who are you?

H. … for me … your comment suggests we are on the same page. :slight_smile:

the kicker is … life is simply too short to connect the dots in one lifetime.

I am love itself.

The second I tell you who I think I am I will be something other than that.

Such wisdom Ierrellus!

Are you suggesting K. add one word to his question … “Who are you becoming?”

7 billion+ people in constant flux … hmmm!

Let’s look at a simple example in our physical world. Gestation In our species … from a single cell to birth … generally takes about 9 months … from birth to death 75-80 years.

Seems to me the scope of the constant state of flux you imply in your comment stretches beyond our physical reality … ???

The gestation period for non-physical “being” may be much longer … perhaps supporting the notion of reincarnation.

I’m a gestalt entity created by my relationships reaching back before I was born and reaching to infinity.

I’m also awesome.

Awesome comment!

Reminds me of a comment a middle aged Chinese woman made during a discussion on the topic of … “when does life start?”

She said … “my life started when my mom met my dad.”

OTH … the same topic being discussed with a different group of Chinese people … a young woman replied … my life started two weeks ago when I defied my parents and married my husband.

???

There is no contradiction. The creation and sundering of relationships are what define us. Individuating (especially from parents) is an important psychological milestone. However, radical individualism is an empty promise. Life is a radical process of becoming. Becoming is violent, so it’d be naive to think that the interplay between ontological being and existential becoming would be easily understood or even non-contradictory.

Eloquently stated … maybe I even understand it :slight_smile:

true for the individual and his/her growing/shrinking community … true for the species with it’s growing/shrinking communities?

I know nothing of species. That’s broader than my philosophy.

But if you view the individual as a rubber band. you’ll agree there are stretched and relaxed states that exist.

If one considers the human species simply as an aggregate of individuals … surely some of your philosophy concerning individuals would have relevance to the species as a whole.

absolutely agree … might even add one more ‘state’ … snapped as in stretched too much. :slight_smile:

a creature always going in search of the many (herself).

I think we’re all capable of having that conscious recollection of where we come from. We just need to reflect on it, ask questions, observe the world, read…

Jesus actually had to grow into his own CR of where he came from, if I am not mistaken, just like the rest of us do. After all, he was part human. I doubt if he was born knowing just who he was. It might have taken most of the 30 years before his mission/his journey began.
Putting a label on someone doesn’t actually define the 'reality" of that person and his/her essence…or mission.

Christ was very often an outsider except for those who loved and embraced him. He was also a radical.

Both Christ and Buddha might be defined as pathways or beacons or (insert here).

AD … for me … such inspirational thoughts that seem to synthesize so much of what has been posted on this OP and elsewhere.

Let me add Confucius to your short list … apparently he understood his personal “Mandate from Heaven” … 天命 … Tiānmìng … at age 50.

The title of this OP points to this phenomenon … as I mentioned in a previous post …

This notion of ‘becoming’ … perhaps is what Socrates meant when he said … “the (un)examined life is not worth living

The question arises … how do we “see” who we are becoming?

Read this paragraph this morning … seems relevant …

“Sometimes you can see a whole lot of things just by looking. That’s one of Yogi Berra’s infamous aphorisms. It’s a clever expression of course, but, sadly, perhaps mostly, the opposite is truer. Mostly we do a whole lot of looking without really seeing much. Seeing implies more than having good eyesight. Our eyes can be wide open and we can be seeing very little.”

There are three stages of becoming: individuation, metamorphosis (change) and synthesis (of old and new changes). The stages suggest the was, are and will be of biological entities.

Ierrellus … while your posts recently are few in number … for me … they have been real “gems”

Let me share my gut reaction to your above post.

Individuation … the Geula labels this the “exile” … the expulsion from the Garden of Eden.

Metamorphosis … the million … billion … pick a number … years of human history all for the one purpose … metamorphosis.

Synthesis … the Geula labels this “redemption” … spirit and flesh unite in harmony … the return to the Garden of Eden … may take another million … billion … pick a number … of years. Than again … may happen next week. :slight_smile:

Thanks Tom. Most of my philosophy is based on three human trinities:
Body, Mind, Soul
Being, Becoming, Belonging
Individuation, metamorphosis, synthesis
Within these parameters of experience one can describe where one is by what one is doing.

For me … yet another “gem” Ierrellus … keep them coming!

Let me try to illustrate my ‘gut reaction’ …

With keen observation and intuition perhaps one can also describe where “others” are … vis a vis the three stages you mentioned.

Individuation … by far the most populous category … especially among adults. How many adults continue to “lean” on others … be it political leaders … religious leaders … philosophers … heroes … family. How many adults remain incapable of standing on their own and taking responsibility for their personal/individual thoughts, decisions, actions, feelings and so on.

Metamorphosis … empirical evidence consistently confirms the existence of incredible levels of metamorphosis within one lifetime. Though for most adults the changes are subtle and often go (un)noticed … like the chick developing inside the egg … we can’t see the changes taking place. Using the egg and chick metaphor again … at the end of the chick’s metamorphosis … the becoming of a living chick … the chick must personally/individually contribute to the process … the chick must break through the egg shell.

Synthesis … a level of maturity that defies description … something the very few that reach this level tell us themselves.

Yes, but can you understand how all three categories can describe one event. For instance DNA creates the physical conditions for an egg to become a baby. There is already on this physical level of existence a this which must interact with a that–the egg and its environment; and there is a synthesis of food and body.
The three categories are a trinity. On the primary level of operations, we can describe the growth and development of organisms. On another level we can describe the growth and development of organizations, countries, cultures, religions --all memetic conditions. That is to say activities of both gene and meme can be described using these categories.

Ierrellus … for me … and perhaps only me … you describe the dialectic “Unity of Opposites” … ergo … ONENESS

Who Am I?

Maybe the answer to that question is as complex as the answer is to Who is God.

At first glance, what comes to me is I am an observer.

After that, I see things as I go along in life…ebbing and flowing.

Doesn’t answer your question though, does it?