who are you?

… not sure I would use the word “outsiders”.

reminds me of a comment made by a brilliant young man in Santiago Compostella many years ago … we met by chance after walking the Camino.

He said … paraphrasing … perhaps Jesus is the first human with a conscious recollection of where he came from.

How would you describe their relationship to society?

… in a word “helpers” … maybe … “facilitators”

Who says each individual human has a particular “place” in either [a, presumably human] society or the universe?
How is this “place” defined or described?

Do we know what society is? Because if we don’t know what society is then knowing who we are won’t get us any closer to finding a place in society. And if society isn’t an aggregate of all the people in it who are both products ad producers of society, then what is it? And how can you be disconnected from something of which you are an integral part?

Society isn’t disconnected. It’s intricately connected in thousands of ways through millions of relationships.
An individual may feel isolated from society when he is disenfranchised, barred from participation in, and information about, the controlling processes of that society; when he does not see the fruit of his labour nor share in the reward of his efforts.

Societies have many different reasons for failing - most frequently bad leadership.

No; it’s mostly that people are insecure in their income, health and living conditions.

You keep repeating this mantra: We don’t know who we are. Where did you get this fixed idea? What makes you think it’s true? What are the proportions of those who know all about themselves, to those who know nothing at all, to those who know 10%, 40%, 83.5% … ?

Facilitators hits the right spot in me. :smiley:

one might argue that the evolution of the human species is one long continuous journey … destination unknown.

One might also use that metaphor for life, a romantic relationship, enrollment in a college course, a regimen of treatment for chronic illness, a cooking contest or hitchhiking.

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.”