In the last article, we talked about how our environment tries to keep us the way we were when we were changing, and how the gaze of others restricts our freedom. We became aware, we set boundaries, we mourned some relationships.
But while we were doing this, we couldn't help but ask ourselves the following question: Will I still be me when I change so much?
I thought about this for a moment: If the "old me" was the one who procrastinated, ran away, kept silent... And now if I am doing none of these things... Who am I?
If not the old me, who is the new me? And is there a connection between these two "me"
There is a paradox in ancient Greece: The Ship of Theseus. After Theseus returned victorious from Crete, the Athenians kept this ship in the harbor as a monument. Years pass, the rotting wood is replaced one by one. Until none of the original parts remain. The question is: Is it still the same ship?
The question is: Is it still the same ship? (1*)
Are we not in the same paradox? Our behavior is changing, our thoughts are changing, our relationships are changing. But am I still me?"
Heraclitus said: "You can't bathe twice in the same river, because both the river flows and you change." (2*)
But if I am constantly changing, what is this thing I call "me"? And what will I keep and what will I let go as I change?"
This article is meant to look into these questions.
Philosophical and Scientific Background
Philosophical Perspective
Heraclitus vs Parmenides: Change or Immutability?
There are two opposing views in ancient Greek philosophy:
Heraclitus: Everything is in flux (panta rhei). Nothing remains constant. He says: "You cannot wash twice in the same river". Because both the river flows and you change. (2*)
Parmenides: Change is an illusion. In reality everything is immutable. Being is constant, change is only appearance.
The tension between the two is precisely our question: Am I an ever-changing flux or an unchanging essence?"
For me, the conflict between these two philosophers suggests this: Perhaps we are in between. Neither completely flowing, nor completely constant. But what is the balance between the two?"
Aristotle: Essence (Ousia) and Accident
Aristotle offers a solution: Every being has an essence (ousia). The essence does not change, but the accidental properties do.
Example: The essence of a tree is "being a tree". The fall of its leaves and the growth of its branches are incidental. The tree is still a tree.
What is the essence of a human being? Are our behaviors incidental or part of our essence? (3*)
If "procrastination" is a behavior (incidental), when I change it, I still remain "me". But if "procrastination" is part of my essence, do I disappear when I change it? What is your essence? Is procrastination a behavior (incidental), or is it part of your identity (essence)?
It is much harder to answer this question than I thought.
Locke: Personal Identity and Memory
John Locke says something very interesting about personal identity: Personal identity is the continuity of memory.
I am me as long as I remember my past. If I remember yesterday, yesterday's me and today's me are the same person. (4*)
But memory can be fallible, it can change. Sometimes we remember the past differently. Sometimes we reinterpret it.
Then who am I? The person I remember, or the person I am now?
According to Locke, what we call me is really a story. The story we tell ourselves. But what if we rewrite that story?
Change, perhaps, is just that: Rewriting the story. But when we change the story, do I change or is it just the story?
Hume: The Illusion of the Self (Bundle Theory)
David Hume says something much more radical: There is no such thing as a fixed "I."
The self is just a bundle of perceptions, feelings, thoughts. It is a flow that changes every moment. There is no fixed essence behind it.
What we call "I" is an illusion. (5*)
According to Hume, when we look inside ourselves we do not see a constant "I". We see only passing emotions, thoughts, perceptions. And we call them "I."
For me, this idea of Hume's is the most disturbing. Because he asks the question: What if there is no "I" at all? What if what we call "I" is just an illusion?
Then where does the fear of "losing ourselves" come from? Are we trying to protect something that does not exist?"
Ricoeur: Idem vs Ipse Identity
Paul Ricoeur brings a very nice distinction to this confusion. He says that there are two types of identity:
Idem (idem-identity): Remaining the same. Unchanging characteristics. My DNA, my past, my biological essence.
Ipse (ipse-identity): Being unique. Continuity of promises. Being who I promised to be. (6*)
My id cannot change. But ipse can change and I can still be "me".
Example: My Adam (my biological past) remains the same. But my ipse changes: When I promise "I am no longer a procrastinator", I create a new ipse.
Ricoeur shows me a way out: Maybe the change is to keep the idem and change the ipse. My past remains the same, but my promises change.
But what does this mean in practice? How do I live this distinction in everyday life?"
Buddhist Philosophy: Anatta (No Self)
In Buddhism there is the concept of "anatta": There is no fixed self.
The self is the temporary combination of the five skandhas (body, emotion, perception, mental formations, consciousness). These are constantly changing. There is no fixed "I." (7*)
Change brings suffering because we cling to the "I." We try to protect something that does not exist. Freedom is getting rid of the illusion of "I."
Buddhism says the same thing as Hume but comes to a different conclusion: If there is no I, there is nothing to lose. The fear of change comes from trying to protect something that doesn't exist.
