Are you really who you think you are?

by Mindchild 22 Replies latest jw friends

  • Mindchild
    Mindchild

    I recently enjoyed reading another post on an ex-JW board about how our past experiences as Witnesses have shaped our lives and made us who we are. There is obvious truth to the effect that our past experiences do effect how we see our selves now, but I think many people who leave the Borg are still enslaved to the idea that they are the same person they were then. I disagree and think things are a little more complex than that.

    For example, what we think of as "who we are" is really nothing more than a illusion or myth. In simple terms, we have a "story teller" function in our brains that assimilate our collected experiences in different circumstances to create a temporary homogenous conceptualization which we describe as “self.” Depending upon our state of awareness, altered or otherwise, this memetic and psychological weltanschauung can vary remarkably.

    Besides the dynamics of various mental states to contend with, who we are also varies with nonzero competition between memeplexes. For example, when I was a Witness, my beliefs shaped not only my view of the world but of my very way of interacting with perceptual data. Consider how a male would look at a pornographic picture as a Witness and a picture of a horrible accident scene, compared to someone who later left the Witnesses. I contend there is a big difference both by reason of scientific experiments and my own personal experiences.

    In college, I remember reading about an interesting psychology experiment in which an electrode was attached to a single muscle neuron on a person’s finger. The output of the electrode went to a computer, which altered the flicker rate of a television monitor in front of the subject. When the finger neuron fired, it would cause the flicker rate to slow down, and make the television image stable and visible. When neutral images were shown on the monitor, the neuronal firing was sufficient enough to stabilize images for a few seconds before habituation set in. Interestingly, when pornographic pictures were shown to male subjects, the rate of neuronal firing was very high, allowing for detailed and prolonged viewing of the images. When the images were of horrible accident sequences, the neuron rate practically fell to nothing. Which brings up several questions…how could part of the brain monitor what information it wanted to receive? If the flicker rate was so fast on the monitors to make the images unintelligible, how did the finger neuron know not to fire? I came to the conclusion that our conscious experience of reality is exceedingly small, that indeed the information we actually process and allow ourselves to see is related to our beliefs and interests, our memeplex or comprehensive view of reality.

    Using the same materials, I know when I was a Witness that images of naked women had both a powerful emotional appeal (as I was single with no sexual opportunities being available) but also one of great guilt (for displeasing the JW God). When I did get to occasionally see those images, I saw them not only in richer detail then but the experience of who I was doing that event was much different than 20 some years later being outside the JW mental trip. Now, pornography, at least the type I saw back then, not only has very limited emotional activation but the physical way I see it is much like reading a sentence. Good speed-readers don’t see every word in a sentence; they skim, scan, and select topic words that combine to form meaning. In short, the picture gets a second or two of my attention as it has little value.

    As our current beliefs (memeplexes) change they also tend to force fit old memories to bend into compliance with the current reigning memeplexes. If we now love spiders for instance, our old childhood negative experiences will be modified and minimized.

    All this says we are who we are for the moment. The smaller the details of our past memories, the easier they fade away to be replaced by new ways of looking at the world and being new people. We pretend we are the same people, but we are not. Half our behavior comes from our genes, and while different genes express themselves at different times in your life, your behavioral influences are rather stable. This only adds to the illusion of you being you through time.

    You are not the You of yesteryear…got that? Lol

    Skipper

  • Undecided
    Undecided

    You got too intellectual for most of us. The telephone just rang and woke me, I had fallen asleep while reading the post.(Just kidding about your post, but I had fallen asleep reading someone's post. Must have been really tired.)

    Ken P.

  • Flowerpetal
    Flowerpetal

    Is that like getting to be a new physical person every 7 years, when our cells renew themselves?

  • JamesThomas
    JamesThomas

    Nice post Skipper. Perhaps we can question deeper still. If one stops and looks silently and closely upon what is believed to be oneself, it may be seen that all there is, is neural firings: memories. A story. A long chain of mental interpretation of sensual data highly tainted and colored by past experiences, beliefs, prejudgments and programmed ideas. Is this who I am? Am I this ever-changing mental movement? Who sees all this? Who looks upon the thoughts and sensations, even now? What is this silent and unmoving conscious-awareness? What is It -- that has never changed? Who am I, really? JamesT

  • Mindchild
    Mindchild

    Flowerpetal we are changing who we are every day. When you get exposed to new ideas, have new experiences, remember (and in the process of doing so) transform those old memories, you are no longer the same.

    James, it can even get pretty unerving to look closely at these subjects to realize how fragile our identities are. We can lose our self completely by means of an accident (losing our memory) or the psychological phenomena of "snapping" can literally create a new person. Horrific experiences for children and adults have made multiple personalities in some victims. Chemical imbalances, drugs, trauma, and much more can accelerate or transform the self.

    I always thought this was a good arguement against the idea of God "reading our hearts." Who we are changes from day to day. What day would he judge me on? When I was 14 or 44? If I died from some disease that caused deleterious mental deterioration and he supposedly ressurected me, would I be brought back a raving idiot, or when I was 21? Too many difficult questions for outdated memes to deal with.

    Skipper

  • Vitameatavegamin
    Vitameatavegamin

    I think I'm tired.

  • Flowerpetal
    Flowerpetal

    OK, now I see where you're coming from. One of the things that made me start thinking differently about how God views us, was when I read articles about people who had been in comas for many years due to an injury or illness and woke up completely different, with different personalities. Some who believed in God before and woke up not believing in God, or some who didn't want to be married anymore because their spouse was a stranger to them and they didn't like them, etc. All kinds of reasons.

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    I used to go with the guiding principle "know thyself", but this year came to realise that I don't.
    I'm subsequently left trying to find myself again, and it's proving difficult.

  • Lady Lee
    Lady Lee

    I am constantly changing. To do otherwise is to stagnate, become tired and bored. I love to learn new things and new ideas.

    I will stop learning, growing and changing when I die. After that - well I have no idea.

    But each new experience, each new person we meet, or idea we consider, even the things we reject become a part of who we are.

    Ever since I left the Borg I have believed this. I had a living death once. I will not go back

    and people who knew me then hardly recognize the person I have become

  • SadElder
    SadElder

    I think so therefor I am.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit