Personalities

Is it possible that we have multiple personalities or are we just one?
Does anyone else here feel that gradually the various personalities within each of us are becoming lost, or burried because of societies expectations? Ive been feeling and wondering that for some time now, that because of the need to ‘fit in’ with society and work with it, the extremes of our various selves and our expresionism is becoming lost.
I feel we all have various ‘personalities’ within us that its natural to express, but because of the fear of critisism or being seen as ‘not fitting in’ people are moulding themselves into one that will be accepted. Has anyone else noticed this or does anyone have any thoughts on it? I’d also be interested to hear what others feel personality is as i feel my thoughts on it are affecting my application of it to other issues.
Also it is generally considered to be an ‘illness’ to have multiple personalities… do you agree with this or is it a natural part of us to have several?

I think that, as with all things (rightly or wrongly), society expects moderation. Someone who acts in the same way with close friends as they do with their family is unusual to say the least, while someone who slips into the role demanded of them by certain situations too well has MPD.
I do often feel that the roles I play in everyday life have submerged what I really am; I find it so easy to lie or twist the truth, or to feign emotions and fool someone else, that I find myself doing these even when I don’t mean to.
So I think it is normal, though not natural or healthy, to have several different facets (if not entirely separate personalities). Current society is at odds with human nature and we must take up lies and believe them ourselves to get through.

I would go as far as to say that we almost completely deny almost all of our primary instincts as animals to fit society’s rules.

Rules are only made if they are relevant. There are no rules against walking on the ceiling because people simply don’t do that. We have rules against killing and stealing and the like, because if we didn’t have those rules, we would do those things. We are still animals much the same as rabbits or tigers, but due to our intelligence we’ve realised we survive better in numbers - working as a team. And this realisation has evolved into an all encompassing team known as a society.

Whereas previously we had to survive against each other, we now have to survive with each other. Its much more safe, but we have to repress our most basic competative survival instincts as a result. They still come out in competition and in traits like greed and intolerance and anger, but nothing compared to what they would be - had we not been a society.

Society’s rules change what we’re allowed to be and how we’re supposed to be/act. When the ability to control how u act is insufficient, you are deemed insane and your multiple personalities show through. Its normal to just show an accepted personality - usually determined by who you want to be.

Its not wrong to kill or steal, its just not accepted by society because it isn’t beneficial to team work and so its deemed wrong and there are consequences holding us back from doing it. Its not wrong to be insane for the same reason.

Society is not an all-encompassing team… not between countries and not within them. It is a morass of competing elements struggling for dominance and the government merely reflects the interests of those who are currently dominant.
Your assertion that society’s rules and demands are reasonable is also flawed. Five hundred years ago an atheist would be burnt at the stake. Fifty years ago a known homosexual would be committed to an asylum. What reasons can you give for this? History has no logical progression beyond that present in a nightmare or trip. As for killing and stealing… well, they are so vital to society that the government monopolised them. The same could be said for insanity. If a cold-blooded killer stabs a man for his wallet, he goes to jail. If he invades a country and kills thousands, he gets a medal. Humanity is changing, perhaps, but far too slow.

However, that was all a bit off topic… I would say that the only thing that you should be is yourself; those who won’t deal with you because of who you are aren’t worth dealing with. A “sane” person is only one who has all the socially encouraged disorders.

…and the “perfect” system will never be there. system is by definition created and can never acheieve complete adaption to what it means being human, whatever that means. so there’s no need to take it seriously. most people, if not all, have an understanding that we all behave a little at odds with ourselves in the system-life. That doesn’t mean we change ourselves though, we are as we always have been and will be, as is the case with all animals, plants and other living creatures, I believe.

I don’t buy that, people change all the time and without the belief in a soul or that DNA determines every aspect of an individual’s existence it is difficult to see what ties them together from one given moment to the next. You can’t step into the same river twice.

Ok, I shouldn’t say society is all encompassing at the moment, but its trying to be. Its trying to do away with what makes us individual and human to eliminate all sources of conflict and make us one big majority - difference is always feared and discouraged shown by everything from bullying in schools to world wars.

The struggle for dominance is still very much there, but its trying to be suppressed in favour of society as shown most successfully by america where there is no overall religion and everything is federal.

This problem of human nature vs working as a team and to not strive at all for a little bit more of individual power is still there - and so although the amount of divisions of people is decreasing because of what society is trying to be, each division is trying to get the others to join their team rather than wanting to join other teams.

Its a battle between doing what is natural and innate, and working as a team where it is safer and more secure - two totally incompatible ideals that are both being striven for, so only a compensation is possible - meaning that a perfect solution can never be reached…

I’m sure I never implied society’s rules and demands were reasonable. They are just posed to make conditions most favourable for the reason that society was implicated.

I like that last sentence

But when you say you should be yourself, what exactly does that mean? Even being who you are most naturally is still profoundly influenced and limited by who you are allowed to be. You should read the diceman. Find out who you really are and who you really can be.

The Diceman is one of the most pathetic books I have ever read. It was a torture finishing it and I would only wish it on my worst enemies.

haha, you not a fan then? If you had the courage to actually live by the dice in the same way, then you’d realise your true identity and self much better. Its all very well just reading it and saying its pathetic, but its totally different to put urself in his position - experience what he did. I think then u’d find it much more informative about urself than you seem to be able to imagine.

Silhouette, I know that who you are is often determined by your social environment, and it is my personal belief that human nature is more to do with upbringing than genetics, but when I said that people should be themselves I meant they should not attach such importance to appearances, social coventions and public opinion. Does a tie improve your ability to perform an office job? No, but you have to wear one anyway because it’s one of those little pointless rules of life that grinds away at people’s desire for self-determination and encourages them to allow themselves to be distorted by society into something more ‘acceptable’. This distortion is the cause of most psychological problems IMO.
BTW… no overall religion in America? Western laws are still largely based on Christian ‘morals’ and your President is a born-again fundamentalist whacko who won’t promote anyone who doesn’t turn up to his prayer services.

i belive that our personalities are modified by the society we live in and that different events in our live shape the person you are .we are all born with a certain mode of thinking or pattern we use .i know that if you belive a ego you have created in your mind that fits another personality within your self you can become that person.well for me it can.we all have different goals and expetations to other people thats a little what makes personality and yes there are different personalities within each other.

What I meant to say is that people apparently have loads of personalities. Its not so obvious from most ‘normal’ people, but some people switch between these personalities randomly and its like your talking at the same body, but its like your talking to a completely different person. The only difference is that they lack the control that we have to appear as the same person.

I agree that human nature is more to do with upbringing than genetics, and upbringing has everything to do with social environment. The ability to control our personality from not flitting around all the time must be genetic however. But even so, everyone moulds their personality that they want to ‘be’, (regardless of whether they have the control to maintain it) by trying to copy your friends, family, and anyone that you see really - all of whom are equally effected by societies requirements. This being essentially what upbringing is all about. Of course it can be influenced by restricting what you see until you have a proper idea of what, socially speaking, ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are by other people - usually parents. But really upbringing is something that the self does, not what the parents do and since you’re copying everyone else who is being affected by society’s ‘way to be’, you are likewise affected in the same way.

You are brought up to follow societies rules and you make your personality around what you want to be and what you are able to be. Not by becoming what you really are. I know what you meant when you said that you should be yourself. I was just pointing out that there is essentially no such thing as ‘yourself’.

I’m not American btw, I’m english. It does seem that all western laws are based around christian religion, but that is the reason why the chosen president is religious - so that he promotes an example to everyone that being christian is ‘good’, coz it persuades everyone to be a way that automatically makes you more socially acceptable. This is to make most people the same religion, eliminating internal conflicts about religion, but at the same time it doesn’t force anyone to be a certain religion like other countries, and thats what I meant by an overall religion.

But my point was that america is a good example of what society is trying to be: all encompassing - trying to show everyone that the american way of life is the best, in an attempt to minimise other social divisions that are different on an international level, and by standardising everything from making office workers wear tie’s to encouraging an ‘american dream’ on a national level.

Following the philospohy that identities/personalities are constructions (how you move or how your voice sounds can be treated as personality/identity, but it’s based on false premises), I would say you can have several “identities/personalities”. Internet proves that. It’s only about playing identity/personality game with others, something of a cornerstone in society one would think.

I don’t thnk that personality and identty are interchangeable, identities can be assumed and put down at will but by most definitions, for most people, personalities can’t…
Silhouette, did you mean that society attempts to imprint its ideals on a person’s identity with the eventual end of making everyone the same? You won’t find any disagreement from me there.

In short, yes.

I have heard that personalty is part of identity, but it’s definately not the other way around… Still, one’s personality is as mch created as one’s identity, as 1) being part of identity and 2) only a case of subjective judgements with no proof.

Identity is just how other people see you as an individual, usually based on your personality and appearance and actions. So yes personality is part of identity.

And yes, since personality is created - a product of how the person wants to appear, how they are physically able to appear, and how society inhibits them to be able to appear - and personality is part of identity, that automatically implies that identity is created. Not at birth though, it is assumed over time because it is taught as being necessary for life, when really it is only necessary for our way of life, which is trivial in the long run.

There is still no identity physically which is what I think is the important part. I don’t see humans or any life as spiritual in any way, and anything mental or emotional is just a state of mind which changes constantly too as u learn more according to your residual personality that dictates your identity and so identity changes constantly, and in most ppl has the controlled ability to be changed at any time whatever, and is therefore completely trivial in everyway.