What am I?

Remove all ads!

Spurred on by a couple conversations I had with friends yesterday, my thoughts turned philosophical, and I asked a question which I have since had great difficulty answering: What am I?

The obvious answer is my name, David. So I imagined myself, and thought, "There, that is me." But then I realized that I was in fact the observer of my imaginary self, and not the conjured object, so that answer seemed unsatisfactory. So then I thought, "I am a physical process; I am a wonder of chemistry and electricity." But this just seemed a more fancy and complicated version of the first answer; again the observer being me, and not the nuanced device which I imagined. So I then thought, "I am the observer." But in this case, to explain the problem illustratively, I imagined an eye viewing an eye, which to be to viewed had to require an eye viewing the eye viewing the eye; and so an endless loop results with an infinitely increasing number of eyes, and no viewpoint upon the actual observer.

It turns out, if I am not mistaken, it is impossible to define or observe "I".

So now, my next question is, "If I can not define myself as an object, can I define you as an object?"

 

I think you could, given the case. In this case, it would be an eye viewing another eye.

 

There is no I. Only seeing.
There is no you. Only being.

 

Yes, following your logic you should be able to. The original problem was that you were attempting to observe yourself; as you should be able to observe me (were we to meet), then you should be able to define me as an object.

The problem isn't really with being unable to define yourself- the difficulty is that you then attempt to observe it, which is unecessary when attempting a definition.

 

I am what all I can see isn't.

I am what is left after all I can define has been removed.

 

No, the problem is that you attempt to observe yourself directly. Observation is neccessary for true understanding, but it need not be direct. You are the eye viewing an eye, yes, but that eye is you, viewed through the mirror of the real world. You observe yourself through what you do, how you act and react, both physically and psychologically, what you cause, what you prevent, when you succeed, when you fail, etc.

In this method, you can define yourself as 'I', 'I' being the collected processes, experiences, and motives you have observed in yourself. This definition becomes more exact and accurate as you observe more of yourself, it is also updated, as you undoubtably change with time. The same process can be used to define others, only the 'mirror' of the real world is not neccessary. It is, however, still useful to see these people 'from a different angle', i.e. through the mirror. As with the definition of yourself, your definition of others will become more exact and accurate as more observations are made, and it will also be updated as others will change with time just as you do.

 

Ah, I don't know how I missed this before! I just had to write an essay on something very similar to this. Presents on point of view on this topic (sort of), more or less saying you can't be defined as an object, but it's the memories that make you who you are.

 

Blarrgh! Rotku thank's for wasting 10 minutes of my life!

I am Simon James Croft. Human, male of various mixed ethnicities (a right bastard some of you would call me... knowing my ethnic origins or not). I am me and me is I.

I look down and see my hand and that is a part of me. I needn't imagine myself since I know I am here by observing the rest of my body. Indeed I can not see my own face without assistance of a mirror but I know it's there even though I have never viewed it directly.

Since I deem anything I see in this world as real then I also have to be real since I can see myself. I interact and things react to my own actions, therefore according to the world I am real.

What am I? I am the being that is communicating to you now.

 

Well, I think the conundrum has been settled adequately already, so I'll just inject a little funny a la George Carlin:

 

*laughs*
I thought me saying it was an essay I wrote was a big enough warning.

 

A bored man in the middle of the night?

Wb, btw.

As one of my friends defined it with me in mind:

Dum bibo spiro.