Origins of 'Self'
For me, being human-centric is to acknowledge and serve the whole human.
But given how complex and multi-faceted we are, it feels like a big ask. We'd essentially be taking into account our physical, psychological, emotional and spiritual state at any given time.
And to make things more complicated, are we talking about serving:
the human someone else perceives?
the human we perceive ourselves to be?
the human we would ideally like to be?
the human we intrinsically are ‘underneath’ all of the above?
If so, that could be at least 4 different versions of the same person!
Or perhaps in line with non-duality theories, all of these perceptions are illusions and the human we're serving is something else entirely.
It's a dilemma that has inspired me to go on a historical learning journey to better understand various thoughts about what our human 'self' is and see if it leads to any useful, definitive conclusion.
As I navigate this venture, I’m cataloguing key findings which will eventually become a book. What I’ve already found though is others have written incredibly insightful things, to the point where I’d end up regurgitating their words verbatim rather than adding value.
So the book will be more of a summary of what great thinkers have said, with references to allow curious readers to explore more deeply the theories that are of most interest to them.
I’ll also be adding a twist - each theory on ‘self’ will have its own poem, inspired by and interwoven with the elements of that theory, containing hidden meanings and multiple possible interpretations.
The reasoning is partly because I enjoy writing poetry, as my wife would attest to from the many romantic cards over the years, but I also hope they spark additional perspectives amongst readers on what it means for us to have a self.
This month, I wanted to share with you a couple of work in progress excerpts from Chapter 1: Origins of ‘Self’ (references not yet added) and see what you think.
In particular, I’m curious to know if you’d prefer reading the poems first or after the summaries…
Fragments From The Ancients
A man once known
No longer himself
A river in situ
Flowing without time
Paths intertwined
May never cross twice
An evolving existence
A universe in flux
Our journey of self discovery begins in ancient Greece around 500BC - just over 2,500 years ago - during a time where there lived some of the most historically renowned thinkers you have probably heard of: Plato, Aristotle, Socrates.
And before them, was Heraclitus.
Unfortunately not a great deal is known about Heraclitus and what we do know is mainly a result of interpretations by those who came after him, including some of the aforementioned thinkers, through various fragments of Heraclitius’ writing.
So the story goes, those fragments were likely to have been part of a single book that Heraclitus wrote, which was left in the temple of Artemis at Ephesus - the city now being Selçuk in Turkey.
Heraclitus’ perception of the world was seemingly that everything is in flux. That is to say, “everything is always flowing in some respects”. A much later interpretation of one of the fragments by another philosopher, Plutarch, that is often quoted (albeit in an altered form) states "It is not possible to step twice into the same river according to Heraclitus, or to come into contact twice with a mortal being in the same state."
You may be thinking ‘of course someone could step into the same river twice!’ and on the face of it, that is true. But the meaning I read goes a little deeper. Although the river may still exist, because the water is continually flowing, the very essence of the river will be different the second time around. It may be deeper or shallower. The water molecules present will not be the same set that were there during the first step in. The contents of the river are likely to have changed, as will the earth it flows through.
Whether or not Plutarch’s interpretation was correct about the ‘mortal being’ element, we can see how Heraclitus’ thinking could apply to our self as well. A person we twice come into contact with clearly still exists as they did before, but they will have aged to a certain degree and may have changed in physical appearance. Their mindset may have changed, such as from being happy during first contact to sad during the second. Their fundamental values and beliefs might also have altered.
For me, this is the beginning of understanding what we might mean by self - an ever evolving existence within a universe in flux.
Self as a Soul
Gazing into reality, I see my self
And all who came before me
An invisible glow, no mirror can hold
And no mortal eyes may perceive
Yet knowledge within, of the ages past
And an entity ripe for remembrance
When quiet triumphs, a dulling of senses
And the illusion is stripped away
I hear my self, the voice of reason
And behold! Transcendence…
Around 425BC, 50 years after Heraclitus passed away, Plato was born.
Plato is described as “one of the most dazzling writers in the Western literary tradition and one of the most penetrating, wide-ranging, and influential authors in the history of philosophy”.
He also had an interesting perspective about our self - that we are essentially a combination of a soul and body. Curiously, not a mind and body, as he considers the soul to give life to human aspects such as intelligence, reason and control of the body. Whenever Plato talked about the soul, he referred to it as “a different sort of object from the body—so much so that it does not depend on the existence of the body for its functioning”.
He also believed that the soul is essentially immortal and at a fundamental level is a sort of repository of knowledge which could be considered to reincarnate, “and suggests that learning is therefore possible by remembering what has been known but forgotten”.
There is a likely influence here from his teacher, Socrates, who after being sentenced to death for ‘corrupting the youth’, stated that “death is the separation of the soul from the body”.
Based on the Menos dialogue, Socrates also talked about how “the soul reasons best when none of the senses troubles it. Neither hearing nor sight nor pain nor pleasure, but when it is most by itself, taking leave of the body, and as far as possible having no contact or association with it”.
The Student
I know not what form I take, or matter I consist of
For I lack the wisdom to see;
O teach me what it meaneth, to reveal my self
In the image he made me;
Trust that my appetites are pure, my spirits are just
And my mind is wide open;
So I beg you teach me, sophist, please teach me,
The true value of my soul
By roughly 387 BC, Plato had founded ‘The Academy’ in Athens, Greece, which was thought to have been similar in its function to our modern day universities and drawing students in from far-off places, including someone who may have been deemed Plato’s most gifted student - Aristotle.
Given the nature of their relationship, it may be unsurprising that Aristotle continued with the belief that there is such a thing as a soul. Both Plato and Aristotle felt there were multiple layers or functions to a soul:
The appetites - our desires for pleasure, comfort, nutrition and so on
The spirited - not spiritual, but rather the emotions (particularly ‘stronger’ ones) we feel and express such as anger and love
The mind - our conscious awareness; ability to think, perceive and reason.
However, Aristotle’s overall view of our self was somewhat different to Plato’s, despite it incorporating a soul. I’ve broken his perception into 3 parts:
Firstly, “For Aristotle, in fact, all living things, and not only human beings, have souls”.
Secondly, “Aristotle, for his part, insisted that the human being is a composite of body and soul and that the soul cannot be separated from the body”.
Thirdly, “Aristotle’s philosophy of self was constructed in terms of hylomorphism in which the soul of a human being is the form or the structure of the human body”.
To understand that last part on hylomorphism, here’s a handy picture:
So Aristotle believed our self is a combination of our organic body, and the human form we take based on our soul, which is represented through our desires, emotions and thoughts.
Fin
That was a small sample from a long list of diverse, interesting characters throughout history who have pondered over what it means to have a self and ultimately what it means to be human. As always, please feel free to hit reply and let me know what you think!
Equally if you’ve come across any theories about self from anywhere in the world (not just ancient Greece!), I’d love to hear them and include it in the book.