Category: Post Untitled, volume one

SUNDAY, 11 JULY 2004

Coma, amnesia, and consciousness of the self – the relationship between the body and the “psyche”

My sense of self and my ability to think critically about the self whilst my own self remains comfortable depend greatly on the proper functioning of my major organs.

The details of my particular self-consciousness – language, culture, ethnicity – is directly related to the rise of the Dutch Republic to eminent naval power and accompanying economic growth and prosperity and even advancements in art during the seventeenth century.

* * *

Both “sense of self” and “identity” are essential for something to function. What is this something?

* * *

Family and friends are important, even essential to our existence, because we think they know us. They – “know who I am.”

* * *

It feels like I am running down the correct lane in the orchard, but I am not barking up the right tree.

* * *

Johnny Clegg said, “Spirit is the journey, body is the bus.” Perhaps one should be more specific and say: The body is the bus, sense of self and particular identity is the driver, and the “spirit” is the passenger that needs both the body, and the self-identity to get where it needs to go. But, go where?

______________________

TUESDAY, 6 JULY 2004

Choose and believe

The goal is not to be incapable of doing evil deeds, but not to do evil deeds.

That means looking yourself in the eyes and admitting, “I am capable of being evil and doing bad things,” and then to choose to not be evil, and to not do bad things.

This choice, as most know, is not always easy, but even that should serve as motivation, rather than as a reason to doubt yourself.

Believe that you can be good. Believe that you can do good things. Then be good, and do good deeds.

Myself and I: “I talk to myself.” A deceptively simple statement? Who’s the “I” in that sentence, and who’s the “self”?

WEDNESDAY 7 JULY 2004

Happiness is a sensory issue

Happiness is primarily an issue of the senses.

Think about it for a minute: What are you looking at right now? What do you smell? What do you taste? What do you hear? What are you touching?

Equally important, and perhaps even more so: What are you not looking at, or what do you not see? What do you not smell? What do you not taste? What don’t you hear? What are you not touching?

And then, if happiness is to a great extent dependent on how you experience your immediate environment: What do you want to see? What do you want to smell? What do you want to taste? What do you want to listen to? What do you want to touch?

Conclusions on FRIDAY, 9 JULY 2004

1. What at one stage seemed like wise choices that initially had positive results, may in some cases with the passage of time produce extremely negative consequences.

2. Sometimes you must pretend what you are not to achieve more positive results.

3. The enlightened, wise person should be able to play the game better than the ignorant; he should also be able to exert better control over his emotions.

4. The question can be asked: Do you want to play the game?

______________________

The idea was originally to use the material of this “Final Chapter” as the fourth and final part of the “Personal Agenda” project. It should therefore not lead to any shock and surprise if I should mention that what follows builds on the material that has preceded this chapter.

In short, prepare yourself for another several dozen pages of observations, usually unsolicited social criticism, arguments with myself (and others, but only in my own mind), plans that are not really relevant to anyone else, and insights that may just be useful for one or two people.

This chapter can for various reasons still be seen as the unofficial final chapter of the “Personal Agenda” project, while also serving as the first chapter of the next project. Allow me then to solemnly announce, without any further delay, the absolutely concluding …

FINAL CHAPTER

and

CHAPTER ONE

of the next project, entitled:

volume II

POST UNTITLED

______________________

MONDAY, 5 JULY 2004

I

“The Personal Agenda of Brand Smit” is a collection of more than a hundred pieces dealing with one person’s ideas of what it means to exist, what humans need to survive and to function relatively successfully in the modern world, and what it may mean to be “happy”.

The material is rooted in my own life for the simple reason that I used myself as chief test subject – because there is no one that I know better than myself. The fact that it is autobiographical does not imply that I think my life is, or has so far been more interesting than other people’s lives – the opposite is most probably closer to the truth.

Especially the last five years of my life [1999 to 2004] have for several reasons been conducive to asking certain questions about my own life, coming up with a few answers, and to identifying certain principles on what a “happy” life may possibly involve. I believe that these things can be relevant for other people who also want to answer the question of what it means to them to exist.

II

The book deals with the following scenario: After graduating from high school a man went to university where he earned a degree in the so-called social sciences. In addition to knowledge and insight gained – which would prove to come in handy later on – he also managed to accumulate thousands of rands in student debt. He always knew he would have to take responsibility for this debt – his parents have been engaged in their own struggle for financial survival for years.

