the hardest of all questions to aswer

[enfp can be shy]

so you believe you are nothing, or the thought of yourself as something is nothing more then a thought.

Well, the thought of anything is not more than a thought. At least that is certain. But what is anything, and what is something, and what is nothing.

But, yes.

I would go as far to say that the what and why are you can't be answered untill you answer who.

I'd say it doesn't even have to be asked at all. Your mind is interested in this question, because it was motivated by the language and the way other people use it. And even before that - the way other people treat you, like some who. They expect you to have who, so you imagine it. And you believe in it.

And those who have the strongest who were probably the most repressed when they had to answer the imaginary question about it. So I pity them.

 

[Quinlan]

I'm Quinlan, who are you?

 

[Quest]

I understand myself now a lot more than I did before, but I

 

[midnightmelody]

I know what I believe I am, but
I don't think I'll ever know what I am.

 

[Stellar Affinity]

Maybe I'll know for sure in about 10 years time. =/

 

[bamf]

I'm Bart Simpson. Who the hell are you?

 

[bs98r3kjf]

I am me.

 

[randomsomeone]

I don't think I'll ever know what I am.

Oh, I sure hope you do......boy, you will be in for a big surprise!!!!!

 

[TinyBubbles]

how can you understand life with out first understanding yourself?

yourself does not equal life, you're just a part of life, a drop in the ocean. if you can understand the whole, you will understand the one.

 

[gloomy-optimist]

I know more or less who I am at any given time, although it's not necessarily stagnant. I change, I reevaluate, I grow.

I don't know what makes me me. But I do know on an intuitive level who I am, and I'm fine with that.

 

[Grey Wolf]

[YOUTUBE]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vM39_j24YaY&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vM39_j24YaY&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

your ans here. kinda anyway

 

[Barnabas]

yourself does not equal life, you're just a part of life, a drop in the ocean. if you can understand the whole, you will understand the one.

A man paints a picture of the mountains, the sun has risen , snow has fallen and trees dot the land scape. I his glorious picture he exclaims this is life.

But in this picture there are no people, in this picture there are no birds, beasts or insects. In his grand view of the mountains he has lost sight of the things that matter upon it.

We cannot forget the importance of ourselves in life, for in view of the world only through ourselves can we change that view.

 

[TinyBubbles]

A man paints a picture of the mountains, the sun has risen , snow has fallen and trees dot the land scape. I his glorious picture he exclaims this is life.

But in this picture there are no people, in this picture there are no birds, beasts or insects. In his grand view of the mountains he has lost sight of the things that matter upon it.

We cannot forget the importance of ourselves in life, for in view of the world only through ourselves can we change that view.

Life came from the world, so by examining the world (the snowy landscape dotted with trees) we will know life too. From a chemical point of view, there is no difference. And trees are also alive
I agree though that the self is somewhat important, if only for the fact that our only lens to the rest of the universe is through ourselves.

 

[Barnabas]

I'm Bart Simpson. Who the hell are you?

.... eat my shorts

 

[Barnabas]

Well, the thought of anything is not more than a thought. At least that is certain. But what is anything, and what is something, and what is nothing.

But, yes.

I'd say it doesn't even have to be asked at all. Your mind is interested in this question, because it was motivated by the language and the way other people use it. And even before that - the way other people treat you, like some who. They expect you to have who, so you imagine it. And you believe in it.

And those who have the strongest who were probably the most repressed when they had to answer the imaginary question about it. So I pity them.

If we are nothing, have no way to understand ourselves or have no need to understand ourselves then why do we need to understand anything else.

 

[randomsomeone]

Perhaps it's something of a spiral...knowledge of the world around us leads us to deeper self awareness, which enables us to better understand the world around us...over and over and over and over, growing deeper over time. I know I have often come full circle on things...sometimes in small acrs, sometimes in HUGE arcs...seeing things I thought I knew as if for the very first time. That's kinda exciting!! It would not surprise me at all to see self knowledge and knowledge of the world existing as two mighty hinges through which our personal inner movement takes place.

 

[enfp can be shy]

If we are nothing, have no way to understand ourselves or have no need to understand ourselves then why do we need to understand anything else.

Why not? Actually the latter need is the single cause for the former. It is an illusion that those are separate needs.

If we didn't want to understand the world, we would have never learned that there is supposed "self" to understand. (which isn't more than lack of awareness of all our inputs, causing the feel of "mystery" and "unknown" within us)

 

[Barnabas]

Why not? Actually the latter need is the single cause for the former. It is an illusion that those are separate needs.

If we didn't want to understand the world, we would have never learned that there is supposed "self" to understand. (which isn't more than lack of awareness of all our inputs, causing the feel of "mystery" and "unknown" within us)

but doea this not fail to acknowledge the fact that we first acknowlege ourselves before the world and seek to sustain ourselves before acknowleging the world.

Just as the infant first relizes it's hungry only then it thinks of how to get food.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Who are you?

I am a piece of shit, a speck in the earth's beautiful eye, a turd waiting to be trodden on... and when trodden on, cursed for having existed.


I am an empty shell, a shaddow on a bright day, one who admires beauty from afar.

 

[enfp can be shy]

but doea this not fail to acknowledge the fact that we first acknowlege ourselves before the world and seek to sustain ourselves before acknowleging the world.

Just as the infant first relizes it's hungry only then it thinks of how to get food.

The infant does not tell to itself "I'm hungry", it has no language. Without language, it also has no self-awareness. If you show a feral child a mirror, it won't understand that it's him/her shown there, like it happens with the animals.

This is a very hard process to learn, doesn't come naturally, and only occurs each time, because of the already well-established methods of communication that the other humans teach you, which includes the sense of "I".

The baby doesn't think of "I" when it cries. Its nervous system sends signals for distress/hunger , so the centers of emotion in the brain are stimulated and it cries. It is designed that way, but it is not designed with the sense of "I". In the beginning, the brain only recognizes pain, and can't even recognize that it's related to some part of a body, which this brain rules. That takes years; therefore kids often have problems to explain what's wrong, what hurts. In the beginning also the brain's control over the body is still not fully functional, takes time to explore, adapt and utilize. If the brain is not stimulated to explore its own ability to control the body, it may not even be able to do it.