For me, Buddhism reminds me: what if there is no self to protect? What if the fear of change comes from trying to protect something that doesn't exist?
Scientific Perspective
Narrative Identity - Dan McAdams
In modern psychology, Dan McAdams has developed a very interesting theory: Identity is the story we tell ourselves.
We turn our life into a narrative: beginning, middle, end. This narrative selects, interprets, connects events. (8*)
Change is rewriting the narrative. But the continuity of the narrative ensures the continuity of the "I".
McAdams tells us: You are the story you tell yourself. But when you change the story, do you change or does the story change? "I used to be X, but I realized that wasn't good for me. Now I am becoming Y."
This is not a rupture, it is evolution. The continuity of the story is maintained, but the direction changes.
Core Values Research
Psychology research shows: People have "core values". These values are relatively fixed, while behaviors are variable.
According to the research of Shalom Schwartz, there are universal values: honesty, kindness, freedom, security... (9*)
Change, perhaps, means becoming conformed to these core values. Behaviors change but values remain constant.
But here is another question: can core values change too? If at 20 I value success and at 40 I value relationships, am I still the same person?
Self-Consistency vs. Self-Expansion
There are two opposing needs in psychology:
Self-consistency (Self-consistency)
People want to be consistent. I want to be the same today as I was yesterday. (10*)
Self-expansion (Self-expansion)
People want to grow, to expand. New experiences, new relationships, new identities. (11*)
Change threatens consistency but enables expansion. When I go from being a procrastinator to a timely person, consistency is broken, but I expand.
There is a balance needed here: Staying consistent and expanding.
Autobiographical Memory and the Self
Autobiographical memory is the record of our personal past. This memory forms our sense of self.
But memory is selective: We remember some things and forget others. Some memories we emphasize, others we push into the background. (12*)
Change means reorganizing the memory. The "old me" remains in the memory, the "new me" lives in the present.
And interestingly: When the new self is formed, we also reinterpret the memory. We look at the past differently.
Perhaps I am not only who I am now, but also who I remember.
Real Problems and Solutions
The Real Problem
What to Protect, What Do We Let Go of?
The problem is: We want to change. But we don't want to become someone completely different. Because then the "me" is lost.
But what do we keep?
There are several options:
1. Preserve core values.
Maybe my core, my values. Honesty, compassion, curiosity. Without changing these, my behavior can change.
But: What if my values change too? If at 20 I value success, but at 40 I value relationships?
2. Preserve the past.
As Locke says, maybe I am who I remember. My past is my identity.
But: When I reinterpret my past? When the "old me" starts to look different?"
3. Preserve the story.
As McAdams says, I am a narrative. Change can be part of the narrative.
But: What if I completely rewrite the narrative? When I say "I was X before, now I am Y", which one is real?
4. Not protecting anything.
As Hume and Buddhism say, maybe there is no self to protect. Maybe the "I" is an ever-flowing river.
But: Where then does the fear of change come from? Why are we afraid of "losing ourselves?"
Here is the most difficult question: What is my essence? And can this essence change?
Solution Suggestions
How do we change without losing ourselves?
I would like to share with you these practices that I prepared for myself:
"Ship of Theseus" Exercise - Gradual Awareness
On a notepad I wrote the following:
Things I want to change:
- Put off
- Run away
- Keep quiet
Things I don't want to change:
- Honesty
- Curiousness
- Compassion
Then I asked myself: Are the things in the second list really my essence, or are they also a habit?
This exercise helped me to distinguish between what is my essence and what is a habit. And I realized: Some of the things I thought were my essence were actually just patterns that I had been repeating for a long time.
Rewriting the Narrative - Story Continuity
Inspired by Ricoeur and McAdams, I made change part of my story:
"I used to procrastinate, but I realized it wasn't good for me. Now I try to be timely."
This is not a rupture, but an evolution. The continuity of the story is maintained, but the direction is changing.
The important thing is that the new me does not ignore the old me. It comes from it. The next chapter builds on the previous one, not erases it.
Determining Core Values
I asked myself these questions:
- What values have always been important?
- What principles have I never given up?
- What is common in different roles (spouse, friend, employee)?
My answers: Honesty, curiosity, connection.
These values are perhaps my "essence". Without changing them, the way they are expressed can change.
Example: If my essence is "honesty", do I express it by procrastinating or by being timely?
When I procrastinated, I was not honest with myself. Now when I am timely, I express my honesty better.
The value is the same, the expression has changed.
"Idem vs Ipse" Distinction
Using Ricoeur's distinction:
Idem (unchanging): My past, my biological characteristics, my basic temperament
Ipse (changing): My commitments, my responsibilities, my choices
Changing the ipse does not threaten the idem.
