Who I Am In Reality?

[Kuldeep]

Looks a simple question but true reply science is not having. science has gone upto DNA, RNA, Genes and beyond. Still, what I call as I is well within the cotour of my body. Can any body guide me to locate it at pin pointed place in side my body??? :unsure:

[CSwriter1]

Hum, I am aware of this question. I have interesting conversations with myself and am not even sure if I am any part of my body, or even I determine my personality.

Some forms of brain damage can change a person's personality. Our bodies change, yet we continue to think of ourselves as around 30 years old when our personalities are fully developed. It is strange too to be in an aging body that doesn't fit our internal self image.

Thomas speaks of consciousness too. The concept is still new to me. Still beyond my comprehension.

[sonrisa]

inside every old person is a young person wondering what the hell happened! :)

Ernest Borgenine once said, you wanna know how it feels to be 72? The same as it feels to be 52. Or 42, or 22. (& now I'm paraphrasing) Just becuz your body can no longer do the things it could do when you were younger, that doesn't mean you no longer want to do them. Or words to that effect.

[TruthSeeker]

How long does it take for all the cells of your body to be replaced?

How about the electrons in your brain? ;)

[buzzlightyear1982]

Old is nothing but a state of mind...like so many other things in life it is all mental. I believe it is possible to feel like your twenty-two when you seventy-eight B)
As far as personality goes, I firmly believe that a persons personality is genetic...at first. Then ones enviroment affects ones personality, but still leaving bits and pieces of th personality that genetics gave them. But for now consider these...

"Erikson believed that personality develops in a series of stages. Erikson’s theory describes the impact of social experience across the whole lifespan. One of the main elements of Erikson’s intricate theory is the develoment of ego identity. Ego identity is the conscious sense of self that we develop through social interaction. According to Erikson, our ego identity is constantly changing due to new experience and information we acquire in our daily interactions with others. In addition to ego identity, Erikson also believed that a sense of competence also motivates behaviors and actions.Each stage in Erikson’s theory is concerned with becoming competent in an area of life. If the stage is handled well, the person will feel a sense of mastery. If the stage is managed poorly, the person will emerge with a sense of inadequacy. In each stage, Erikson believed people experience a conflict that serves as a turning point in development. In Erikson’s view, these conflicts are centered on either developing a psychological quality or failing to develop that quality. During these times, the potential for personal growth is high, but so is the potential for failure B) "

But now for another question, am I right? Is a persons personality genetic from one or both of his/her parents? Or is personality an direct affect of our enviroment?

[TruthSeeker]

Hello Freud :D

I love Erickson. He presents a very nice organized blend of Jung's and Adler's theories... :)

But now for another question, am I right? Is a persons personality genetic from one or both of his/her parents?
I have observed that my child did come with a distinct personality of its own. And he does seem to be a blend of my personality and my wife's. So... yes, it could very weel be true... :)

Or is personality an direct affect of our enviroment?
The environment definetely has an effect on our personalities.

[scameter]

Well, I personally have come to a conclusion that who we are is our brain; the whole brain collectively, of all it's singular working parts and aspects, combines into our self/mind. The body is then the tool and house of the brain; the brain uses the body to perform it's bidding, unlike most animals where the brain is there for the body. I believe that this is why we are so much more prone to mental illness, because of the collective might and complexity of our brain beyond that of other animals. Whereas to them getting an ear cut off could be the end of their existence unless their body adapted, to us a mental illness could entirely interrupt and even destroy our lives as we know them. I also think, as did/does Carl Sagan, that we are much moreso based on knowledge than other animals; to us, knowledge is everything, but to other animals, they may be curious, but that is as deep as it goes. They have no morality, no prediction abilities, only knowledge of particulars, live entirely in the moment, and kill only when it's necessary, if at all (in the case of things such as fungi). But, do not take this to mean that I do not believe in a soul or something spiritual; I have simply essentially come to the realization that the skeptical approach is essentially futile, being that it is common sense that nothing we know is certain and that because of that we can know some things certainly but with the wisdom to know objectively that it isn't truly absolute, and that science is the best means, so far, of attaining knowledge of truth/fact. Evidence, the scientific method, reason, logic, corroborated thought: I believe that these aspects that form the infrastructure of science are the best means of truth acquiring. But, I think a soul could very well exist, and could even be something physical; it simply isn't as practical or as certain as scientific facts.

