delusional self-identity

[ThatsWhatHeSaid]

I believe there can be, but as to determining it concretely? Like trying to locate the "mind" and not it's supposed organic location, the brain. The authentic self is merely a projection or a shadow. As an NF, I compulsively seek it, but if I were objective about it, where and what exactly am I seeking?

Agreed that it's not a physical thing. I see what you mean by shadow. I think of authenticity as unadulturated ME. Where is it? It's always here, just hidden. It's nothing something you have to go out and seek because you're not going to find it in a certain profession or with a certain person. Those things can help put you at ease, but they're ultimately only tools to authenticity. Authenticity is like exaggerated honesty. You find it by developing love and acceptance for others and for yourself and being patient with your quest, not by frantically searching. (Not alleging you do this, your highess, but you said "seek.")

In my opinion, you can't, except through completely personal means. Even if one could determine an "authentic" self, how can you prove it's relevance to 3 dimensional "here and now"? As an NF, I don't have to have the unseen and immaterial explained to me because I tend to accept things on "faith" (i.e. without the need for concrete data), but just for the sake of argument (and you know a good debate turns you on), what's the point of pursuit of the authentic self when it has no address or shape?

It's true that it's not something with boundaries that you can touch, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Perhaps it doesn't exist as a separate entity, but some combination of conditions, much like liberty. Is liberty worth pursuing even though you can't touch it? Sure, why not.

Fish don't need pants. Would a fish be "inauthentic" in pants?

Not enough info. I would have to see the fish's facial expression, along with the rest of his wardrobe. Perhaps he's (she's?) wearing pants because she just felt like it one day. In that case, I'd say there's a chance he's (she's??) being very authentic and honest.

All right, may I ask what tells you that an expression has become distorted? It just feels "wrong" somehow? Also, shame seems to indicate that a person is correlating their actions/attitudes with the general populace and determining the validity/acceptability of such actions/attitudes.

As far as shame goes -- I'd agree. Shame comes from judging one's self in relation to notions of what's good/successful/proper. Almost fucking worthless.

I know an expression is distorted when I question whether it's authentic. That questioning, to me, implies that I'm already judging myself and evaluating my own actions as authentic/inauthentic, which links back to self-consciousness and self-distortion. Why? Because they have the same origin: impatient progress. Meaning, my overeager desire to be authentic is the same overeager desire for change that leads me to distort. Mmmm, that's good.

How Buddhist of you, Richard Gere. *poke*

How others know Edahn is present: by the constant stream of maundering ramble-ations that proceed from the alleged mouth part of the alleged face of said alleged being.

You prefer the "trip over truth" method, do you?

You refer to flow. Letting things just happen. I like that way too, but with a little targeted searching thrown in. Idling about while the cosmos hogs the restroom isn't my idea of enlightenment.

I agree. Searching with patience is a big key, I've found. (From the album Floating Glass Key in the Sky. Just heard the song today and I'm already in .)

 

[suzyk]

what purpose, ultimately, does one's opinion of one's self serve?

How and what they see themselves as? We may look the same on the outside, but isn't everyone different inside?

are people inclined to mimic and absorb things in order to form their self-identity?

Yes. Aren't fashion trends essentially a way of portraying yourself (with clothing)? I do, at any rate.

do they do it on purpose, or do they suffer from some degree of delusion?

They do it on purpose. What delusion do you speak of?

 

[nightning]

Edahn: From what you were saying... does it imply that authenticity is merely accepting who we are... that there should be no evaluation of self? From that line of thought... where is the drive for improvement?

 

[Grayscale]

what other perceive you as (authentic or not) is irrelevant, if we're trying to define authenticity, we should look to what is central to authentic and inauthentic behavior--the reasoning behind the source of the behavior.

first off, i do not think any behavior is entirely inauthentic or authentic, there is a gradient between the two, marked by the person's "viscosity of self" in any given behavior.

inauthentic behavior, i would argue, is when people absorb and expel behavior without any thinking. the reasons for doing so are most likely along the lines of wanting to fit in or be accepted, and the assumption is made that such can only be achieved through mimicry. this is the low road--copying others (most likely those respected by the majority) without understanding the reasons behind their actions. in the most severe form of this, the only self-produced behavior is a lack of confidence and a need for acceptance, everything else is simply that behavior in action. blow this up in scale and imagine the results: everyone would be the same.

