Is identity found through introspection or through action?

Affable

Which will help you find identity better-contemplation, and introspection, or plunging in to action and doing doing doing things?

c-note

well i'm not a philosiphizer but i'd go for action!!

how many times have i defined some aspect of my character by hypothisizing what i would do in a certain situation.

and then to be confronted by that situation and behave differently.

of course reflecting on the difference between the two impacts on the ego.

to quote the great philosiphizer, Tyler Durton:
"how well can you know yourself if you've never been in a fight"

identity established through introspection is about as usefull and accurate as the fake i.d.'s i used have printed on the back of cornflakes boxes!:p
(mind you they ocassionally got me served)

Broad

c-note wrote: »

how many times have i defined some aspect of my character by hypothisizing what i would do in a certain situation.

and then to be confronted by that situation and behave differently.

c-note is so right!

I would say introspection as teenager and early twenties, then action from then on. The instrospection thing when young is just great, gets awful timesome over forty!

nyarlothothep

Both. Action for its own sake is like wandering blind through your life. It depends on the person also. Some people find introspection more fulfilling, others don't. Imo, I would use introspective thought to plan my actions accordingly and to reflect on them afterwards. Reflection is important in order to learn from the choices one makes and what their consequences are. This way one can improves ones choices of action in the future.

Joycey

c-note wrote: »

well i'm not a philosiphizer but i'd go for action!!

how many times have i defined some aspect of my character by hypothisizing what i would do in a certain situation.

and then to be confronted by that situation and behave differently.

of course reflecting on the difference between the two impacts on the ego.

to quote the great philosiphizer, Tyler Durton:
"how well can you know yourself if you've never been in a fight"

identity established through introspection is about as usefull and accurate as the fake i.d.'s i used have printed on the back of cornflakes boxes!:p
(mind you they ocassionally got me served)

Neither, personal identity is an illusion which emerges from a sufficiently complex arangement of matter

dreamlogic

Affable wrote: »

Which will help you find identity better-contemplation, and introspection, or plunging in to action and doing doing doing things?

If by 'identity' you mean something along the lines of sense of self and reputation then I think these things are unavoidable no matter what you do. In other words a person will have an identity anyway no matter whether they themselves believe they do or not.

As for 'better' way to help you find(or shape) yours well that depends on better for whom.. 'Better' for you is not always 'better' in terms of how you are perceived by others and vice versa. But also it is possible sometimes to have both. Like many things the answer lies in having a balance.
Personally I find that if there had been a lot of 'action' I need to take time out for a while. Then when I get restless or whatever it is time to introduce action again.. So it can strongly depend on where you're at..

Joycey wrote: »

Neither, personal identity is an illusion which emerges from a sufficiently complex arangement of matter

LOL and +1

InReality

Action.
There is an topic known as the Body/Mind split ,which views peoples as "disembodied minds ".

I think was strongly encouraged in Philosophy by studying descartes in a certain way.

Its not very useful for "real life" though , or as a good way of thinking about ourselves IMHO.

Denerick

Identity is essentially artificial, hence action moulds ones artificial identity.

We all engage in introspection, but what you think and what you do are two entirely different things.

DadaKopf

Reading about ideology recently, there's an interesting synthesis of ideas between the American pragmatists, the sociology of Pierre Bordieu and figures in the new left.

It's possible to reframe this issue through the lens of 'habits'. They develop even before we're self-aware, and they emerge out of our interactions with the world and with people. We continue habits even when they are contrary to our conscious senses of ourselves (values, goals, etc.) and our understandings of the world. Habits necessarily break down the conceptual division between the self and the world (subject and object) by positing externally obserbable modes of agency.

This conceptual opposition between 'introspection' and 'action' therefore emerges as a false dichotomy or antinomy. They are part of the same process. The theory goes that performativity forms aspects of the self, but the performance of one's actions (and habits) can also elicit an introspective process, let's say in the case of a habitual action running contrary to one's closlely-held beliefs. There is a tension between habit and voluntary action, where habit mostly goes unacknowledged by the person.

