Self

[Family Court Strategies: When Your Partner Has BPD OR NPD Traits.]

Hi all! Reading in pingo's post about attachment styles raises a few other finer points in understanding my self. Heal used an expression that piqued my curiosity. He used "self" instead of self. I wondered why the quotation marks. He explained that there is more than one self. A true self and a false self. I am curious to see how others feel about the idea of more than one self. Perhaps a self that is constantly in transition and could appear as many selfs? Aren't there many valid "I"'s, while maybe false, nevertheless valid? In a nutshell, what is self?

[Perfidy]

Hi all! Reading in pingo's post about attachment styles raises a few other finer points in understanding my self. Heal used an expression that piqued my curiosity. He used "self" instead of self. I wondered why the quotation marks. He explained that there is more than one self. A true self and a false self. I am curious to see how others feel about the idea of more than one self. Perhaps a self that is constantly in transition and could appear as many selfs? Aren't there many valid "I"'s, while maybe false, nevertheless valid? In a nutshell, what is self?

[Blimblam]

Hi all! Reading in pingo's post about attachment styles raises a few other finer points in understanding my self. Heal used an expression that piqued my curiosity. He used "self" instead of self. I wondered why the quotation marks. He explained that there is more than one self. A true self and a false self. I am curious to see how others feel about the idea of more than one self. Perhaps a self that is constantly in transition and could appear as many selfs? Aren't there many valid "I"'s, while maybe false, nevertheless valid? In a nutshell, what is self?

There are many layers to the onion of the "self."  Their is the true self, idealized false self dichotomy of the object relations tradition then their is the true self that Jung puts forth which is like a universal oneness which is very Eastern conceptually.

The object relations true self is like the birth of the individual ego and sense of seperate self and it's connection to the deeper aspects of the psyche and the original sense of self which was defined by the primary caregivers. 

Then we have the false self which is the idealized idea of ones self.  Which is intimately linked to the persona and roles we take on in various communities and our status. 

[Perfidy]

So blim, from what you're saying we have many selfs? How is this possible? It would seem that even a false self is indeed valid.

[Blimblam]

So blim, from what you're saying we have many selfs? How is this possible? It would seem that even a false self is indeed valid.

What I am saying is the "self" is a word that describes different concepts in different traditions. 

I mean you can start getting into the time factor too. Like the ought ones life ones self has changed and progressed so much even the cells are completely different.

Then there is your self in context to a community.

Your bodily self. 

All the attachments and extensions of the idea of ones self. 

Basically it can mean a lot of different things.

[Perfidy]

How is it that we exist without one self? With no definition of self is it possible to definitely have a self? Self is purely conceptual and therefore has no real existence?

[BuildingFromScratch]

www.simplypsychology.org/psyche.html This very short article can help you understand the psyche and what that guy was talking about. As for a loss of self in lets say Buddhism. They don't really mean a loss of self, it's more like just being connected to the world more and so you feel and realize the connectedness of all things and feel more apart of the oneness of the universe. It doesn't mean you're not you any more.

Myself, I have an extremely overactive Superego and it's like I'm getting yelled at constantly. A borderline has a renegade ID and defunct egos too.

[Perfidy]

Interesting article building. Freud is always interesting. From what I gathered reading that there is no foundation in reality to explain the human personality. That the origin of personality is in delusion and unreasonable expectation. Does the article not state this? I'm referring to the id as defined by Freud, being pure id at birth.

[myself]

Great topic. Branches off in many directions (perhaps echoing how there are many possible selves).

It makes me think of how you can look into a mirror and be surprised that that is what you look like. Especially as we're growing older. What you see can be accepted, but is it the truest reality check or all we really are? There's external and internal, as well as other aspects of this already discussed. What's inside of us is quite a large piece of the bigger picture. Some would say we invent our own reality. Some say we're just swept along. Like the body can be a vehicle for self, can self be a vehicle for something greater?

From being in therapy I've looked into how we can get stuck with our concepts/hopes/pains/etc. of Before, During, and After. It really all comes down to ':)uring'. The other two can take us too far out of the moment. Letting go, which is something many of us personally reach for, basically means forgiving and not expecting. So what we have is This Moment. That's who we are. Possibly infinite layers. Your 'Self' is Now.