entirely authentic behavior is sourced entirely from one's self, that is to say, it is completely original. without taking anything externally, it follows that someone is required to generate their own reasoning in entirety. there is no bluffing and all that results, regardless of whether it may happen to resemble something else or not, is authentic expression of that person's thinking.

authenticity is merely another example of the root problem to what this thread was originally bringing up--the behavioral tendency to not question one's self. those who question themselves in everything will be forced to either accept that they are incapable of surviving on their own reasoning or... come up with their own.



people may lack the facility to identify the attractive behavior (real confidence) behind anything, but for the most part i have seen this approached the same way. someone who acts in such a way that resembles nothing must have authentic reasoning and the confidence that their self reasoning is tried-and-true. something that resembles something else points largely to mimicry and thus a lack of confidence in one's own reasoning. so yeah, people may not know why, but they can identify attractive and unattractive behavior, and this is the mechanics behind that, in my opinion.

with that said, most people are copy cats that go unchecked... artificial confidence builds in this until something occurs that exposes their lack of self driven reasoning and that confidence crumbles. on the flipside, those with an abundance of reason are rarely phased.

 

[Nocapszy]

Agree very much with the first line of OP.

I've heard, and believe that most people are inclined to think they're slightly above average, in any skill. Few would acclaim themselves with high level of skill as it's, unbelievable (especially to themselves, even if it's true), or in fear that they may ultimately embarrass themselves. The same lot would as infrequently admit to being anything less than the next guy on the barbecue rack, for obvious reasons.

That's not exactly the same as what you said but it works.

I've actually thought of this before and (sort of) intentionally stopped trying to figure myself out for knowledge of lack of ability. At the same rate, I don't allow anyone else to really try it much 'cause I know they're not going to be able to either.

That above doesn't count. That's just stuff I've done. Certainly I can remember that.

 

[heart]

The authentic self is merely a projection or a shadow. As an NF, I compulsively seek it, but if I were objective about it, where and what exactly am I seeking?

Part I would say is the part of us that existed before we were conditioned by life's experiences, both the good and the bad conditioning we've recieived. Another part is the part of us that can exist beyond the attempted control of our own ego and its needs to shelter us against our flaws or that which we don't like about ourselves.

The ego can in its proper place be a cheerleader to give us courage to face life's adversity, the problems come when it is treated like the captain of the team and allowed in the driver's seat.

So the ego has needs to deny our flaws, because it is the cheerleader, the yes man. If we allow it to dictate to us, it encourages us to split ourselves off.

The way to true self is to integrate the conscious and unconscious parts of ourselves, completing the circle, the process of individuation, of becoming whole once more. We do have to seek it and to accept our shadows/unconscious self. It is the purpose of our lives, to repair the cracked vessels that we all are.

 

[Domino]

Agreed that it's not a physical thing. I see what you mean by shadow. I think of authenticity as unadulturated ME. Where is it? It's always here, just hidden. It's nothing something you have to go out and seek because you're not going to find it in a certain profession or with a certain person. Those things can help put you at ease, but they're ultimately only tools to authenticity. Authenticity is like exaggerated honesty. You find it by developing love and acceptance for others and for yourself and being patient with your quest, not by frantically searching. (Not alleging you do this, your highess, but you said "seek.")

Agreed that the best "you" is inside you (and not sought elsewhere), I think the elsewhere-seeking is meant to contrast more sharply what is you by showing what is not-you, like Mr. Rogers is not-you but you may decide you like cardigan sweaters from seeking out Mr. Rogers and observing how he wears his.

Exaggerated honesty is a good way of putting it. Your Highness endorses this statement.

It's true that it's not something with boundaries that you can touch, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Perhaps it doesn't exist as a separate entity, but some combination of conditions, much like liberty. Is liberty worth pursuing even though you can't touch it? Sure, why not.

So are yetis. I like to believe in things I know DON'T exist. That rules out any pesky "reality" problems.

Not enough info. I would have to see the fish's facial expression, along with the rest of his wardrobe. Perhaps he's (she's?) wearing pants because she just felt like it one day. In that case, I'd say there's a chance he's (she's??) being very authentic and honest.

You are a ridiculous man.

I know an expression is distorted when I question whether it's authentic. That questioning, to me, implies that I'm already judging myself and evaluating my own actions as authentic/inauthentic, which links back to self-consciousness and self-distortion. Why? Because they have the same origin: impatient progress. Meaning, my overeager desire to be authentic is the same overeager desire for change that leads me to distort. Mmmm, that's good.

