Who Is Speaking To Whom?


from a line in William James'
The Principles of Psychology

mashed graphics from cartoonist
Ray Moore's The Phantom


You as you really are is speaking to the other as they really are. However, you intend to address the other as you see them, and believe the other is speaking to the you you see yourself as. Simple, huh?
Posted by Ryan McCormac on 12/6/2009 2:51:20 AM
Fortunately I have solved the dilemma by typing on my computer which knows nothing of William James and possesses no consciousness. Although when it is connected to the Internet all available knowledge concerning William James is readily available to me and the Internet itself has surpassed the level of complexity found in the human brain...AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Posted by Michael on 12/15/2009 3:36:19 PM
this thing is wrong, but only because between what other people see you as and what you see yourself as, there is no "real you".
Posted by colin thorpe on 12/15/2009 4:39:50 PM
Let us label the six entities. The self-perceptions of the self: S1, S2 The perceptions of the other: O1, O2 The true selves: T1, T2 T1 has an intention. S1 then sends a message to O2 based loosely on this intention. The message is transferred through O1 and intercepted by S2. S2 then processes it and sends it to T2.
Posted by Michael Dickens on 12/15/2009 7:06:20 PM
colin, whilst i see ur point, i disagree because the 'real you' is the conductor of what you see yourself as and what you project yourself as to others. so the 'real you' is always present.
Posted by tony on 12/15/2009 9:31:32 PM
what if... as he sees himself == as he really is? hmmmmmmm
Posted by Sleepers on 12/16/2009 12:13:57 AM
what if...as he sees himself == as he really is? ...
Posted by Sleepers on 12/16/2009 12:15:18 AM
the real self is the true self whilst other being mere projections or extensions of it - and there could be other abstracts of this self too, say, how the person would 'like' to see himself ... hence all of the projections are actually the real self
Posted by anonymous on 12/16/2009 5:01:49 AM
Psychology: Sounds like science. Smells like bull$hit.
Posted by tom on 12/16/2009 2:02:51 PM
*gasp* who said that?
Posted by Schizophrenic on 12/20/2009 4:16:39 PM
It's enough just to concentrate on getting across what I am trying to say, without figuring out what and how I am doing it, let alone what the reactions of the 'other' are going to be, or my interpretation of their interpretation. Maybe we just don't talk or hear anyone but our 'SELVES'. Hopefully I've only got two of those left, my ego, and my hope to find God or my True Self. (Take from this what you Will! It will make James happy)
Posted by loreenlee on 12/22/2009 8:03:14 AM
isn't who we really are just a combination of who we see and who they see?
Posted by unknown on 12/23/2009 2:15:44 AM
That 's the reason that the olden Indian individual was expected to 'recite and introduction' before he addressed another person as 'I am - that is the son of So and So.../ etc... After all all societal transactions from Domestc/familial to the democratic/political are as between 'socially cognizable individuals/organizations'. For neither a psuchic person or a philosophical do not interact with others - the different reasons being the former is a narcicisst [capable of recognizing and loving only oneself]and the latter a recluse[indifferent towardsthe world around - by choice].
Posted by vedapushpa on 1/3/2010 7:25:56 PM
We have two brain hemispheres that alternate dominance depending on our "state" of consciousness. Conversation, writing, and editing use very different areas of the brain. We may find ourselves thinking or saying: "Did I just say that out loud?" "What was I talking about?" "I can't believe I wrote that, I'm a genius (or an idiot)."
Posted by Jim Gauthier on 2/7/2010 5:31:04 AM
I think what james is trying to say is that we have a narrow perception, especially whilst in any relation with another human. He is assuming that what is "real" about us is born before what we call "consciousness" is born, because we existed during times that almost everyone doesnt remember (the earliest years). What is really "us" has lived with us for ages before we could think as we do now. There is, based on our ego and motivations, someone we believe ourselves to be... someone we share with others during interaction. We can say this is true because when one is alone, the pressures of society are released, triggering all sorts of pent up emotions and tendecies. There is the perception of others, though this really has nothing to do with who WE are. My disagreeance with James' idea is in that. He suggests that there is a part of who WE are, naturally and deeply, that ultimately lives within others. I think that perception cannot EVER leave the bounds of ones own individual concsiousness, and therefore the idea of perception and identity cannot be related, especially in this way. He has a good point, though i think he tries to take his idea further than it can be taken.
Posted by Jon Laxton on 2/18/2010 12:57:14 AM
There is also the facade-person you try to present to the other person (rather than the one you really are, or the one you believe you are.) So eight. RD Laing adds: also there is the version of you that the other person sees when they look at you (and, if you can predict accurately how their perceptions differ from your desired facade, it lets you take appropriate small actions to tweak their viewpoint into perceiving the facade-self you wish to project.) Ten! RD Laing spiral: you imagine that the other person is noticing you perceive a warped version of themselves, but the other person knows that you're trying to predict what you're seeing them see you see, so then they try to predict what you think they think you think they think you think that they're seeing. That way they can use this prediction and try to fool you into thinking that you've successfully fooled them into seeing you in the way that you wish, when actually the fooler is being led on a merry chase. But you suspect that this is happening, so you let them go on thinking that they've fooled you into imagining that you've fooled them. Once you've evolved mirror-neurons, you can point them at each other to form an infinite tunnel of repeated reflections.
Posted by bill beaty on 2/24/2010 2:39:41 AM
Maybe the person is blind.
Posted by jack on 3/11/2010 12:32:15 PM
But then if these six people also see six people then who was people?
Posted by rudolf on 4/10/2010 4:49:55 PM
What he is actual saying directly to the intelectually impaired who over educated to copmesate is, you are nothing more then bones and flesh carrying your exagerated ego's.unfortunately, and it a real shame there aren't enough large carnivours around.
Posted by Doug Platts on 10/3/2010 4:11:43 AM
Chase your tails in circles like this, and when you stop you find there is no you.
Posted by yoga on 10/4/2010 3:39:07 PM
I say there is no category of "how one 'really' is. Personal identity and private identity are Assessments/Declarations (simply our opinions of ourselves and others) and, not real. Therefor, there are only four identities at the table when two are conversing
Posted by Tony Love on 11/20/2010 5:55:14 PM
Martin Buber presents something analogous when he says we relate to the world as I-Thou(when we are real}, and we see the other as real, unique,and precious and this can apply to a person, place or thing ; I-It(when we're simply dealing with an object,a thing. as when we're selling, or working with something.
Posted by Atticus on 1/4/2011 6:33:18 PM
why is colonel sanders pondering over this instead of making fried chicken?
Posted by jennxsomething on 2/6/2011 10:28:15 PM
LMFAO Colonel Sanders.... I think what this dude is trying to say is that when people talk to someone else they have a perception of who they are talking to but it is different from what that person thinks he is and that is different from what he really is. BUT I have one problem with this. I believe a person is who he believes he is because if he is not, then how can the real him be real if he does not think he is that?
Posted by McLovin11 on 2/13/2011 4:02:08 AM
Most conversations are interpolations of personalized qualia. You almost never say in plain language who you really are.
Posted by Michael Lloyd on 2/14/2011 4:44:53 AM
There are ACTUALLY 8 people there. There is each as he/she sees themselves, there is each as the other sees him/her, there is each as he/she really is, and there is each as he/she wishes they actually were.
Posted by lori on 8/31/2015 9:40:02 PM

Post a Comment


Email: (verification only, not displayed)  



Sponsored Links

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links