After graduating from university he did not try very hard to look for a job of any kind in his own country, for reasons he could only briefly formulate at the time. Eighteen months after he had attained his final tertiary qualification, he went to South Korea to earn money as an English teacher. After two years he returned to South Africa, and made a heroic but totally unsuccessful attempt to join a more conventional flow of existence. Eight months later he returned to Northeast Asia. For the past five years he has been living on the island of Taiwan.

The main protagonist of this story is now in his early thirties. He owns no property. He does not own a car. He is not married, and he has no children. He is not currently involved in an intimate relationship. He is thousands of kilometres away from his closest relatives – whom he misses very much, and from the land of his birth. He has not saved a significant amount of money, and he continues to pay his student debt – albeit rather slowly.

Yet this man is relatively pleased with himself. Why? “The Personal Agenda of Brand Smit” attempts to lay out the reasons.

III

A young man is walking through the Gallery of Adult Lives. He is looking with a degree of bemusement at the exhibit that shows how many adults spend their time on earth. He sees the work that people do, the houses, the children, the annual vacations, family gatherings and so on.

Through all the rooms and hallways full of portraits he gets what he believes is a balanced view of the good times and some challenging times that probably await him too.

However, it is the work that adults do that really gets his attention. A few so-called careers seem to him somewhat impressive, but his predominant impression is, “Jeepers, don’t these people die of boredom?!” So he continues to the next exhibit of professions. “Wow,” he’ll think to himself, “I cannot imagine that people do these things every day of their lives until they’re old!” Then he will go through a few more rooms. “Good heavens!” he would say out loud. “How can anyone expect people to do such tedious work?”

Eventually the curator of the gallery gets tired of these rude outbursts. “Young man,” he scolds him, “people do most of these jobs not because they enjoy doing them. They do it for the money. Didn’t your parents tell you that you will also one day have to earn an income?”

Slowly but surely it dawns on him that people earn money to afford homes, cars, clothes, food, holidays at the sea, toys for children, and things like magazines and daily newspapers. He also realises that some people get really old, and if they cannot earn an income any longer, they have to live on money they had saved during the years they did work.

Nevertheless, he could still not escape the thought that he can think of many better ways to spend his time. He does not have a problem with the idea of working; it is just that he can think of many other examples of work that will be much more exciting, work that will give him a sense that how he spends eight-plus hours a day is worth more than monetary compensation. He also believes that he can devote himself much more easily to this other work on which he can spend forty hours or more per week.

The young man then expresses these thoughts to the curator. The curator again rises from his chair and with a finger wagging furiously in the air shouts at the man. “That work does not give you enough money for a house and a car and food and clothing and holidays and toys and medicine and weekly magazines! Do you not understand? From what planet are you …”

By the time the man exchanges the musty, cold rooms for fresh air and sunshine, he feels a little panicky. He understands the whole story of making money and getting older and so on, but why does he not see his future in images similar to those in the exhibits? And how on earth could he be in opposition if it is such a great gallery, with so many portraits, and so many people who live their lives according to these customs?

Who is he to think that he can try something else?

IV

It is like a bicycle lock, or a safe. You turn the lock to a number, and something clicks in place. Then you turn it to another number, and again something clicks. Again you turn the little wheel, and again something falls into place. After all the teeth have moved into the right grooves, the lock or the safe door opens and you can continue with your life.

I am just an ordinary person. I have the same basic structure as everyone else, and just like everyone has slightly different “codes” so mine is also relatively unique. But the result is usually the same: Everything falls into place, the door opens, and you step inside.

Perhaps the problem isn’t that my vault door has not opened yet. It may rather be a case that the door has in fact swung open but I have chosen until now to remain outside, to examine the door, to study the lock mechanism, and to observe other people who go through the same process of “insight” into the life of an adult person, and “now I know what I must do”.

It may also turn out at the end that my tendency to question everything is my unique “code”. What should have fallen into place have already occurred. I may already have entered – or climbed on the proverbial bicycle, and I may in fact be doing the exact job I was always supposed to do.

______________________

MONDAY, 5 JULY 2004

A short dialogue

“Have you ever wondered about the origin of the self? What could possibly be the origin of the self?”

“Well, birth is certainly a reasonable answer.”

“Define ‘birth’.”

“Biological separation of mother and child. I would say the precise moment is the cutting of the umbilical cord. I think that’s the most dramatic moment of separation between the two physical entities.”

