'articulate', as a word, to me at least sounds like its about movement, precision, & the building of both structure & facade, so when you wrote "When you speak your thoughts, you’re better able to complete them" another thought jumped out to me. Along the lines of "live your life out loud". maybe from a poster with a kitten, perhaps yawning to look as if singing out some wild song. which would be nice. anyhow...to know your self, you have to articulate your life - in the sense of moving and building -> of articulating, but in actions & experience, not only in thoughts and reflection and dialogue...You have to 'live out loud'. I learn about myself by observing how I respond to a car crash, or when my child is born, or to a day of total boredom (and my self develops through these experiences). So in that sense, of being built through experience, the self is limitless, even as our ability to know ourself, and our mortality and biology trails behind that potential of infinity. anyhow, forza.
This is actually a very big idea you've touched on! The concept of "articulating your life" (which is a great phrase!) through living--actions and experience--sounds very similar to the existentialist concept of creating our life's meaning through choice and hence action. I've always gravitated to the idea of forging ourselves through action, particularly because I'm so prone to hesitation and doubt.
There's something true and powerful in the idea of discovering yourself through discovering the world--those experiences that "make us," as is often said--loss, love, fear, joy. Though if this is true, then it is also true that we are endlessly making ourselves. Which is beautiful, but simultaneously sad when you remember that death then is always the end of all potential.
Thank you for your lovely comment. It definitely brought me some emotion and thought!
My parents used to tell me not to talk to myself that only crazy people talked to themselves. I'm glad I never stopped, now I'm crazy AND highly intelligent. Hurray me!
Learning about a self that could lead to my own mental collapse in hopes that it would lead me to a more honest personal ideation is so fun and cheerful, soon all the morning breakfast show hosts will discuss this easy and palatable practice. No?
Well at least Salomé will discuss this on her Instagram live. I'm excited for that episode. Who knows what I'll find in there?
I'm also glad you never stopped! Haha, welcome to the club. And I'm glad you're enjoying the IG livestreams! Haha, the self is definitely a kind of pandora's box at times, but the one we actually should open, rather than not.
Really enjoyed this! I basically share your perspective that the self is multilayered, elusive and contradictory but there's a *something* there - never quite been able to commit to the Buddhist view of "no-self".
Have you heard of the Hindu doctrine of "atman"? I got introduced to it through Hermann Hesse's books and it fascinates me - the idea of each of us having a true Self that we have to spend our lives digging through the weeds of ego to get down to, something that partakes in the divine in some way. Reminds me of a couple of ideas in the Bible: the "image of God", 'I am the vine, you are the branches'.
I'm sorry to link to my own stuff but I've been investigating some of the same areas as you lately, so in the spirit of weird & güd people sticking together I thought I'd leave these here in case you were interested:
Thanks for sharing! Bringing the Buddhist concept of no-self alongside the Jungian self is a great comparison. I appreciate that idea and I liked the way you approach these concepts in your own writing. Personally, as with most things, I find there's a useful quality in balancing the two ideas.
The idea of no-self is a great tool for detaching ourselves enough from our personalities to avoid becoming rigid and guarded over that "self." The Jungian self, though, is a little more practical for an individualistic culture. In a way, it encompasses one of the benefits of "no-self" by giving us the space to step back and view that self as merely a part of who we are, and as such, something changeable. In this way, you can see the two approaches as almost reaching for the same goal but taking different paths.
I've found the Hindu concept of atman to be so challenging! What's stood out to me about it is the idea of searching for one's "true self." There are so many parallels to this idea in different disciplines and philosophies; Maslow's humanism spoke of the path to a true self, Jung's individuation is a process of defining the personality, and existentialism speaks of choice and action as the process by which one becomes themselves, to name a few.
So interesting to see all the iterations of what's essentially nothing more than humans trying to understand themselves!
What a pleasure to know you enjoy my work! Thank you for reading.
This is a great question. I don't often journal (writing as a job makes journaling a little less attractive haha), but when I do, I'm surprised at the restraint it places upon me. Speaking is so much faster and freer, and perhaps that's what makes it a good test of your knowledge--there's a lot of room to fill and the only constraint is your articulation, breath, and knowledge, rather than the speed of your pen.
Journaling seems to be a better way to *organize* your thoughts and explore them, while Rubber Ducking seems to offer a kind of "proofing." That might just be me, but there's an interesting distinction in there.
As for proof of a true self, that's quite a rabbit hole haha. There's something worth considering in the fact that no two people have identical personalities. Whether those personalities are "true" is debatable, as our personalities naturally shift. But there is something worth chasing in ourselves to see how truly rare each of us is.
Thanks for making me think with these great questions!
