Dissociative identity disorder makes me wonder about the nature of our identity. Which personality is the real person? Clearly at least some of these personalities are not central to the identify of the person -- clearly not the teenage boy. It stands to reason that one or even none of the personalities truly represent the person, and that they are simply projections of the mind. Then I start thinking about the normal case of one personality. Is the normal case somehow different? Is our mind-created identity really us, any more than B.T.'s several mind-created identities are really her? Or is it just a projection of our mind?
Put another way, is our personality a part of our identity, or is it merely an extension of us, in the same way an arm or leg is a part of us? If we cut off an arm, we are no less ourselves. If B.T. lost a few personalities, we would agree that B.T. is no less herself. If we lost our own personality, our "ego", would we be no less ourselves? Eastern philosophy says yes. I see the logic, but I'm having trouble accepting it.
Well, that's easy. Your preference for the color blue is the real you. Your preference for big boobs is not you. The preference for big boobs is your gene's preference, not your personality's preference. Your short temper-ness, your aggressiveness, that's your genes, it's NOT the real you. Your liking computers, that's the real you. Your curiosity about computers and wanting-ness of the computer, that's your genes, not you. You wanting to do something great with a computer. That's your genes. The greatness that you created with a computer. That's the embodiment of you. Your preference for fighting people. That's your genes. Your niceness. That's the real you, the real personality of you, the you that is not controlled by the genes.
So you see, it's pretty easy to tell which part of you is controlled by the genes, and which part of you is the real you.
What? What do you mean it's hard to tell the difference? What do you mean you need me to explain it more? LOL.
Put another way, is our personality a part of our identity, or is it merely an extension of us, in the same way an arm or leg is a part of us? If we cut off an arm, we are no less ourselves. If B.T. lost a few personalities, we would agree that B.T. is no less herself. If we lost our own personality, our "ego", would we be no less ourselves? Eastern philosophy says yes. I see the logic, but I'm having trouble accepting it.