[CSwriter1]

I personally have come to a conclusion that who we are is our brain; the whole brain collectively, of all it's singular working parts and aspects, combines into our self/mind. The body is then the tool and house of the brain; the brain uses the body to perform it's bidding, unlike most animals where the brain is there for the body.

Scameter, I really like the way you worded this. It is that part of our brains performing our bidding that makes us as the gods, or gets us into stupid wars over abstract concepts of right and wrong. But from this point can we jump into "who am I" as spirit?

A popular speaker from India, Charpa (sp?) ask us, when I ask " who am I" who is asking, and who is listening to the answer? For me this question gets complicated with impressions of past lives. I have a sense of having lived other lives, so I can not be only as I appear today.

And this quality about us that makes our brains do our bidding. As Scameter said, this is beyond a brain that simply serves the body. We can serve God. How does Cicero word this? Something about our connection with God. Our consciousness of this varies, but we do have this conscousness.

[scameter]

Scameter, I really like the way you worded this. It is that part of our brains performing our bidding that makes us as the gods, or gets us into stupid wars over abstract concepts of right and wrong. But from this point can we jump into "who am I" as spirit?

Thank you, but please do not misread what I said; I do not think we are as the gods, as I've said before elsewhere. I think we are definitely capable of atrocities, but not of being like the gods. We can only be how we can be, and that does not include being like a god.

A popular speaker from India, Charpa (sp?) ask us, when I ask " who am I" who is asking, and who is listening to the answer? For me this question gets complicated with impressions of past lives. I have a sense of having lived other lives, so I can not be only as I appear today.

Hmm... reincarnation is quite complicated. I personally think it is a matter of belief, not logic or evidence. I do not believe in it myself, partially because I do not wish to think nature would be so cruel as to make us reincarnate, but also because I do not really see the reason behind it. But, I think that when we ask who am I, we are asking ourselves this; sort of like an echo into consciousness. We speak to ourselves conceptually, and the thought echoes through our brain and back to our conscious focus/selves. But, I also think when we ask this question, we are thinking in third-person with ourselves.

As Scameter said, this is beyond a brain that simply serves the body. We can serve God. How does Cicero word this? Something about our connection with God. Our consciousness of this varies, but we do have this conscousness.

Well, an interesting addition to this I think would be what Colin Wilson called Faculty X; which is essentially an inherent extra-sensory ability to intuit the meaning of life naturally. He says that we already have this partially, but it is almost entirely unconscious. He says, though, that this faculty has been manifest in what he calls the occult- spirituality, odd occurances, intuition, etc. I think he has a good point; I'm about to start reading the main body of the books containing that which I just said above soon. :)

[buzzlightyear1982]

As an answer to your questions B) I was told as a child I displayed many traits of both my mother and my father. However, as I became older I found myself displayin more of my mothers traits than my fathers. My curse, I look like my father but act and think like my mother B)
I firmly believe the adult parent that the child spends more time with is the he/her is more likely to show traits of. Just like I show more traits of mu mother because my father was always somewhere else. Doing something else...with someone else...spending time with his kids wasn't high on his list. So that is why I believe I display more of my mother than my father B)
I also believe that personality can be a direct affect of one's enviroment, some what. For example, I don't believe in love. As a child I witnessed fight after fight held by my parents and so there for came to the conclusion that love isn't real, it's just another name for putting up with each other. So in short personality from my point of view is ninety percent genetic and ten percent enviroment B)