“So, the moment the umbilical cord is cut, is the moment of the birth of the self, the moment the new person becomes aware of his own, separate existence?”

“That sounds sensible enough, does it not?”

“Would you say only humans – members of the species Homo sapiens – have consciousness of their own unique existence? Would you say animals have a similar consciousness?”

“What kind of animal?”

“Many people would probably first think of dogs and cats.”

“Pets, but then surely also baboons, chimpanzees, gorillas …”

“Well, let’s say all mammals, then.”

“Or, all mammals born with umbilical cords.”

“Rats?”

“Well, rats are mammals … and mice.”

“And whales. But if a rat has consciousness of its own unique existence, what about an ostrich? And if you reckon that an ostrich does not have consciousness of its own unique existence, why not?”

“According to our reasoning, because an ostrich is not a mammal. Because ostriches lay eggs, there is no dramatic moment of separation.”

“It doesn’t sound right that a common rodent has consciousness of its own unique existence, but not as large a … creature as an ostrich, just because it hatches. This means a giant creature like a dinosaur also did not have consciousness of its own unique existence, just because there is no umbilical cord, or there wasn’t. And what about egg-laying mammals?”

“Well, an egg-laying mammal lays an egg, so there’s no umbilical cord, anyway. Let’s say then for the moment that ostriches and other large egg-laying creatures also possess consciousness of their own existence.”

“What about insects? What about smaller organisms?

“Amoebas?”

“And parasites and bacteria. How do they fit into the whole thing?”

“It’s difficult to say. Let’s stick for the moment with mammals and the large egg-layers.”

“Reptiles? If an ostrich qualifies, then a crocodile must qualify. And if the largest snake qualifies, then the smallest snake must qualify …”

“Let’s just first go back to the question about origin … but wait, what exactly are we talking about? What exactly is the ‘self’?”

“A few minutes ago we referred to the consciousness of own separate existence. Let’s see what a dictionary says …”

[The following terms and definitions are taken from Psigologie-Woordeboek (Dictionary of Psychology), by Gouws, Louw, Meyer & Plug (1979). The original source is in Afrikaans; the quoted definitions are my translations.]

self

A term with a variety of meanings, of which the following are the most important:

1. The person’s view of himself, i.e. a synonym for SELF-CONCEPT.

2. All the person’s characteristics, i.e. PERSONALITY.

3. The core of the personality, i.e. a synonym for PROPRIUM.

4. The agent or executor of behaviour, i.e. the “I”.

5. The substratum of behaviour, i.e. a synonym for PSYCHE.

6. (W. James) Any of a range of aspects of a person as it emerges in different life situations or areas, e.g. the social self, the religious self and the professional self.

self-concept

A person’s perception and evaluation of himself. This includes cognitive, emotional and evaluative elements. Synonyms: SELF-COMPREHENSION, SELF-ESTEEM and SELF. Compare. IDEAL SELF and BODY IMAGE.

ideal self

(C.R. Rogers) The totality of characteristics that the individual would want to have. The assumption is that a person has such wishes in order to meet conditions for acceptance.

body image

A person’s subjective representation of his own body. It can include one or more of the following aspects: the subjective and more or less conscious idea that a person has at every moment of the position, posture and movement of his body; a person’s distinctive experience of his own body; and a person’s evaluation of his body or parts of it in terms of aspects such as attractiveness, masculinity, femininity or health.

personality

A term which in its broadest sense refers to the integrated and dynamic organisation of an individual’s psychological, social, moral and physical qualities, as it is reflected in his interaction with his environment and especially with other people, and as determined by the interaction between constitutional and environmental factors. As the personality gradually develops during the individual’s life cycle and is therefore never static, the term usually refers to the pattern of characteristics at a given time during the individual’s life.

proprium

(G. W. Allport) The core of the personality. It entails those aspects of the person with which he feels himself most closely and intimately involved, for example, his most important values and objectives.

psyche

The hypothetical substratum or carrier of all experience and behaviour. […] A variety of terms is used besides psyche to refer to the hypothetical substratum of behaviour, e.g. spirit, person, personality, individual and organism. Synonyms: SOUL and SELF.

soul

1. (Theology) The immortal (and non-physical) aspect of the person. […]

“I like the parts about body image and psyche. What do they say about the ideal self?”

“They reckon you cherish the notion of an ideal self because you want to be accepted.”

“Want to be accepted? I have an ideal image of myself in my head, but if more people than the current handful accept me, I’ll definitely get nervous!”

