Identification, Part 2

Today we continue to look into the theme of "Identification"

without using that word too much
or mainly philosophical ideas and abstractions
if possible let's let the idea fade away
and return to it through the back door

and talk more about experiences
that actually happen,
of Me and Not Me,
It and "this",
and maybe some strange in-between mixtures.

Sometimes I feel different,
have an attitude, a tendency to feel
and to act in a certain way;
or a quality comes in
and gets more materialized or embodied;
and other times it is "less there"
maybe hidden altogether, out of awareness
but it's familiar when it comes
and I call it a "part" of me.

Sometimes I'm fast and flowing in the kitchen
like an octopus employed as a short-order cook
and other times
so much NOT that way.

If it weren't familiar
if or if I seriously didn't like it
I would find it very confusing
I might even feel "possessed"
and say "that's NOT me".

There's a voice talking "in my head"
and that's familiar
so I call it "thinking"
and say it comes from "inside".

But if it said really unfamilar things
or was loud, or seemed to come from outside
I'd say "that's NOT me!"

Excuse some bits of philosophy.
I want to put this idea in a frame
mainly so we then can look OUTSIDE the frame.

Why do we give things names?
Is it to remember what to do when we see them again?
Are they objects to be controlled?
This only tells part of the story.

Forgetting are they Others,
other beings, other entities like "me"
and I use their names
to talk to them, to greet them,
to honor them with my recognition.

Or perhaps I can see the I in them.

Am I an object to myself?
An object to be controlled?

No I'm not, I'm a Being, a live Self.
But, ...

If I think if my "self"
is it as a set of properties or qualities,
as a "personality"
that is like the shape or color of an object,
or maybe like a kind of substance,
This is the classical notion of personality,
static, built-in, maybe eternal.

But how did I get this particular way?

Maybe I'm like the pine tree outside the window.
It's tall and thin and has a lot of growth at the top
and a big bare spot halfway up.
It had certain abilities from being a pine tree
and grew into a shape depending on the soil and weather
and the other trees it is mingled together with
and it was to them as they were to it
creating and created by the forest.

Someone calls on the phone and asks the familiar
but in some ways dreadful question
"How's it been going?" / "How have you been?"

It's hard to describe the familiar that doesn't change
Or remember if I'm different now than 20 years ago.
Do you feel "the same" as when you were young?
Or a little different, or completely different?

An easier question to answer is "What's New"?
But the answer is often "nothing much .."

Self-knowledge is difficult.
We're not built for it.
The brain doesn't have any internal sense at all
to feel itself.
It's hard to surprise oneself,
to "tickle" oneself,
hard even to describe oneself.

Sometimes to feel myself more fully
it helps to step outside
and breathe deeply of the night air.

There's a well-known idea in psychology
A bias in how people see themselves and others.
called the Fundamental Attribution Error:

It means people explain themselves
in terms of external situations
and describe others
in terms of innate qualities.

So if someone else gets in a car accident
it's because they weren't a good driver
or weren't paying attention;
But if I do,
it's because the road conditions were terrible
and that other vehicle came from nowhere.

If I fail a test, it is because it's a hard test
but if someone else does, it's because they aren't smart enough.

This seems pretty natural:
I don't see myself, really, but am aware of my environment
and as for others, I don't see what they see of the world,
I see them as objects in my world.

There's a folk saying that recognizes this tendency:
"Don't judge another unless you have walked a mile in their shoes."

What's it like
to treat parts of myself
as an honored Other,
a Guest in my house of Self?

Am I a fair Host?
Do I treat those inner "others"
with more consideration than myself?
Or less?
I don't mean behavior toward real people
but to those inner parts
the ones that I talk to
with my "internal dialogue"
that we call "thinking"
and indeed, it seems they talk back to "me" sometimes!
Is it a respectful conversation?

Do you think there's a similarity
between inner and outer talk
inner and outer relationships?

Sometimes
when talking ... when thinking ... about something
there's no "thing" there
just a chain of "aboutness"
but it keeps everyone happy
and we assume we could cash the check
of referring.

There are many "ways of knowing".
Most of them are not even "knowledge"
   Though they may be wisdom
   or "insanity", or both, in some cases
but they aren't objects, they are activities.
Knowledge is a noun,
Knowing is a verb.

How can we apply that to self -knowing / -knowlege?

A primary distinction is between "tacit" versus "explicit".
Explicit is what we can describe, objectify, make statements ABOUT.
Tacit is what can be experienced, expressed, and LIVED.
These mix together in every moment
but the vast majority of your knowledge is tacit
and the MEANING of what we talk ABOUT is all tacit.

This is even more true for self-knowledge than for knowledge of others.

It's like the difference between knowing a train
by looking at it from the platform
or by riding it with all the other passengers
listening to their conversations (or starting some)
visiting the dining car
looking out the windows noticing
the changes and activities of the world.

This is "indwelling"
taking up residence in a place, living there.

It stands in contrast to "identification"
Which, to recall our last meeting
comes from the idea of
"looking again and again"
and "not changing".

But things are always changing, breathing
and nothing is captured by our saying what it is.

So, "identification" can mean "getting stuck"
thinking that I am this, or this is Me
(whether that is conscious or unconscious)

But it can also refer to the process.

In this sense, getting on the train,
making it your home base, for now
is identification, and so is getting off the train again.

This meaning of identification is based in empathy,
Seeing the Me in You and vice versa.
To walk in others shoes
is a path to self-knowledge.

How is this done?
Awareness, the thing that grows
when you plant attention.

Attention can "light up" tacit knowledge
to make us aware of it
aware of a "thing"
even without making it explicit
without labeling it.
although sometimes it helps to give things names
not to define, label, or control,
but to refer to, speak to, "address"

as in "Hello, X!"

and in this way
to create a relationship,
awareness
of its reality and presence,

and finally, to communicate
"about"
with others,
and with oneself.

Walking a mile in someone's shoes
is to enter their tacit world
and experience it.

Can I do this for my "self"?
Is it possible
to imagine myself being someone else
walking a mile in my shoes?

So,
what's it like today
to be walking in your shoes,
riding on your train?