It is argued that this is where ideology enters the frame. Our habits reflect the underlying rules of our social reality, and while we may oppose the prevailing order of things, we find it hard to give up our habits which form part of us.

Habits also allow us to deal with these issues in more concrete form. Identity, as the threat title suggests, is not something, it's born out of a duality of action and intropection by beings-in-the-world.

mewmoo

A tree doesn't think it's a tree, it is a tree...

why think about that kind of thing? Why waste your time, if you think it will bring you some sort of inner peace, sure go for it, but if you've never achieve it before how can you be sure there is inner peace at the end of the process...

You'll probably be like the proverbial dog chases his tail.

Denerick

mewmoo wrote: »

A tree doesn't think it's a tree, it is a tree...

why think about that kind of thing? Why waste your time, if you think it will bring you some sort of inner peace, sure go for it, but if you've never achieve it before how can you be sure there is inner peace at the end of the process...

You'll probably be like the proverbial dog chases his tail.

+1

I think the proverbial dog chasing his own tale sums up a lot of philosophy!

Joycey

mewmoo wrote: »

You'll probably be like the proverbial dog chases his tail.

Well if you take questioning and thinking about existence as one of the occupations that give meaning to your life, then it doesnt really matter if you ever actually catch the tail does it? I think its the fact that you run around aimlessly but happily preoccupied which makes me aspire to be this proverbial dog

thebouldwhacker

mewmoo wrote: »

A tree doesn't think it's a tree, it is a tree...

You'll probably be like the proverbial dog chases his tail.

The only trouble with the above is that (as far as we know) trees don't think at all and so have no choice but to be a tree. Simular with the dog, the reason the dog runs around endlessly chasing his tail is because he doesn't really have the thought processing ability of humans and so believes it is perfectly normal behaviour (which for a dog... it prob is:pac:).

We can abstractly examine ourselves and thus have to find a balance between thought and planning and action. OP if one jumps in with out proper thought we end up being the dog, huge effort for no result, however if we over think then we run the risk of becoming too stuck, unable to act, like the tree, and be of no use. (mewmoo sorry for nicking your examples)

So like everything in life you gotta find a healthy mix:cool:

DadaKopf

Fine, but the philosophical question here is about identity vis-a-vis thought and action.

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

We can abstractly examine ourselves and thus have to find a balance between thought and planning and action. OP if one jumps in with out proper thought we end up being the dog, huge effort for no result, however if we over think then we run the risk of becoming too stuck, unable to act, like the tree, and be of no use. (mewmoo sorry for nicking your examples)

So like everything in life you gotta find a healthy mix:cool:

thebouldwhacker

DadaKopf wrote: »

Fine, but the philosophical question here is about identity vis-a-vis thought and action.

Point taken but the same rings through for the formation of ones identity. If one concentrates on the 'thought' they will become inept on the 'action' side etc.

Example is the church and child abuse, all talk no action from Rome ie removed from the reality and thus from the pressue of action. When was the last time the church took serious action on something? Missions maybe, selected poverty projects... you dont see Rome acting in a powerful way, they have an old think about it and tell others what to do... that to me suggests an inability to act.
This can be matched to a persons identity, in a moment of need do you act or think. if your identity is theoretical then you will struggle in times where action is needed. However if your identy is governed by the need to act then perhaps ones actions may not always be fitting.

Thus if ones identy is formulated using a health balance one will know how best to address an issue in life.

Húrin

Joycey wrote: »

Neither, personal identity is an illusion which emerges from a sufficiently complex arangement of matter

Personal identity may emerge from a sufficiently complex arangement of matter, but I don't see how that makes it an illusion.

kiffer

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

The only trouble with the above is that (as far as we know) trees don't think at all and so have no choice but to be a tree. Simular with the dog, the reason the dog runs around endlessly chasing his tail is because he doesn't really have the thought processing ability of humans and so believes it is perfectly normal behaviour (which for a dog... it prob is:pac:).

The dog doesn't chase his tail because he's stupid... He chases his tail because it's fun to chase things, he knows it's his tail, he'll chase it for a while, then lick himself, then go eat some food.

nyarlothothep

Húrin wrote: »

Personal identity may emerge from a sufficiently complex arangement of matter, but I don't see how that makes it an illusion.