“I don’t know if you picked it up, but not one of the authors of those definitions succeeded in properly caging their target. It’s as if everyone tries to get a grip on a fairly slippery bar of soap.”

“Let’s see: a person’s view of themselves … a person’s characteristics … the core of the personality … the agent or executor of behaviour … any of a range of aspects of a person as it emerges in different life situations or areas … a person’s evaluation of themselves … an integrated and dynamic organisation of qualities … the carrier of all experience and behaviour … the immortal and non-material aspect of a person …”

“As I say, a slippery chunk of soap. Let’s first concentrate on a human’s consciousness of his or her own self.”

“Consciousness of self? Just remember, if the self is ‘X’, the self cannot also be ‘consciousness of X’.”

“Perhaps the self is not an ‘X’, perhaps the self is awareness … of … something, or everything. Yet, self cannot be equated to consciousness … Do you ever get the feeling you’re trying to articulate something for which your vocabulary is too primitive?”

“Yes, often.”

“Nevertheless, the awareness of … own living, physical, separate existence must surely arise from somewhere, at some point it must go from nothing to something, from ‘0’ to ‘1’. If this point does not lie with the cutting of the umbilical cord, what other possibilities are we looking at?”

“Conception?”

“Can’t be … can you imagine a fertilised egg with consciousness, not to mention a sophisticated consciousness of its own existence?”

“Can it be said that the self does not arise from one moment to the next but that it rather develops slowly?”

“Can it be said that the body does not originate from one moment to the next because it develops slowly?”

“Let me see if I understand this correctly. The physical body originates from the mother – and to be thorough it should be mentioned, after the mother’s egg was fertilised with a physical contribution from the father. According to the umbilical theory it can be said that the new-born human’s consciousness of himself or herself also arises from the mother, in the sense that initially there is only one consciousness – that of the mother, then after ten or twenty or thirty weeks brain activity in the foetus is detected, but certainly nothing that could be called consciousness of own unique existence – there’s no personality, no view of him- or herself, no evaluation of him- or herself, and then the moment the umbilical cord is cut there is undeniably more than one case of consciousness – the mother’s consciousness and the child’s consciousness.”

“Consciousness of own, separate existence perhaps, but still no personality. I mean, no new-born baby has any view of him- or herself, no self-evaluation …”

“Not yet, but you cannot deny that an extraordinary event occurs from one moment to the next.”

“Doesn’t it make you think of Frankenstein who animates his project, and gives it consciousness of himself, with an electric shock? Except in the case of the new-born human, the electric shock is the severance of the umbilical cord.”

“But in the story the electric shock also stimulated brain activity. From brain activity, consciousness arose. In the case of real humans, the foetal brain is already active weeks before birth, weeks before the cutting of the umbilical cord. Whether the foetus is aware of anything, and if indeed, of what, is of course a different question.”

“Let me make a statement: I am now, at this point, Monday, 5 July 2004 at 12:48 in the afternoon aware of myself as a distinct entity, separate from inanimate objects in my environment (except for the chair on which I’ve been sitting for hours), and physically removed from all other living creatures. If I should die now from sudden seizure, only I would die. If anyone else in the area were to die at this moment of a heart attack, only that person would die – I would continue. I am aware of this separateness. I am also aware of another type of attachment, what we call in everyday speech an emotional attachment to people I have known since I … well, since I can remember. I am also aware of the fact that I have a fairly unique personality, that I have a particular view of myself and that certain aspects of my person emerge in different situations. I am aware of all these things. My question now, at what point did I become aware, for the first time, of myself, of my separateness, of my existence as a separate entity? And if this point is not the origin of what can ultimately be referred to as the self, what is, then?”

“It’s hard to put a finger on a single point. One must also remind yourself that ‘self’ cannot be equated to brain activity, and cannot necessarily be equated to consciousness.”

“And brain activity also does not necessarily mean that there is consciousness.”

“Nevertheless, even if the ‘self’, or a consciousness of own unique existence is understood as a result of a slow process that happens in small increments, there still has to be a point of origin. There must, necessarily, be a point of origin! Where this point is, when this moment of more than just flesh and blood coming into being occurs, however elementary, touches the essence of human existence.”

“Then we don’t even speculate about the possible similarity between human consciousness and appreciation of own existence, and what other mammals experience.”

“And birds, reptiles, fish, insects … trees?”

______________________