on fitting in to a social world. This is the common meaning.

This self does not do well in a world without people and relationships.

There is a self of perception of things, which most see as wholes, and almost ignore, a few see the parts that it is made of, the patterns formed, which is useful to find an understanding of how it was made, how it came into being, our famous, focus on the parts of objects.

Reality is not the relationships of people, nor is it objects, it is greater than both.

The concept of, I think, or, I am the sum of my perceptions, is also flawed, limited to a moment and a partial view of reality.

Those are but traits of self, a few things it does.

That is the Buddhist world of illusion, Maya.

The path to the true self is by stopping the world, stopping perception, things with names and relationships that cloud the view, and understanding that thought and perception keep us from seeing the true reality.

Reality does exist, we are part of it, and seeing our oneness opens the Third Eye.

Then there is no I, for self is Reality, a point of observation in the Universe.

Then there is not a meaning, but a greater pattern unfolding. Awareness.

Then all is explained as part of the pattern, and all makes sense. Clarity.

I, cannot think the whole Universe, perception cannot capture it's wholeness, but stopping thought and perception, it is still there, and self is but a part of it, which can then know the whole as self.

O' Benevolent gift waves of reality,
grant me the ability to know all things,
by seeing, hearing, and reflecting."

Tibetian Book of the Dead.

It teachs the path of unlearning the world to see what is behind it all.

The true self is the one great self.

In the Buddhist view Autists are on the path to becoming Boddisatvas, canidates for Buddhahood.

Reaching for enlightenment.

There are Wrathful spirits who will try to drag you down into the trap of Maya, they are called Psycologists, they have no power over you if you ignor them and non focus on Reality.

Behold! The jewel is in the lotus!

Buddhism and Physics agree that all energy is moving to a higher or lower state, and it cannot be destroyed. Death is an illusion.

This life is but a step, to stay on, step up, or down, from.

Awareness of being of the One True Reality, gives everything.

"Om," shuts out all distractions.

I, was just passing through.

David Hume argued that the "self" is a series of impressions and snatches, not a unified stable thing.

ruveyn

Maybe an intense visual focus leads to these "so called" special interests?

People have commented on my intense "staring" at objects, especially foods and snack items!

I look at details of architecture intensely too, almost as though I had magnifying glass permanently in front of my eyes.

By viewing an item intensely, one could develop an intense interest to do with that object. This object could be a musical instrument, a book, piece of equipment etc.

If someone is focussed on observing the surrounding physical environment instead of the social environment, that person could focus intensely on an object and not become socially distracted.

The person may begin to define themselves on the basis of their affinity for that object rather than their connections with other people.

As I see it, it's a very small step from being interested in details in the surrounding environment to developing an appreciation, fascination and understanding of those details.

Someone who's interested in looking at moth eggs on a tree trunk, for example, with a little bit of hard work could eventually become an entomologist.

Perhaps scanning and taking an focussing on the surrounding physical environment could also foster interests in Environmental Science or Geography. Perhaps scanning the surrounding environment is what draws some ADHD people towards outdoor interests?