But by what yardstick do you compare (for judging purposes) this or that thing that seems authentic/inauthentic? How do you determine what a good litmus test is for your authenticity?

Correction: You are a nasty ridiculous man.

I agree. Searching with patience is a big key, I've found. (From the album Floating Glass Key in the Sky. Just heard the song today and I'm already in .)

I'll have to check that out when my dial-up stops messing with everything.

Edahn: From what you were saying... does it imply that authenticity is merely accepting who we are... that there should be no evaluation of self? From that line of thought... where is the drive for improvement?

An interesting thought.

inauthentic behavior, i would argue, is when people absorb and expel behavior without any thinking.

Another interesting thought.

entirely authentic behavior is sourced entirely from one's self, that is to say, it is completely original.

I simply don't think this is possible, Gray. We aren't born with the ability to speak a language, only the inherent capacity. We have to emulate. It's unavoidable. Perhaps the most authentic behavior is what we emulate that hits closest to our inner desires and reject what does not?

Part I would say is the part of us that existed before we were conditioned by life's experiences, both the good and the bad conditioning we've recieived. Another part is the part of us that can exist beyond the attempted control of our own ego and its needs to shelter us against our flaws or that which we don't like about ourselves.

The ego can in its proper place be a cheerleader to give us courage to face life's adversity, the problems come when it is treated like the captain of the team and allowed in the driver's seat. jmo.

Very well said indeed, Heart.

 

[heart]

Does modern consumerism, where to love is to "buy", interfere with personal individuation and produce a society that is predetermined to be inauthentic at its core?


Bernard Stiegler explores this idea:

The Disaffected Individual in the Process of Psychic and Collective Disindividuation

 

[ThatsWhatHeSaid]

Edahn: From what you were saying... does it imply that authenticity is merely accepting who we are... that there should be no evaluation of self? From that line of thought... where is the drive for improvement?

This is a question I struggle with constantly. I believe that the drive for self-improvement must be soft and caring. A good analogy is helping a friend get over some problem. You don't say YOU MUST CHANGE OR ELSE, and you don't just say EVERYTHING OKAY THE WAY IT IS. You say something like: well, where you are now is nothing to be be embarrassed about, but I believe in your ability to care for yourself and grow.

Agreed that the best "you" is inside you (and not sought elsewhere), I think the elsewhere-seeking is meant to contrast more sharply what is you by showing what is not-you, like Mr. Rogers is not-you but you may decide you like cardigan sweaters from seeking out Mr. Rogers and observing how he wears his.

I hear what you're saying, but I don't think of that the self is defined that way. I used to think that there was this real me, and every now and then I got hints of who that person was, and that following that trail would lead me to discover that person (and make serious homo/autosexual love to him) but now I think that the trail isn't so much about recreating an "authentic" situation (being a psychologist, being this, wearing that, doing this, etc) as it is exploring a mindset that is comfortable with error (whereas discomfort leads to self-distortion and self-doubt, the antithesis of authenticity).

So are yetis. I like to believe in things I know DON'T exist. That rules out any pesky "reality" problems.

That's why you can't join our NT club.

But by what yardstick do you compare (for judging purposes) this or that thing that seems authentic/inauthentic? How do you determine what a good litmus test is for your authenticity?

I know when my mind has finally stopped searching and is resting. I suddenly feel in touch with my environment. It happened last week and I was listening to the sounds of traffic play with my ears. It was beautiful and soothing.

 

[Grayscale]

I simply don't think this is possible, Gray. We aren't born with the ability to speak a language, only the inherent capacity. We have to emulate. It's unavoidable. Perhaps the most authentic behavior is what we emulate that hits closest to our inner desires and reject what does not?

already answered that:

first off, i do not think any behavior is entirely inauthentic or authentic, there is a gradient between the two, marked by the person's "viscosity of self" in any given behavior.

how authentic someone is isn't as important as the desire to be authentic. as you say, nobody can be entirely original, but it seems only a small few care to even try... or at the very least, represent themselves well.

 

[heart]

You don't say YOU MUST CHANGE OR ELSE, and you don't just say EVERYTHING OKAY THE WAY IT IS. You say something like: well, where you are now is nothing to be be embarrassed about, but I believe in your ability to care for yourself and grow.

