Pitfalls of Identity - James Rolph

Identity is an interesting and powerful concept in the context of personal change and development. Indeed it is so powerful that it can be used to effect deep and lasting change in relatively short time frames - or it can be just as powerful in limiting us and paralysing our development when badly understood.

The philosophical and spiritual traditions of our species have had much to say about identity, and indeed the 'Problem of Identity' is an enduring conundrum within western philosophical traditions. The problem is simply this: people talk about 'I', but what constitutes 'I'? Is it my body? Is it my mind? The problem here is that the body and mind change through time , so are you a different you? And if you are, what is it about you that makes you still you, even though you are different? (Note: For some, the answer is 'soul' is the answer - but then what is 'soul'? how does it interact with mind and matter?)

I once restored an old Austin mini - I replaced the engine, gearbox and exhaust system, many of the bodywork panels, the sills, floor pans and sub-frames, the seats and interior, the fuel tank and I re-spayed it a different colour. The car retained the same license number, and there was a continuity in the documentation - but was it really the same car? If it was, how much of the car would I need to replace before it became a different car? And Is there a difference between replacing all the components of a car slowly over a 20 year period and just scrapping it and building a new one over a 20 day period?

When people change, they often say things like, "I am not the same person!" They may even take the metaphor to the limit and say "that person is dead now!" But they nonetheless have some sense of continuity between the old 'I' and the new 'I' - they will still use the first person in talking about their past.

There has as yet been no definitive answer to the problem of identity, and this might be because there isn't actually a real problem there at all - only a 'pseudo-problem' arising through a confusion of logical levels. A problem of trying to objectively define an entirely subjective 'sense'. Because ultimately people just have a sense of themselves, an experience of reflective consciousness.

This leads us onto another problem of a different type altogether - the problem with identity. While people seem to have a sense of self that defies definition, they will tend to define (mostly unconsciously) the properties of that self. A property of self might be, for example, an ability to effectively forget names, or creativity, or nervousness in context x.

Now, what happens next is (maybe because that which constitutes 'self' is so resistant to definition) people tend to confuse the definition of properties with the definition of self. For example:

"I am an excellent timekeeper."

While 'excellence in timekeeping' is merely a property of the self that generated that statement, a direct identity statement has been made - "I am..." So how can this be a problem.

The first problem arises from how people identify the properties that they use to define themselves - they look back into their past to find 'defining experiences', and then generalise. For example, someone might tell me:

"I am no good with meeting new people",

So I ask them:

"how do you know that?"

And they reply:

"Because whenever I meet someone new I just feel awkward and clam up" they reply.

What their reply reveals is that this person has made a generalisation form past instances of feeling awkward when meeting new people - and this has become a basis for personal definition. So 'some things that have happened' become 'I am'.

Worse than this are the definitions that we have had put upon us by others during our formative years - once we took them on board we then found the evidence in our experience to support them.

It is worth noting here that in the English language, there is no differentiation in using the verb 'to be' between things that 'are' temporarily and things that 'are' permanently (this is not so in some other languages). So whilst 'I am chilly' has the same form as 'I am human', I may only be chilly until I put on a jumper, whereas I will (probably) be human for the rest of my life. So effectively 'I am...' statements are operating outside of time, and this gives them the power to 'freeze' us in time. This helps us to forget that we are, as living things, dynamic processes of matter and mind - fluid and ever changing rather than stuck and static entities.

Think about it like this: as a human being (a living process) I have a past, a future and between the two an ever changing 'right now'. From this perspective I never really 'am' anything, just have been some things and becoming something else. As soon as I state "I am..." I am taking a snapshot of that process and freezing it in time - like taking a still shot from a movie and trying to claim it is the whole film.

This becomes a problem when people freeze and take snapshots of their limitations, then mistake them for the ongoing movie of their lives.

"I am not confident"
"I am stupid"
"I am ugly"
"I am a failure"

These are perceptions of transient properties mistaken for permanent identities. These are still frames mistaken for movies. These are not useful because they deny what you can become. And here is the flip side:

"I am creative"
"I am capable"
"I am successful"
"I am in control"

Now these things might be useful to keep as snapshots. And you might just get to be your own director of photography and editor.

With this information in mind you can start to become aware of any limiting identity statements you may make, or limiting definitions you may place upon yourself. If you catch yourself the trick is to stop and reconnect to time and process in a way that acknowledges possibility change and your as yet unknown future potential. So instead of saying something like "I am no good at remembering names" you can say "in the past I have had trouble remembering names". Or "I wonder what I could do to get better at remembering names?" This opens up a new and useful possibility for defining yourself in terms of where you are going instead of where you are coming from. Otherwise you will find yourself driving into the future using only your rear view mirrors to guide you. And this is not good.