Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

No Self Ponderings

edited November 2010 in Buddhism Basics
I was sitting out in my phys. ed. class, as I so frequently do - and given that my mind has been totally infected by buddhist related stuff as of late, I was thinking about how our idea of 'self' is just a product of our experience etc. and wondered that if I had lived the same life exactly - as you, or any other person - but were still 'me' would I turn out exactly the same way as the other person? (Not physically obviously, and assuming that there was no physical differences that would totally hinder me in living this other person's life.)

Initially, I thought that surely I would react to things differently - but isnt the way i react to things based on my previous experience?

Another question/point - If our 'self' is just a product of our experiences...
--> People who are gay often claim that they were born this way, but surely if our identity or 'self' is made up of our life experiences and past emotions - surely this cannot be true.

Any thoughts/answers?
(Im a buddhism-newb ftr, please excuse and correct my inaccuracies and mistakes :) )

Comments

  • ShiftPlusOneShiftPlusOne Veteran
    edited November 2010
    Nature vs nurture. You wouldn't process all the input in exactly the same way. Even if it was 99% nurture, that 1% could fork your life (no pun intended) off into a completely different direction.

    For example, when I was a baby, I was fairly quiet. To this day I am the quiet, calm guy. When my brother was a kid, he'd always have to be doing something, exploring, getting up to mischief, you name it. To this day, those traits are obvious in his personality. I think no amount of change in my childhood would make my personality different and I think no amount of change in my brother's childhood would make his personality different. Some things are just with us from birth.
  • edited November 2010
    I agree with ShiftPlusOne. Also..
    meh_ wrote: »
    Another question/point - If our 'self' is just a product of our experiences...
    --> People who are gay often claim that they were born this way, but surely if our identity or 'self' is made up of our life experiences and past emotions - surely this cannot be true.

    That's one way of looking at it, sure. But then, the same could be said of peole who claim to be born heterosexual. ;)
  • edited November 2010
    "You" aren't only determined by your experiences, but also by what genes you start the game with. Part of my "self" is male...I didn't chose that and it wasn't a result of my experiences; it was a fact of nature due to the egg and sperm cells that happened to join to provide my genetic code. The same could be true for homosexuality if there is a genetic component to it.
  • edited November 2010
    Okay, thankyou.
    Well with the buddhist idea of no-self, what specifically is that refering to then?
  • edited November 2010
    We have an ever-changing "identity". Make a thorough investigation of your own mind and body and see if you can find any self there that is not merely an opinion or a mental impression. What is this, apart from different personal opinions regarding the so-called "self". Nature or nurture aside, the "self" or "identity" is an ever-changing stream of consciousness. Nothing stays the same so an "eternal self" doesn't exist.
  • ThailandTomThailandTom Veteran
    edited November 2010
    There is an example that may makes things clear here. Take for example a crime scene on a busy road. Lets say that 2 men run out of a bank, one of them punches a person to the floor, the other breaks into a car and they both flee with a hefty sack of money. There were maybe 10 people by standing who say the event. If you ask each one of those people to give a detailed account of what took place, I am sure that they will all differ slightly, but they all saw the exact same thing take place.
  • edited November 2010
    The "Rashomon Effect".

    A Rashomon Style story is where the same event is recounted by several characters. The stories differ in ways that are impossible to reconcile. It shows that two or more people can view the same event quite differently. The author invites the audience to compare and contrast these divergent points of view. Sometimes the work provides no definitive answer as to what actually happened.

    More usually, the audience will get the definitive true version of the story at the end of the episode. One or more of the points of view will be obviously false and/or a transparent attempt to make the teller of the story look good. By the time a story uses this plot, we often know which characters are less trustworthy, but in real life we never really know.

    It is inspired by the famous Akira Kurosawa film Rashomon.
  • GlowGlow Veteran
    edited November 2010
    meh_ wrote: »
    Okay, thankyou.
    Well with the buddhist idea of no-self, what specifically is that refering to then?
    It just means that there's "no self" that exists outside of causes and conditions. Some of those conditions are genetic (e.g., you are human, as opposed to any other type of creature) and others are experiential (upbringing, cultural environment, etc.). The teaching is simply meant to teach us to learn to identify less with those causes and conditions. Think of all the suffering that results from identifying strongly with your body at a young age, and then watching that body age and finally having to confront the reality that it will one day give up and die. We didn't choose to be in a body inside of time. We didn't choose to look the way we do, or to have our looks be subject to the effects of aging. Thus, the extent to which you have any right to identify with your body (and it's natural frailties or "flaws" or proclivities to age/die) is fairly limited. So we go easy on ourselves for this reason.
  • edited November 2010
    Thanks guys, thats helped to clear some stuff up^^
Sign In or Register to comment.