Good point, what is platonic is no less real than something tangible, the mind being a platonic end result of its parts, like windows 95 on a computer or the yellow of the handles on the seats of a train.

thebouldwhacker

kiffer wrote: »

The dog doesn't chase his tail because he's stupid... He chases his tail because it's fun to chase things, he knows it's his tail, he'll chase it for a while, then lick himself, then go eat some food.

Hey, it was a borrowed metaphor at best, not a lesson in dog psychology!!

My point stands:-)

Affable

I was reading this(my) thread again and it reminded me of a Buddhist concept I read about, the impermanence of the soul. How does that tie in?
Well I guess my concept of the soul would be linked to my concept of identity. Thus if the soul is impermenant then identity is impermenant.
To me it's going to be more impermenant through action than through introspection. Thus, introspection may lead to greater stability or greater sense of permenant self, introspection, and another buddhist concept, 'detachment' help this process in my view. However, one could argue, in my case from personal experience, that exposure to new experience, and the abandonment of morbid self attention can free one from monotony and produce one with new emotional revelations, and new enlightened mindset relative to the day before, an essential part of identity is feeeling most alive agree? Or would you say that identity is indeed found in detcehment, self-awareness, and stability of mindset over long periods?

thebouldwhacker

or.... variety is the spice of life....

Joycey

Húrin wrote: »

Personal identity may emerge from a sufficiently complex arangement of matter, but I don't see how that makes it an illusion.

Well, the only non-transient, unchanging (within someone's lifetime), thing about one "person", is the belief that they may or may not have that they have persisted over time.

There are never two instances in an individual's lifetime where their beliefs, motivations, ideals, feelings, cell arrangement, exact number of hair follicules etc etc etc, are identical. When I say that "I" persist over time, the only thing which remains constant is the belief that I have Ive persisted.

For me, this does not constitute the entirety of what is normally referred to when we say "personal identity", so I see it as an illusion.

Affable wrote: »

To me it's going to be more impermenant through action than through introspection.

Introspection is an act....

Affable

Joycey wrote: »

Introspection is an act....

Well, you know what I mean-don't be so literal minded!

Nevyn

Affable wrote: »

Which will help you find identity better-contemplation, and introspection, or plunging in to action and doing doing doing things?

Id or ego?

Offalycool

Identity is an Idea, a conceptualisation of a piece of the world we designate as individual and identifiable via properties we suppose are in common with other properties we identify in the world. I.e., the tree is a tree because it has such and such characteristics of trees, yet no tree is exactly alike.

Plato believed we remembered the perfect tree from our past existence in the world of forms, and even though every tree we experience in this world is imperfect, it shares identifiable characteristics with the perfect tree. This fundamental assumption, that trees have a fundamental tree-ness that is undisputable, has had enormous impact on our understanding of the world for thousands of years, and still does today. It would eventually mutate into Cartesian duality, our ego/spirit and the world.

More recent thinkers, particularly philosophers concerned with phenomenology, have challenged this foundational idea.

Identities or ideas are understood to be at bottom a linguistic expression. Because of the structure of our language, we understand tress to belong in the same identity: A tree is a tree because it is a linguistic expression, the characteristic of a tree are linguistic structures and the groups of ‘characteristics’ we make are classifications that are linguistic in nature. Similarly, we have ‘characteristics’ we identify with that form our own identity. Be it family, or nation, or skin colour, or work; we build our identity with our vocabulary.

Many recent philosophers, such as Heidegger have challenged the value of identity, and indeed its viability as a truth. Heidegger believed we are imprisoned by our identity, and the ideas we have of existence. We have an impossible idea about life, and we cling to it desperately using the ‘idea’ to understand and express our desire. We never really experience the anxiety of freedom and the full possibilities of our existence, because we limit possibility by imposing limitation on possibilities via the ‘idea’, the image of everything that is possible in our perception. Only when something brakes, unexpectedly, are we exposed to the reality beneath our ideas. Suddenly, we are faces with the horizon of possibility. In the moment we are awakened from our subconscious day walking slumber our plans and understandings are exposed as fantasy; we are forced to live in the anxiety of real freedom, of choice in an existence without straight forward ‘ideas’.

