Originally, I was going to make an “One Year as an Atheist” thread, and recount the things that stayed the same, and the things that changed in my life. As I was writing, I perceived that the only original subject in there, was me discovering a new side of myself, that I would deem, more of my ‘true self’. I was raised catholic and adopted many conservative positions on political and religious issues. However, there were a few positions, that I never adopted, even at a young age, things like the classic opposition to gay marriage (which I believe was my potential ‘true self’, resisting these indoctrinations). As I became older, I became a little more culturally liberal on my own, then non-religious, then a little over a year ago, an atheist. As I lost these indoctrinated positions, I actually began looking at the world for what it really was, and I no longer saw some spiritual essence in everything I laid my eyes upon. I listened to both sides of all of the issues that I could, and made up my own mind. It dawned on me, that I had possibly become more of my ‘true self’. I was comprised of my true beliefs, and use of my true reasoning faculties, to observe the world for the first time. I truly believe that in order to become a version of your ‘true self’, one must become an atheist. No matter how much of a realist you think you are, if you believe a god intervenes in the world and that you have a personal relationship with this entity, you cannot see things the way they really are, in my opinion.
One short, silly example of a suppressed aspect of my true self is that, I thought designs of skulls were cool, but suppressed my true desires to wear clothing with skulls on them, because this idea was implanted into my head that I shouldn’t like those designs, because they are demonic by nature. Now, I feel I am who I am. I, then thought how much further can I take this? If, I was raised in a different time, by different parents, in a different environment, with a different government, would I be a different person? One may argue, that this would truly not be me, and I would respect that stance. Although, I feel, that in some ways that I would be different. To me, in many ways, we are products of our environment, but of course some people can fight against this, like what Ayaan Hirsi Ali did, but many submit to such conditions. If, theoretically, I was raised on a different planet, I may be dissimilar to my ‘true self’ on earth. If, I was raised in times of slavery in the U.S., even as an atheist, I’m not sure if I’d think that slavery was wrong. I’d like to think that I’d be repulsed by the thought of slavery, but I don’t know for sure. Of course, with my morals, (compassion being part of those) I can’t imagine seeing someone being abused, and treated like property, and not think something was highly immoral with that. If, I was raised in a cannibalistic society, with no outside contact, would my true self be a cannibal? After deciding that the best way to be a version of the ‘true self’, would be an atheist, and that it would also depend on the extent of your understanding of your environment as a whole, I decided to look up material on the true self, and I only came up with this video (5 min.):
The basic premise that is argued is: the true self is either your beliefs and your critical thinking OR your emotions and desires. Going by this disputation, I defend that within a particular environment, while being exposed to as much information as possible about your environment, that your beliefs and critical thinking skills consist of your true self, as opposed to your emotions and desires. I argue that, firmly establishing a moral compass, using observation and your emotions, one can use their emotions to formulate their beliefs. I think that it is these beliefs, only when put into action, become your true self, when applying the argument made by the video. The problem for me, is the arguments that I’ve made earlier, show that we can change, based upon events that take place. And, there may be events that take place in the future, that change my beliefs on a matter. It is for this reason, that I { truly
} believe that a true self cannot completely exist. Do you think there can be a true self, and what do you think that it is? Or, can it only exist in a particular scenario? Or, is the true self, merely an illusion? Can a true self change or does it have to be fixed?
Some of you may ask to define a true self, and rightfully so, but I think there are going to be many different opinions on that matter. You may want to use the video or comment on my thoughts. Thank you for taking the time to read and respond.
One short, silly example of a suppressed aspect of my true self is that, I thought designs of skulls were cool, but suppressed my true desires to wear clothing with skulls on them, because this idea was implanted into my head that I shouldn’t like those designs, because they are demonic by nature. Now, I feel I am who I am. I, then thought how much further can I take this? If, I was raised in a different time, by different parents, in a different environment, with a different government, would I be a different person? One may argue, that this would truly not be me, and I would respect that stance. Although, I feel, that in some ways that I would be different. To me, in many ways, we are products of our environment, but of course some people can fight against this, like what Ayaan Hirsi Ali did, but many submit to such conditions. If, theoretically, I was raised on a different planet, I may be dissimilar to my ‘true self’ on earth. If, I was raised in times of slavery in the U.S., even as an atheist, I’m not sure if I’d think that slavery was wrong. I’d like to think that I’d be repulsed by the thought of slavery, but I don’t know for sure. Of course, with my morals, (compassion being part of those) I can’t imagine seeing someone being abused, and treated like property, and not think something was highly immoral with that. If, I was raised in a cannibalistic society, with no outside contact, would my true self be a cannibal? After deciding that the best way to be a version of the ‘true self’, would be an atheist, and that it would also depend on the extent of your understanding of your environment as a whole, I decided to look up material on the true self, and I only came up with this video (5 min.):
The basic premise that is argued is: the true self is either your beliefs and your critical thinking OR your emotions and desires. Going by this disputation, I defend that within a particular environment, while being exposed to as much information as possible about your environment, that your beliefs and critical thinking skills consist of your true self, as opposed to your emotions and desires. I argue that, firmly establishing a moral compass, using observation and your emotions, one can use their emotions to formulate their beliefs. I think that it is these beliefs, only when put into action, become your true self, when applying the argument made by the video. The problem for me, is the arguments that I’ve made earlier, show that we can change, based upon events that take place. And, there may be events that take place in the future, that change my beliefs on a matter. It is for this reason, that I { truly
} believe that a true self cannot completely exist. Do you think there can be a true self, and what do you think that it is? Or, can it only exist in a particular scenario? Or, is the true self, merely an illusion? Can a true self change or does it have to be fixed?Some of you may ask to define a true self, and rightfully so, but I think there are going to be many different opinions on that matter. You may want to use the video or comment on my thoughts. Thank you for taking the time to read and respond.
Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.' -Isaac Asimov-