I agree with this but I think there also has to be a conscious movement, an intention to seek and explore in growth and a way to evaluate self during this growth. Evaluation and judgement are neutral terms but modern people try to put an automatic negative connotation on them. I don't have to be embarassed to admit I want to grow. In fact this has been the best way for me to quiet my own negative inner critic, I say yes, you have a point there, I could develop this area more and so I will work towards it in the most positive and healthy ways I can find. At least this is the mindset I am working towards. I certainly don't favor the just let life happen and float, because I pretty much did that in the past and I did not experience the person growth that I have since I have actively sought out growth and growth experiences.

 

[matmos]

why do you think so many people get offended? because their image is merely a composite of unoriginal fragments perpetuated by the opinions of others. as soon as something disrupts this, they become vulnerable because they do not have their own, legitimate reasons for doing what they do.

Most people don't get around to the idea that it's better to be disliked for who you are than liked, even loved, for something your not.

 

[nightning]

how authentic someone is isn't as important as the desire to be authentic. as you say, nobody can be entirely original, but it seems only a small few care to even try... or at the very least, represent themselves well.

*scratches head* It's back to the idea of "it seems"... isn't the desire to be authentic like any other trait? Normally distributed across the population... You say wanting to be authentic is desirable... yet the distribution isn't skewed towards being authentic. Why is that? Does this not beg the question as to why more people don't do that?

So what are the disadvantages of being authentic? Why might copy cat beliefs be beneficial?

This is a question I struggle with constantly. I believe that the drive for self-improvement must be soft and caring. A good analogy is helping a friend get over some problem. You don't say YOU MUST CHANGE OR ELSE, and you don't just say EVERYTHING OKAY THE WAY IT IS. You say something like: well, where you are now is nothing to be be embarrassed about, but I believe in your ability to care for yourself and grow.

*nods* A strange puzzle... reconciling self-acceptance with self-improvement. I guess the key lies in seeing that "change" is a part of who we are as well. That who we are isn't static. Therefore change can be authentic so long as the drive for change is self-initiated and not due to external pressure. Thank you!

I know when my mind has finally stopped searching and is resting. I suddenly feel in touch with my environment. It happened last week and I was listening to the sounds of traffic play with my ears. It was beautiful and soothing.

Off topic on my part... but I agree with that. It's a great experience going on a random walk outside with nothing on your mind but just to observe everything that's going on around you. Very relaxing.

 

[wedekit]

In my class, Conflicting Views in Psychology, we went through a couple of studies that explores self-enhancing bias (i.e., unrealistically positive self-evaluations) . One study found that people who self-enhance tend to experience more happiness and more success. In contrast, another study found that student with a self-enhancing bias in relation to their academic performance are experiencing only short-term satisfaction:

"Both studies showed that self-enhancement bias was related to narcissism, ego involvement, self-serving attributions, and positive affect. Study 2 found that self-enhancement was associated with decreasing levels of self-esteem and well-being as well as with increasing disengagement from the academic context. Self-enhancement did not predict higher academic performance or higher graduate rates. Thus, the findings suggest that self-enhancing beliefs may be adaptive in the short term but not in the long term."
Source:
Robins, R. Positive illusions about the self: Short-term benefits and long-term costs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol 80(2). 2001. p. 340-352.

My teacher posed a good point by using her brother-in-law as an example. He is a doctor, and is actually considered a damn good one. He doesn't hesitate to brag about and promote himself and sees himself as someone everyone is dying hire. However, he can rarely hold a job for more than 3 months. My teacher argued that he is so self-absorbed in his inaccurate illusions that he fails to see "what an arrogant asshole he is".

The same situation could be be applied to someone who is an alcoholic. If they have a self-enhancing bias they would probably not believe they had a problem. That would decrease their chances of seeking some sort of treatment before they inflict harm on themselves or others.

I agree with many of the posters when I say that people with these inaccurate illusions are lacking in the self-examination department. I believe we all naturally start out with some kind of preconceived perception of ourselves, but it is important to call this into question. However, overdoing it is probably one of my greatest faults. Though I could probably confidently share with you that I am a good person, I always have this fear in the back of my mind that I am not and haven't come across the evidence to prove it yet. However, to me it is more important to call things into question than to assume anything.

 

[heart]

Though I could probably confidently share with you that I am a good person, I always have this fear in the back of my mind that I am not and haven't come across the evidence to prove it yet. However, to me it is more important to call things into question than to assume anything.

My husband (INFJ) also worries about this good or bad person thing. I tend to not think in terms of good or bad person, but I will obsess over single actions of mine and how I could done better or prevented a bad outcome. I tend to see people as chosing good or bad actions rather than good or bad as a whole.