We Are Not Who We Think

Posted on May 10, 2007 by Dave Pollard

If you spend enough time thinking about instinct, and culture, and genetics, and language, and love, you begin to get pretty skeptical about ‘free will’. As the diagram above shows, we are the product of:

our culture (the language which determines how the neurons in our brains form, peer pressure, others’ ideas, and the educational, economic, political and social systems in which we live),
our genes (instincts, hormones, metabolism, emotions, physical structures and appearance — and don’t tell me that your appearance doesn’t shape who you are), and
our senses, experiences and memories.

Nature, nurture, and what we’ve been through make us what we are. The following poem by Montrealer Kezia Speirs, which I read today on the Toronto subway’s ‘poetry on the way’ poster, makes this point more lyrically:

We love as though we know not

better. A trick, biology, it claims

more worthy selves and gentler aims

and still this doom is ours. We sought

late wanderings and soft light, dim,

and then the first embrace, the touch

as if those hands were all the world — for such

their beauty seemed; he carried gods with him.

And these loves, so celebrated, sung

so painted, danced, idolatrized, these scenes

are but the tantrum of our genes,

which we their slaves embellish — strung

like puppets, till they break their strings

and all that’s left are our imaginings.

If our actions are indeed “the tantrum of our genes”, then where, in the ‘product’ that is each one of us, is us? If we are, as I would posit, simply our knowledge, our beliefs and our imaginings, figments of reality, and if these three fragile, fleeting figments are determined by our genes, our culture, and our senses, experiences and memories, and if in turn these figments determine what we do, and don’t do, during our too-long, too-short ‘lives’, what control do ‘we’ have over any of it?

And if we are fortunate enough to have the capacity to think, say and do what ‘we’ want, regardless of what ‘everybody else’ thinks, why do we value the ‘freedom’ to do so, so highly, when we are in part a product of the culture that is ‘everybody else’?

So if, say, our culture tells us that, for some specified reason, we have to do something (e.g. work hard for a living at a job we don’t like) or tells us that we cannot do something (e.g. travel to Cuba), why do we rebel at this? And then do (or not do) what we’re told?

Or if, say, we are seduced by someone to whom we are intuitively and/or hormonally drawn, and our culture tells us that it is inappropriate to act on that impulse (e.g. because we, or they, are already committed to someone else), by what logic can we say that our ‘ability’ to resist the temptation is an act of ‘free will’ or morality, rather than merely a resolution of the forces that control us, make us who we are, by sheer strength of that superior force, and not in ‘our’ control whatsoever?

And if ‘we’ want to save the world, is it a matter of defying the culture that normally tells us what to do, and trusting instead the other two forces: (a) our instincts & emotions, and (b) our senses, experiences and memories, both of which tell us, increasingly, that our culture is killing us? When our culture makes us so much who we are, can we even do that? Are we the gatekeepers, the honest brokers between the three forces in the diagram above, who decide which one(s) make ‘more sense’, and get paralyzed into inaction when they are in unresolvable conflict? Or are we merely their instrument, blown like leaves in the wind by all three forces in their combined vector of velocity?

For once, I’m not going to proffer any answers to these (admitted loaded) questions. They aren’t rhetorical. They may be recursive. They may be unanswerable. Perhaps how we answer them tells us who we really are. And who we thought we were, but are not.

Category: Being Human

This entry was posted in Our Culture / Ourselves. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to We Are Not Who We Think

sageservice@gmail.com says:

May 11, 2007 at 00:17

Interesting Post. “Who am I?” is a question that always seems to pop up in my quest for enlightenment. Actually, it initially appeared to me that enlightenment was just figuring out the answer to that question.I remember taking solace at one stage hearing the “you are not your thoughts…” adage. So I am not pizza… good, but who am I? I wondered.I needed a real world solution to how to even find the answer to a question like that. I was into chaos theory at the time and I began to wonder if the idea the self-organization (which occurred spontaneously when a positive feedback loop occurred) might be applied to myself.Hmmm… “Self” Organization, that sounded like something I could use — I started to look around my home with fresh eyes and I noticed all the things that were there because society/culture/friends or family “were doing it.” I also started to sense which things were there because they reflected a essential piece of me.Long story short, I found tremendous value in removing the “advertisements” that originated externally and started putting up my own “advertisements” for things that I had discovered within myself. Reflecting more and more of me to me, became the positive feedback loop that spurred “self”-organization. The whole thing still is an amazing process which I blogged about some time ago, if you are interested.Self-Organization: http://sagefool.com/2006/01/my-basement-my-mind.htmlFiguring out what’s inside:http://sagefool.com/2005/11/whats-your-motivation.htmlBlogging has been on the back burner for me for a while, but I plan on getting back to it at the proper time.
Jacob Haqq-Misra says:

May 11, 2007 at 05:16

I like the diagram, and I think it helps illustrate an additional point. Our actions are certainly influenced by our genetics and surroundings (to what degree? this is hard to say, as you point out). But I do think that awareness of a particular influence helps minimize it’s influence.If our culture tells us we need to get a job
Jacob Haqq-Misra says:

May 11, 2007 at 05:20

I like the diagram, and I think it helps illustrate an additional point. Our actions are certainly influenced by our genetics and surroundings (to what degree? this is hard to say, as you point out). But I do think that awareness of a particular influence helps minimize it’s influence.If our culture tells us we need to get a job and consume without regard, almost everyone will follow in the same pattern. But explicitly realizing this influence is a step in letting ‘You’ become more dominant than ‘Your Influences’. The same example is true of an alcoholic fighting a hereditary tendency toward addiction. External pressures may be present, but acknowledgment can lead to perhaps a freer will.
Dave Pollard says:

May 11, 2007 at 06:26

Ben at forcevive.blogspot.com writes: Dear Dave, really good post… the division into three parts works for me.Recently I posted about Richard Dawkins (talking on POP!Tech) where he quotes Steve Grant: “think of an experience from your childhoodsomething you remember clearly,something you can see, feel or maybe even smell as if you were really there.after all, you really were there at that time, weren’t you?how else would you remember it ?but here is the bombshell:you weren’t there.not a single atom that is in your body today was there when that event took place.matter flows from place to place and momentarily comes togetherWhatever you are therefore,you are not the stuff of which you are made.”Hey… what’s that? Another (micro-)division, I suppose. Lovely intriguing thoughts… find it here, video and text, if you like: http://forcevive.blogspot.com/2007/05/poptech-richard-dawkins.htmlDear Sagefool, great comment – although I only understood what you meant after having read the linked post on your blog (which is a really good one, btw!)
Nick Smith says:

May 11, 2007 at 07:10

The model is correct in that behaviours and actions stem from mind activity – what we know, belief, imagine, think. But are we really our knowledge, beliefs and imaginings? Is that testable? I have believed this at one time but I have never experienced this to be true.Knowledge, beliefs and imaginings are all temporary phenomena – they change according to our perception of reality. But more significantly, they are also <me>observable</me> – we can at any moment we choose become still and simply observe what is happening in our minds – we can watch thoughts come and go, we can be aware of our imaginings and beliefs and, if we wish, we can trace these things back to their source. So if these three things are a part of who you say we are, then what Dave is this entity.. this Presence, that has the ability to be aware of these things?
Mariella says:

May 11, 2007 at 15:19

My feelings about myself changed drastically the moment I began to see me and think about me, as a process in constant movent and change…. I reframed my old “solid” thought about my identity for a mo more gaseose one,(like visualising the changes from ice to water and to vapor…..loosing the bonds between molecules…)so that beleifs, values, interactions, can be more lightly tied…. So now, for me, Identity is a process too….. so, in a way, I feel much less concerned about who I am….. hmmm… that´s nice !
Ed says:

May 11, 2007 at 22:13

I’ve been following different paradigms of “reality” for the past many years and I think I am finally at a point where I got myself to accept that what I refer to as “I” is not my body alone. “I” is that which the body “emits” as awareness. It is the same relationship as a radio transmitter and the radio transmission. “I” is the transmission not the transmitter.”I” is that which is aware and conscious. Thus, “I” is not only this body, but it encompasses everything it is aware of! Rather hard to swallow, but if that is so, that puts “unity” in a whole new light!I know it is easier to differentiate bodies and call this one me, that one you and I don’t know where my awareness ends and where yours begins, but this has been a totally huge paradigm shift for me.What you wrote about is a big part of this way of thinking what “I” is and the question is what if what you hold to be true in your mind as your beliefs is all you can be aware of? Where does that leave you? It is a catch-22! It is a loopback system which you can only jump out of with faith.. Faith in the truth of something which you cannot experience until you believe it first!
Siona says:

May 12, 2007 at 09:59

Our culture is killing us, but our biology is killing us, too.And I love how science has provided us with tiny new gods. The talk of genes and determinism reminds me so much of the Fates, and I feel as though your questions are ancient ones.
andy mill says:

May 12, 2007 at 16:54

Wow, how desperate for meaning are we? Isn’t sunshine enough. Isn’t the air in your lungs as you read this enough. Stop it.