Man, Know Thyself & Who Am I - What Does It Really Mean

[regnauld]

---

Who Are you?

Do you know who you really are?


http://www.scribd.com/doc/6572237/Ma...It-Really-Mean

[SEED OF LIBER]

______________________

Come on pipol


Any Lost Souls here !

______________________

[Lovely Charm]

In the subjective world hunting for the Absolute,,searching for the Ultimate reality is next to wishful thinking,,,so the only feasible way of intimating TRUTH is to know what truth is not.

Our five senses can only reveal its own limitation,,,nothing more,,,speculation at its best,,,vanity under the cloth of rigtheousness.

[The_Child]

there was never a subject, this is the greatest prejudice of rational psychology.

[regnauld]

there was never a subject, this is the greatest prejudice of rational psychology.

Your opinion is quite interesting. Can you explain and expound that further sir?

[The_Child]

dont call me sir, sir. TheChild would suffice.

i stand with the idea that subjectivities are created never inherent nor given. It is dialectical relation (forgive the french) between man, its is most raw form and the world. thus when we perceive of ourselves as "I" as subjects as identities we are nothing more but perceiving a mirror (Lacan), or products of the institutions of power (foucault) or as Text ought to be deconstructed (Derrida) or as mere simulations, (baudrillard). The "I" is created with our interactions with the world, and we are changed by it.

i could not of course expound the detail of each one of those that i mentioned in this forum.

cheers!

[regnauld]

dont call me sir, sir. TheChild would suffice.

i stand with the idea that subjectivities are created never inherent nor given. It is dialectical relation (forgive the french) between man, its is most raw form and the world. thus when we perceive of ourselves as "I" as subjects as identities we are nothing more but perceiving a mirror (Lacan), or products of the institutions of power (foucault) or as Text ought to be deconstructed (Derrida) or as mere simulations, (baudrillard). The "I" is created with our interactions with the world, and we are changed by it.

i could not of course expound the detail of each one of those that i mentioned in this forum.

cheers!

Why did you say, there was never a subject? I mean in Psychology, I don't remember we have that subject. I want to call you sir coz you are a USC colleague of mine, aren't you?

[The_Child]

Why did you say, there was never a subject? I mean in Psychology, I don't remember we have that subject. I want to call you sir coz you are a USC colleague of mine, aren't you?

no. i am not.

but Subject, i refer to "Ego" the notion of the self. yes? so, one of these prejudices that there is a subject runs throughout the history of psychology (rational psychology) you might want to correct me on this. Perhaps, one of the more famous one is Descartes with his famous dictum of I think therefore i am, which has reduced man as thinking being, (also an extended being). Man is defined as a thinking being, which supports the earlier claim of Aristotle (man is a rational being), but either ways, this quality attributed to man, defines his Subjectivity, being a subject, as something given by God or endowed by Nature. that is what i do not agree with, because the conception fo the "I" "Ako" "Ego" "subject" is created by Man himself, we are created identities, or better yet, imagined identities.

[regnauld]

no. i am not.

but Subject, i refer to "Ego" the notion of the self. yes? so, one of these prejudices that there is a subject runs throughout the history of psychology (rational psychology) you might want to correct me on this. Perhaps, one of the more famous one is Descartes with his famous dictum of I think therefore i am, which has reduced man as thinking being, (also an extended being). Man is defined as a thinking being, which supports the earlier claim of Aristotle (man is a rational being), but either ways, this quality attributed to man, defines his Subjectivity, being a subject, as something given by God or endowed by Nature. that is what i do not agree with, because the conception fo the "I" "Ako" "Ego" "subject" is created by Man himself, we are created identities, or better yet, imagined identities.

So, which is more accurate, "I think therefore I am or I am therefore I think"?

[patrizekirsten]

dont call me sir, sir. TheChild would suffice.

i stand with the idea that subjectivities are created never inherent nor given. It is dialectical relation (forgive the french) between man, its is most raw form and the world. thus when we perceive of ourselves as "I" as subjects as identities we are nothing more but perceiving a mirror (Lacan), or products of the institutions of power (foucault) or as Text ought to be deconstructed (Derrida) or as mere simulations, (baudrillard). The "I" is created with our interactions with the world, and we are changed by it.

i could not of course expound the detail of each one of those that i mentioned in this forum.

cheers!

I wonder what recipe you would like to come up with those spices of Eastern and Western Philospy, wiht Foucault, with Lacan, Derrida etc...


You said "I" stand with the idea..are you not percieving this as merely mirror of your perception?
Who is that "I" that your referring to. Is ist subjective? And how can you expuond when it ought to be deconstructed?

I have not notice any dielectical relationship in your view perhaps dialectical pursuits if my brain serves me well..

And subejectivities are created never ineherent nor given...then from whence it come? how is it created.

But am most intrigue with the "I" who holds the idea of subjectivities..


Perhaps you can enlighten me more.. thanks