Identity

[Dreiko]

Interesting so what you're saying is that aspects of one's personality are the only things that are relevant existentially and everything born from the physical or material world is completely irrelevant to one's identity including beliefs and ones own physical characteristics?

Basically if one seeks answers to questions it's relevant but not necessarily the questions they seek to answer isn't necessarily relevant, the problem I have with this outlook though, it's that it could really only work if there was no material existence, if we were for example amorphous being floating through the endless void of the cosmos, which I mean we might be, but assuming that the material world is real and tangible, what you're saying seems a bit like cowardice, basically only uncontroversial statements can ever define you, but anything that draws a bit of controversy can't, ironically those things are the ones that actually have relevancy to ones own material existence and influence how one is treated in the world at large by other people, that's not to say that personality characteristics should be dismissed as an identifier, but you never see someone say they're proud of being curious because no one would oppose that statement as it has little relevancy to how one is treated.

If anything wouldn't you say that it makes more sense to identify yourself as those characteristics that hold relevancy to your own existence?

If you're treated differently for being gay for example, it only makes sense that one would feel more strongly about being gay than passionate for example, or maybe because one is passionate one would identify more strongly as being gay since the individual would be passionate about it, the same could be said of something less controversial like a proffession, like a doctor that's passionate about being a doctor, whether that's because he feels pride in being able to accomplish things others can't or derives satisfaction from being able to help people in need, there are surely many other factors that go into making them who they are but if they feel being a doctor is central to who they are can we really argue that it's not? We could argue that they are a doctor for other reasons such as a desire to help people or raw passion for knowledge that they happened to channel into medicine, but surely we don't know if they would've gotten the same level of fulfillment from and identity from a different proffesion since only they can know that.

But at least that's my take on it, kind off weird considering I'm the one claiming we're incorporeal and possibly non-existent, but then again I am nonesense.

The material world is how we interface with those foundational aspects. One should merely be cognizant that it's not the world that is faulty but merely their interface mechanism. It's the nuance between being jaded or bitter vs being hopeful.

You'd be surprised at how many people live deeply incurious lives, and while they wouldn't say so in so many worlds, are behaving in an anti-curiosity way. Same with gratitude and awe, and this is way more easy to observe. People over-focus on their small issues and miss the forest for the trees, and I think this one is more easy to pinpoint without the need for analyzing what people's behavior shows.

The amount of controversy these things illicit is irrelevant but there have been times where such statements would have been controversisl in various cultures. Especially in cultures stemming from monotheistic systems which safekeep awe for their deity and prohibit showing it for other things even if they deserve it, because that's somehow evil (controversial).

The surface level analysis is that you would feel passionate about being the thing that you're mistreated for being, but also some people go to the self-hate route and end up hating that part of themselves instead. You can't really control this if you are trapped in this way of thought, that's why it's better to take a step back and look at this in the bigger picture. Though that being said, it makes way more sense to identify with something that part of you has gone into taking in as part of your identity, like being a doctor, over merely being born something, like gay as per your example. Striving to become a doctor and working hard enough to get to that stage is a manifestation of high amounts of curiosity and awe for life and the preservation of it, so I would think at that level it'd have become part of your identity whether people hated you for it or not, and that shows that you really don't need external or material influences to identify with something. To the doctor, being a doctor is the manifestation of their apperciation for existence, their awe for life, their curiosity for the way the body works and the way a myriad sciences intersect. By calling it "doctor" they get a shorthand identity but what is really going down behind the scenes is exactly this complex thing that I'm describing. Even if they're not cognizant of the specific elements therein.



But yeah to worry about whether you "really exist" is kinda missing the point here. The point is you get to have fun in this awesome thing, whatever the hell it is. And any worrying over stuff is time you coulda spend enjoying it instead, so just be grateful you get to do that and switch gears into the "seeking cool things to appreciate" mode lol. Nothing is eternal anyhow, entropy is a thing and everything in the universe will waste away. Worrying about whether you go out when the sun goes out in a supernova or not is again, a waste of time.