Theory of Self
I Am Not Myself
Authors Note
This paper was prepared for Human Sciences 481, Section A, taught by Maria Brignola
“The Caterpillar and Alice looked at each other for some time in silence: at last the Caterpillar took the hookah out of its mouth, and addressed her in a languid, sleepy voice.
'Who are you?' said the Caterpillar.
This was not an encouraging opening for a conversation. Alice replied, rather shyly, 'I — I hardly know, sir, just at present — at least I know who I WAS when I got up this morning, but I think I must have been changed several times since then.'
'What do you mean by that?' said the Caterpillar sternly. 'Explain yourself!'
'I can't explain myself, I'm afraid, sir' said Alice, 'because I'm not myself, you see.'
'I don't see,' said the Caterpillar.
'I'm afraid I can't put it more clearly,' Alice replied very politely, 'for I can't understand it myself to begin with; and being so many different sizes in a day is very confusing.'
'It isn't,' said the Caterpillar.
'Well, perhaps you haven't found it so yet,' said Alice; 'but when you have to turn into a chrysalis — you will someday, you know — and then after that into a butterfly, I should think you'll feel it a little queer, won't you?'
'Not a bit,' said the Caterpillar.
'Well, perhaps your feelings may be different,' said Alice; 'all I know is, it would feel very queer to me.'
'You!' said the Caterpillar contemptuously. 'Who are you?'
Which brought them back again to the beginning of the conversation. Alice felt a little irritated at the Caterpillar's making such very short remarks, and she drew herself up and said, very gravely, 'I think, you out to tell me who you are, first.'
'Why?' said the Caterpillar.
Here was another puzzling question; and as Alice could not think of any good reason, and as the Caterpillar seemed to be in a very unpleasant state of mind, she turned away.” (Carroll, 1916)
When my environment changes, when I learn new things, change my mood - who I am, my sense of self changes. My theory of self is that we are not separate individuals, we are part of a collective, a cog in a machine. Based on our environment, on the roll we need to play, who we are changes to fit. We adapt to fill our place. Using my own life as an example, I hope to express just how this works.
Many years ago I was a wife to an ill man and had 2 small girls. I was the authority, with minimal consultation. I made and enforced all rules. That was my role, my responsibility. My cog in the machine. Then I was a widow and a single mother working 2 jobs, very broken, depending on hired help, friends, and family to raise my children.
Now I am a mother and a wife in a large family. My husband and I have made sure one of us is home with children over the years. He is a veteran and runs the household with military order. My role as a wife, step-parent, and mother changed. The shape of my cog in my “parent” role has changed.
I am a witch. I am Goddess Eliada Bloodmoon, I celebrate the seasons changing, and I dance, drink ale, and howl at the full moon. I am my sisters.
I am an Ordained Minister and a certified Death Midwife. I am a guiding hand as lives start together and as lives end. I am just a piece of the sacred times. This is a different role than my role as a parent. And who I am, my sense of self, the shape of my cog in this environment is different.
There is a story going around the internet. It is about an anthropologist who proposed a game to the kids in an African tribe. He put a basket full of fruit near a tree and told the kids that whoever got there first won the sweet fruits. When he told them to run they all took each other’s hands and ran together, then sat together enjoying their treats. When he asked them why they had run like that - as one could have had all the fruits for himself - they said: Ubuntu, how can one of us be happy if all the other ones are sad?" Supposedly Ubuntu in the Xhosa culture means "I am because we are". (Khalsa, n.d.) So how does this African tribal concept work in the modern United States? This can be seen very concretely in sports teams. For example in roller derby, I am the Minister of Mischief. I am one with the track, I am calm and cool and gracefully slip by.
I am a Misfit of Mutiny, I am a Storm City Roller Girl. When I jam, I count on my teammates to help me by, and I count on my coaches to help me know when to call the jam off. When I block, I am not a lone wolf, I stick to my wall.
We are a team, a collective conscious. We work together and know how each other moves. I am because we are.
There is no better example I can think of, of the collective consciousness of teamwork, than paddling. On a dragon boat, I am not an individual. I am a boat. The beat of the drum is the beat of my heart, is the beat of my paddle, moving as one with my boat. We are referred to as a boat. All of us, the paddlers, the drummer, the coxswain (steersperson), the vessel that carries us. We are one unit.
It is the same when we are a part of a family, in a group of friends, at work, even when we are alone. We have a role. We have a job that must be done for the world to run smoothly and the happiness of all. When we are not performing our role, or when our “cog” does not fit into a group of cogs – that is when there is discord. We detach from jobs, relationships, families when we feel our role is unnecessary, or when someone else is not fulfilling our idea of their role.
Perhaps separateness, our sense of individuality, has been the downfall of our society. My theory of “God” as a teenager was that God is like the Borg from Star Trek. The Borg is individual bodies, connected to a hive mind, going around the universe collecting information (Bowman, 1989). In our human collective, I would be 1 of 6.5 billion people. We could include in that collective the animals, the insects, the trees and rocks and earth. We could include every star and atom in the universe. Then I am one of infinite.
Is our sense of separateness, individuality - something that is societally learned? Is the concept of self in its natural state inclusive of the family, the team, the village?
Descartes's claim “I think therefore I am” that the presence of thoughts leads to the conviction of existence. Perhaps better phrased in modern times as I think I am, therefore I am.” Is it really necessary to acknowledge your individuality in order to exist?
Thomas Metzinger, proposed that there are actually no autonomous selves in the material world. The belief that we as individuals are the source of thoughts and actions is an illusion, emerging from physical processes in the neuronal networks of our brains where no self can be identified. In other words – “there are experiences, but no one who experiences; there are thoughts, but no thinker; actions, but no actor.” He looks at individuals with Cotard's syndrome, in which patients experience themselves as being nonexistent. The Cotard patients do not recognize any feelings, and as a result, they do not construct an emotional self-model. They still have a cognitive self-model that enables them to grasp thoughts about themselves. However, they experience themselves only as an object, not as a subject; a "conscious self-model is in place, but it is not a subject-model anymore, only an object-model." (Metzinger, 2003)
Borrowing from Lewis Carol’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, Star Trek: The Next Generation, and Thomas Metzinger’s theory of Subjectivity I have found my Theory of Self:
I am not myself.
Who the self is, is transparent, fluid, ever-changing and growing. The self is not a thing that one could put their hands on, the self is a process, a tool, a lens, which both reflects and sees the world. We are a part of a collective. We have individual roles in our collectives, we thrive when we have a unique role in our collective, but we cannot truly thrive without the whole. When we connect to who we are (individual), we can connect to who we are (collective).
References
Bowman, R. (Director). (1989). Star Trek: The Next Generation, Season 2, Episode 16, Q Who? [Television Series].
Carroll, L. (1916). Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. Chicago: Rand McNally & Company.
Khalsa, H. S. (n.d.). This is the age of Ubuntu. Retrieved from HariSingh: http://www.harisingh.com/UbuntuAge.htm
Metzinger, T. (2003). Being No One: The Self-model Theory of Subjectivity. Cambridge: A bradford Book.
