[Akzis]

Who is 'you'? specifically? Beyond all implications of human, what makes 'you' so distinct from everything else?

[Kmal]

The ego. The part of you that wants things.

[Amphorian]

I'd say the self defines the self actually.

[Kmal]

	Originally Posted by Amphorian To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I'd say the self defines the self actually.

Elaborate please.

[Amphorian]

	Originally Posted by Kmal To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Elaborate please.

Well like you said people are defined by the ego right? I'd say no, not everyone. Many people do things that they don't want to do. Not just for an end result that they want either. They may be doing what someone else/thing wants because they believe the other to be right or of a higher authority despite themselves not wanting such. There is more then just the ego per se. I believe the self, what you're individually composed of percentage wise of the Id, ego, and super ego, is what defines the self.

[Kmal]

I see what you're saying. I agree with adding the ID, ego, and super ego to the definition of self. Though, I was more talking about the true self. The one that is you at the core, which certainly includes the ID, ego, and super ego.

When I think of the self, I think of the conscious individuality that is unique for everyone. We all want certain things; some may want the same thing, but it is still unique for everyone in the sense of how and why they want it. I believe that the want, the drive for these things is the self. The conscious moment that you are in, is yourself.

	Many people do things that they don't want to do. Not just for an end result that they want either. They may be doing what someone else/thing wants because they believe the other to be right or of a higher authority despite themselves not wanting such.

Certainly. When people are doing things not conducive to themselves in some way, I don't believe they are being themselves. They are doing the bidding of someone else. Even when a submissive wife doing everything for her husband, she is still doing it for herself, because she wants to make him happy and she is happy in doing so. If the person is doing something because the higher authority or the other person is right, they are doing it because they think it is right, regardless of the reason.

[Amphorian]

Originally Posted by Kmal To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I see what you're saying. I agree with adding the ID, ego, and super ego to the definition of self. Though, I was more talking about the true self. The one that is you at the core, which certainly includes the ID, ego, and super ego. When I think of the self, I think of the conscious individuality that is unique for everyone. We all want certain things; some may want the same thing, but it is still unique for everyone in the sense of how and why they want it. I believe that the want, the drive for these things is the self. The conscious moment that you are in, is yourself.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by Kmal

Certainly. When people are doing things not conducive to themselves in some way, I don't believe they are being themselves. They are doing the bidding of someone else. Even when a submissive wife doing everything for her husband, she is still doing it for herself, because she wants to make him happy and she is happy in doing so. If the person is doing something because the higher authority or the other person is right, they are doing it because they think it is right, regardless of the reason.

I find this to be the troubling part. There are many instances where the spouse does do it for their SO to be happy, but isn't happy themselves. Instead they become resentful not happy at all. Nor do all under the commanded authority believe the authority is right in their actions. What they do believe to be right though, is that they should follow authority regardless of the consequences of the higher up's actions.

Ironically many of our beliefs, needs, desires and behaviors are paradoxal. They like producing conflict.

[Kmal]

Ahh, I see where the line of communication is blurred now.

	There are many instances where the spouse does do it for their SO to be happy, but isn't happy themselves. Instead they become resentful not happy at all. Nor do all under the commanded authority believe the authority is right in their actions.

I don't believe these people are being their true selves, or acting on it at least. Their themselves, sure, but not their true selves. I guess as an NF, MBTI speaking, I strive to be my true self, but I suppose many don't.

	Ironically many of our beliefs, needs, desires and behaviors are paradoxal. They like producing conflict.

Would you give an example of what you mean?

[Amphorian]

	Originally Posted by Kmal To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Would you give an example of what you mean?

A simple one would be needs verse wants. Many things that we need, like fresh fruit and veggies, is what we don't want. Or at least on a conscious level. We want the taste of the bad foods, despite our bodies needing and wanting the good foods.

On a more less tangible level we can hate a person but want to love them at the same time, even to the point of obsession. An obsession that we should love this individual (like our parents) despite not loving them (perhaps say because they are abusive). Or! We can actually love and hate them at the same time. Conflicting our interests and responses in regards to the situation.

[Akzis]

As a little kid, I often wondered why I was in THIS consciousness, why I was ME and why I could think and be in MY body as opposed to others?

The logical next step here, of course, is to assume that there are no other mes or consciousnesses. In fact, everyone else here is a robot, mimicking the reactions of a human. How do you prove otherwise?

This has bugged me forever, and it seems to be nothing new. And I still don't know whether or not my dreams are real while I'm the real dream.

I'm beginning to shoot off in a thousand directions, apologies.

[RBM]

	Originally Posted by Amorphian
	They like producing conflict.

I think this is an excellent litmus test for what the EGO self is. The 'other self' exists in harmony, so is not the EGO self.

[summersday]

	Originally Posted by Kmal To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I don't believe these people are being their true selves, or acting on it at least. [They're] themselves, sure, but not their true selves.

Actually, I don't see this as people not being their true selves so much as it is them perhaps abiding by a value they subjectively consider to be higher in their own personal set of values than what the current choice of action requires. By doing the bidding of someone else, it could still be possible for a person to be true to him/herself; to continue the example, one can choose to honor the personally-cherished value of making a husband happy, which a wife may place above the need to do something for herself. In this sense, she can still be her true self, even though her set of current choices may contradict with her more general set of choices. Likewise, a husband can choose to do something for his wife that he might not ordinarily do, but in doing it he knows it would make her happy, and this makes him happy.

[stasis]

	Originally Posted by Akzis To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Who is 'you'? specifically? Beyond all implications of human, what makes 'you' so distinct from everything else?

The (or, a) self seems to be defined by the memory-record of a locality of information and influence in space. "My" thoughts, actions, and sensations are persistently immediate while "everything else" is not only intermittently immediate but also sometimes beyond influence. The dislocation of not only objects but also spaces is something that seems evident in memory over time.

[Kisai]

	Originally Posted by Akzis To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Who is 'you'? specifically? Beyond all implications of human, what makes 'you' so distinct from everything else?

An envelope of perception that extends to a finite limit. Past that limit, one is not. The distinction between self and another, even if that one was identical physically and mentally to the self, is that one is not privy to the inner thoughts and sensations of the other. There is you, and there is not-you. You pinch my arm and "I' feel it. You pinch my identical twin's arm and I do not.