[Perfidy]

If any of us are to get anywhere with self help, self healing, self reflection, self reliance, self confidence, self esteem, self development or any other self improvement, shouldn't a working model of self be present? When I say to my self, I want to know my self, who am I speaking to? Who is doing the speaking?

[Blimblam]

How is it that we exist without one self? With no definition of self is it possible to definitely have a self? Self is purely conceptual and therefore has no real existence?

It's a case of borrowing philosophies that were formulated in a different language in a different time and all the different times that has come to happen. Basically it's just a lot of mistranslations that hasn't necesarily been ironed out.  Like that line about how the Inuit have 70 words for snow. 

Just like their are soo so many different translations of the bible.  Then one translation becomes the basis for newer versions but that original translation has many mistakes and mistranslations. 

[Blimblam]

Interesting article building. Freud is always interesting. From what I gathered reading that there is no foundation in reality to explain the human personality. That the origin of personality is in delusion and unreasonable expectation. Does the article not state this? I'm referring to the id as defined by Freud, being pure id at birth.

Freuds concept of the id is simplistic and a very dangerous one.  Freuds model can also be broken down like this superego- parent, ego-adult, id-child. If one looks at the schema modes there is a bunch of facets of the child. That's why in the object relations world it is

Necessary to ballencr Freud with Melanie Klein she views the child very differently than Freud.  To counterbalance melanie Klein you have to read winnicot.  Then if you want to be able to link this up with the world religions you have to read Carl Jung. 

[Perfidy]

There must be a self. We refer to a self casually. We refer to our self without thought, as though the knowledge of self is intuitive. We see it all of the time. Look at the posts on BPD family. Almost every single post has self in it. Lets find out what self really is.

[enlighten me]

I see our selfs like our wardrobe. We have our comfy clothes which is our core self. We have our work clothes which are our expected self who we think others want us to be. We have our going out clothes which is our self we would like to be.

It is in all of us like personalty traits. All these self/ traits make up the whole us... These selfs/ traits are in constant flux.

Just my spin on it

[Perfidy]

Enlighten me, that's a good analogy. Is there more to self? The parts that you describe, do they indicate that in themselves that there is something that unifies them, but isn't them?

[enlighten me]

Hi perfidy

like our wardrobe our self has many facets. The three I posed where just off the top of my head as the analogy was something that sprung into my head in a very raw form.

The reason I chose that is there is always our comfy clothes which no matter what the style is we always return to. As fashions change so does our wardrobe just like our personalities as we develop. We eventually hit a point where we are set in our ways and know what we like to wear so stick to it. Just like the older we get the more set in our ways we become.

[Perfidy]

Enlighten me, this topic should be viral in a community like bpdfamily. Wouldn't it be interesting to know our self well enough  that we would be able to steer clear of the causes and conditions that bring us to our knees and cause us to question our own sanity? You present interesting ideas of self. I like your analogy. There must be more. The comfortable self, you call the core self, would you consider that self to be the unification of all self?

[enlighten me]

I think our comfortable self depends on each individual. One of us may be more comfortable in a suit. Another in sweat pants. Someone else in board shorts. This is who we are.

Like an actor all our other clothes are a character we play. They are part of our overall self but more aspirations of who we would like to be. I think every man here would love to dress in a black tuxedo and when they did James bond would pop into their head. By putting on a tux it doesnt make you James Bond but you may aspire to have the charm and charisma.

As we grow our core self changes. We experience more and situations we were uncomfortable with arent so intimidating. We may progress from sweat pants to jeans. We may then go to a suit after that it could be back to sweat pants.

I think this is where pwBPD differ as their core self never changes. Their wardrobe fills up and becomes so full that the core self is lost. It never gets worn so never evolves.

[enlighten me]

Im sure someone better qualified than me could put it better and use proper pscology explanations. For me though its the easiest way to visualise it.