Many continental philosophers have built on Heidegger’s phenomenological ontology. Agambian in his work The Coming Community, outlines how our ideas about ourselves, our identity, is a futile delusion that becomes more imposable with every experience, every encounter with ‘the other’. Eventually, we brake. We can no longer identify with any particular identity, because they all collapse into imperfect generalisations that we can’t attain ourselves. In this community, you don’t have to be born, you grow. You recognise that everyone is a potential member, held back only by themselves. Not just a community of men, a community of life. The end of identity; the conceptualisation of hate, state, weapons, security, individuality. We can no longer be distinguished by mere imperfect characteristics; we become “singularities”, irreducible to any idea. To reduce the singularity (person) to an idea of the person is nihilism, the masking of what is by what we believe is.

We must always acknowledge the imperfection of identity, use it if we must, but accept it is only an idea, and always keep looking lest we will not see.

Offalycool

On the other hand Hannah Arendt, a philosopher par excellence, follows Heidegger among others. She believed the ‘who’ we are can only manifest through action with others. People can become authentic political people with others, for which the highest manifestation of sheer human togetherness can be found only in the polis. For this to happen, our approach to the world and each other must critically examine philosophy, history, politics and the role of citizenship.

Insofar as identity is concerned, to reveal ones ‘who’ is to act for the sake of others and oneself, while on the other hand to do something in order to get of something else, the end, is a basic utilitarian calculation the is to be found in most modern societies, and is a poor destructive substitute. To undertake something ‘for the sake of ‘is to make it meaningful in relation to some standard worth establishing that is independent of what is undertaken and its consequences. Disclosing ones ‘who’ can never be done intentionally, and requires others to bear witness. While the person who discloses the ‘who’ cannot own the identity, because the other must be present and share in the ‘who’; neither can the others who witness the ‘who’ possess identity. Identity must be shared through action.

scanlas

My identity is my awareness behind my thoughts. That is stable.

You are not your thoughts and stories in your head. Identifying with thoughts, labels, possessions,roles etc just places a barrier between you and the world. It causes unhappiness or a feeling of not being good enough the way you are. You are already good enough. Let go of the ideas of who you think you are and you will find yourself at peace.

thebouldwhacker

scanlas wrote: »

You are not your thoughts... Let go of the ideas of who you think you are and you will find yourself at peace.

Not sure I follow you there... What this sounds like is ignore self examination and be an empty being. To be human is to be aware of the life you and those around you have. To shut out thoughts etc is like becoming a drone. We cause or own problems in life understanding why this is so is positive....

thoughts, labels, possessions,roles etc just places a barrier between you and the world

not if you understand why and where they come from. ie the label 'mother' carries many meanings and through the shape of our society means something valuable, to ignore this label is to strip that from the person. One can be a one off special indivdual and be a mother. Make every one a blank indivdual and all you have is a collection of indivduals not society. Hens, cows, sheep are a collection of indivduals, humans are not:D

scanlas

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

Not sure I follow you there... What this sounds like is ignore self examination and be an empty being. To be human is to be aware of the life you and those around you have. To shut out thoughts etc is like becoming a drone. We cause or own problems in life understanding why this is so is positive....



not if you understand why and where they come from. ie the label 'mother' carries many meanings and through the shape of our society means something valuable, to ignore this label is to strip that from the person. One can be a one off special indivdual and be a mother. Make every one a blank indivdual and all you have is a collection of indivduals not society. Hens, cows, sheep are a collection of indivduals, humans are not:D

I never said don't think or ignore labels, I said don't identify with them, ironically it is identifying with these things that gives people a feeling of emptiness. When you meditate you are more aware than you have ever been because you are in touch with who you really are, the awareness in your body. If anyone is a drone it is the person who is strongly identified with ideas, they go through the world being in their head missing the present moment. Life is in the present moment. I highly recommend everyone reads " A New Earth" to learn more about these concepts.