I was a "procrastinator" (ipse past), but now I am a "timely person" (ipse present). My idam (past) is the same, but my ipse has changed.
My past has not disappeared. Only my present commitments have changed.
"Continuity Tests"
In every major change I ask myself the following questions:
- Memory test: Is there a continuity of story between the past me and the present me?
- Values test: Are my core values preserved?
- Recognition test: Do my old friends still recognize me as "me"?
- Inner recognition: Do I still feel like "me"?
If most of them are "yes", I am still me. If all of them are "no", maybe I am going too fast.
"River Metaphor" - Both Flow and Bed
I have extended Heraclitus' river metaphor:
The river flows (change), but the river has a bed (continuity).
Maybe I am both the flowing water and the bed. The water changes constantly, the bed changes slowly.
My behavior is the water (fast change), my values are the bed (slow change).
I am both. Both changing and unchanging.
Living with a Paradox
But perhaps the problem is in looking for a definitive answer.
Perhaps there is no single answer to the question "what is my essence?"
Hume may be right: There is no fixed essence. I am an ever-changing flux.
But Aristotle may also be right: There is a sense of continuity. I was me yesterday and I am me today.
Are the two contradictory? Perhaps not.
Perhaps I am both the flow and the bed. Both changing and staying the same.
There is a paradox in quantum physics: Light is both wave and particle. Both are real at the same time. Whichever one we observe, we see.
Perhaps I am like that. Both a changing process and a fixed being.
As Ricoeur says: I am both idem (that which remains the same) and ipse (that which changes). (6*)
And to accept this paradox is perhaps the most profound acceptance.
Because then I am neither under pressure to remain exactly the same, nor am I afraid of becoming someone else entirely.
I can change, but as myself.
Conclusion and Message to the Reader
As I come to the end of this article, I realize this: "What is my essence?" is perhaps the wrong question.
Because essence is not a fixed thing. It is both structure and process.
As Heraclitus said: You cannot bathe twice in the same river. But what we call "the river" does not disappear. It is still there, just with different waters.
Perhaps I am like that too. I change every moment, but being "me" continues.
Back to the paradox of the ship of Theseus: Even if every plank of the ship changes, the ship is still Theseus'. Because the ship is not its boards, but its journey.
We may be like that too. I am the journey, not my behavior.
And on this journey, I will let go of some things: Old habits, fears, defenses.
I will keep some things: Values, commitments, deep beliefs.
But most importantly: I will both change and be me.
As my favorite Iranian writer Fürug Ferruhzad says:
The bird dies, remember the flight!
At the beginning of this series, we talked about "conscious repetition". The spaciousness of rhythm, order, repetition. And now we have come here: The freedom of change.
Perhaps the two are not opposites. Rhythm is both repetition and change. Both staying the same and being different.
We breathe: Each breath is different but the rhythm is the same. The heart beats: Each beat is unique, but the rhythm continues. We walk: Each step is new but the walk continues.
Maybe I am like that too. Both changing and repeating. Both flowing and rhythmic.
This is where the spaciousness of conscious repetition meets the freedom of change.
And perhaps this is what maturity is all about: To be able to hold both. To be both flowing and bearing. To change but not to disappear. Growing but not disappearing.
Till then, be both a flowing river and a bed for that river. Change but remain yourself. Keep your rhythm but don't forget to flow.
Because perhaps life is precisely the dance of the two.
Note: As I was writing this article I realized that until now I have always ended it with the next topic, as if I needed to chain the articles together. But maybe this was a self-imposed restriction.
I will now write weekly essays with a freer approach. Sometimes it may be a continuation of the previous essay, sometimes I may start a completely different topic. I myself don't know what I will write right now.
Perhaps this is a rhythm: Sometimes a plan, sometimes a flow. Sometimes continuity, sometimes surprise.
We will see together which topic I will come up with next week.
Be with love.
Sources and Inspired Texts
- Plutarchus - Life of Theseus (Ship paradox)
- Pre-Socratic Philosophers - Heraclitus fragments
- Aristotle - Metaphysics (Ousia and Accident concepts)
- Locke, J. - An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (Personal identity)
- Hume, D. - A Treatise of Human Nature (Bundle theory)
- Ricoeur, P. - Oneself as Another (Idem vs Ipse)
- Buddhaghosa - Visuddhimagga (Anatta teaching)
- McAdams, D.P. (2001) - The Psychology of Life Stories
- Schwartz, S.H. (1992) - Universals in the content and structure of values
- Swann, W.B. (1983) - Self-verification: Bringing social reality into harmony with the self
- Aron, A. & Aron, E.N. (1986) - Love and the expansion of self
- Conway, M.A. & Pleydell-Pearce, C.W. (2000) - The construction of autobiographical memories
){kind=link}