[Blimblam]

My ex was possessive about her things and the sanctity of her space.  Every object she had had meaning and a story behind it she was extremely sentimental in that way. So when she gifted or let borrow something of hers it always had a lot of meaning behind it for her. Her identity was very tied into to her attachments and she used that as a source of her independence and her frame of reference.  In that way she gave a lot of herself away to these things as if they possessd her.  Like she was balancing these reference points of her identity against each other to create the space that could form the shape of her identity.  This is not only something my ex would do but for her it just seemed to carry a level of life or death facing the possibility of oblivion more so than it does for most.  In a way though that confrontation with oblivion is to face the deepest parts of oneself and for her it was just under the surface, that part is burried way down deep in most people.

My exBPDbf kept all his memories in a box and on his phone. I found alot of things were sentimental to him such as our bad text messages. He said it showed my passion. He was such a weirdo. After breaking up and being NC, when I came by his houseone day he had the bday car on his dresser and a painting we did on his wall. He asked me to delete all the photos of us but he kept ever single one.

I personally don't like holding on to bad memeries so I deleted all text and most of our pics.

You see but for a pwBPD it is so much more than sentimentality.  It's like they give the animating force of their self into these objects and actions of giving to create attachments that form a reflection for them to be able to identify themself.  In that way they can be extremely giving and they just want to be appreciated for it.  This also leaves them extremely vulnerable to be taken advantage of.  Often I hear that they are just fake or it's all a mask but it's more like the people they are giving to to be able to create the reference point are fake and they validate that fakeness.

Here's some posts I made earlier I thought would be pertinent to the idea of the self. 

A lot of what we consider our self is who we percieve ourself as in relation to our attachments.  We seek out attachments to reflect back how we would like to percieve ourself as.  In those posts I mentioned it in a way a pwBPD creates their identity but it's a process everyone engages in.

[enlighten me]

Just to expand my wardrobe analogy.

when we are born we are naked. We have no self.

our parents clothe us and start giving us our sense of self.

As we grow we choose our own path. This is where nurture has an affect on us and why the early years are so Important to our development.

[Perfidy]

Enlighten me,

Self is so important that there must be no falseness in understanding it. Without a clear definition of self how can we even qualify ourselves  to think about our self? If when we are born there is no self, how then is it that we exist?

[enlighten me]

Enlighten me,

Self is so important that there must be no falseness in understanding it. Without a clear definition of self how can we even qualify ourselves  to think about our self? If when we are born there is no self, how then is it that we exist?

who we are is constamtly changing and driven by our experiences. wjen we are born we are an almost empty vessel. Our only experiences are from within the womb. Our DNA carries information and some believe it can even carry memories.

We are like a computor which only has a basic operating systrm imstalled.

Our self is there but in a very primitive form.

Self is to me who we are at this point in time.

Are you yhe same person you were last year or the year before? You are still you but your experiences have changed you.

[Perfidy]

If I am the same person, but I change as time changes, then how is it that the paradox exists, I am always the same person and a different person? Change does seem to be a dimension of self.

[Perfidy]

Enlighten me, what other dimensions or qualities compose self?

[enlighten me]

Everything.

every memory, every thought, every action. We are the sum of all our experiences.

You ask how you can be you and change. Well your car is your car. If you scratch it it is still your car. If you put a new stereo In it it is still your car. It can constantly change but still be your car.

Your self is relative to time at any given time you are yourself. Its just that self is different from any past or future self.

[Perfidy]

In the comparison of self to a car, can anything that is called a car be found among it's parts? Does self exist in the same way that a car does? What are other things that compose self? We know that a car has parts like tires, windows, seats, a steering wheel, engine, but none of those parts are a car. Does self exist in and of it's self?

[enlighten me]

It sounds more like you are after the soul rather than self.

self like a car is the sum of all parts.

[Perfidy]

No, the human self. Nothing supernatural, the self as it exists in reality. As we are born, we begin to age. The body is more where I am going.

[Perfidy]

Isn't the body also a part of self just as a car has a body?

[Perfidy]

In the body lies another paradox of self. When we are born we are complete beings. Self, mind and body are complete and whole. When the chord is cut, we begin aging. As the body ages, the body also grows. The mind grows. As we are growing the inevitable changes in life result in death. Sometimes sooner, sometimes later. We appear to exist in a kind of decaying state as we are growing. A paradox.