'articulate', as a word, to me at least sounds like its about movement, precision, & the building of both structure & facade, so when you wrote "When you speak your thoughts, you’re better able to complete them" another thought jumped out to me. Along the lines of "live your life out loud". maybe from a poster with a kitten, perhaps yawning to look as if singing out some wild song. which would be nice. anyhow...to know your self, you have to articulate your life - in the sense of moving and building -> of articulating, but in actions & experience, not only in thoughts and reflection and dialogue...You have to 'live out loud'. I learn about myself by observing how I respond to a car crash, or when my child is born, or to a day of total boredom (and my self develops through these experiences). So in that sense, of being built through experience, the self is limitless, even as our ability to know ourself, and our mortality and biology trails behind that potential of infinity. anyhow, forza.
This is actually a very big idea you've touched on! The concept of "articulating your life" (which is a great phrase!) through living--actions and experience--sounds very similar to the existentialist concept of creating our life's meaning through choice and hence action. I've always gravitated to the idea of forging ourselves through action, particularly because I'm so prone to hesitation and doubt.
There's something true and powerful in the idea of discovering yourself through discovering the world--those experiences that "make us," as is often said--loss, love, fear, joy. Though if this is true, then it is also true that we are endlessly making ourselves. Which is beautiful, but simultaneously sad when you remember that death then is always the end of all potential.
Thank you for your lovely comment. It definitely brought me some emotion and thought!
My parents used to tell me not to talk to myself that only crazy people talked to themselves. I'm glad I never stopped, now I'm crazy AND highly intelligent. Hurray me!
Learning about a self that could lead to my own mental collapse in hopes that it would lead me to a more honest personal ideation is so fun and cheerful, soon all the morning breakfast show hosts will discuss this easy and palatable practice. No?
Well at least Salomé will discuss this on her Instagram live. I'm excited for that episode. Who knows what I'll find in there?
I'm also glad you never stopped! Haha, welcome to the club. And I'm glad you're enjoying the IG livestreams! Haha, the self is definitely a kind of pandora's box at times, but the one we actually should open, rather than not.
Really enjoyed this! I basically share your perspective that the self is multilayered, elusive and contradictory but there's a *something* there - never quite been able to commit to the Buddhist view of "no-self".
Have you heard of the Hindu doctrine of "atman"? I got introduced to it through Hermann Hesse's books and it fascinates me - the idea of each of us having a true Self that we have to spend our lives digging through the weeds of ego to get down to, something that partakes in the divine in some way. Reminds me of a couple of ideas in the Bible: the "image of God", 'I am the vine, you are the branches'.
I'm sorry to link to my own stuff but I've been investigating some of the same areas as you lately, so in the spirit of weird & güd people sticking together I thought I'd leave these here in case you were interested:
https://smalldarklight.substack.com/p/steppenwolf-you-are-what-you-do
https://medium.com/the-small-dark-light/dont-reach-higher-dig-deeper-6f749796cbed
Thanks for sharing! Bringing the Buddhist concept of no-self alongside the Jungian self is a great comparison. I appreciate that idea and I liked the way you approach these concepts in your own writing. Personally, as with most things, I find there's a useful quality in balancing the two ideas.
The idea of no-self is a great tool for detaching ourselves enough from our personalities to avoid becoming rigid and guarded over that "self." The Jungian self, though, is a little more practical for an individualistic culture. In a way, it encompasses one of the benefits of "no-self" by giving us the space to step back and view that self as merely a part of who we are, and as such, something changeable. In this way, you can see the two approaches as almost reaching for the same goal but taking different paths.
I've found the Hindu concept of atman to be so challenging! What's stood out to me about it is the idea of searching for one's "true self." There are so many parallels to this idea in different disciplines and philosophies; Maslow's humanism spoke of the path to a true self, Jung's individuation is a process of defining the personality, and existentialism speaks of choice and action as the process by which one becomes themselves, to name a few.
So interesting to see all the iterations of what's essentially nothing more than humans trying to understand themselves!
thanks for shedding some Positive light and wisdom on self talk. learned a couple of things and my self feels less insane today 😊🙏🏽
Hahaha a slightly less insane self is always a good feeling. So glad you enjoyed the newsletter!
What a pleasure to know you enjoy my work! Thank you for reading.
This is a great question. I don't often journal (writing as a job makes journaling a little less attractive haha), but when I do, I'm surprised at the restraint it places upon me. Speaking is so much faster and freer, and perhaps that's what makes it a good test of your knowledge--there's a lot of room to fill and the only constraint is your articulation, breath, and knowledge, rather than the speed of your pen.
Journaling seems to be a better way to *organize* your thoughts and explore them, while Rubber Ducking seems to offer a kind of "proofing." That might just be me, but there's an interesting distinction in there.
As for proof of a true self, that's quite a rabbit hole haha. There's something worth considering in the fact that no two people have identical personalities. Whether those personalities are "true" is debatable, as our personalities naturally shift. But there is something worth chasing in ourselves to see how truly rare each of us is.
Thanks for making me think with these great questions!