When I look inside myself I see nothing there. I don’t do it often. Even as I compose this, I’m giving my inner “self” a sidelong glance at best. The reason I can’t usually achieve such a moment of clarity is that my life is too busy and filled with distractions and duties, which are external things. In those times there’s an assumption of selfhood that makes everything easy. I like this, I don’t like this, I must do this, I can’t do that. The more accurate version would be “this moment’s instance of the various senses and processes of this pile of organs is compelled toward this or away from that.”
This is how “I’ve” thought of “myself” for some time now (alright no more quotes), but it’s not completely accurate. This article is an attempt at refining the idea. Yeah, I’m making it up as I go. We’ll see how that turns out.
Within that pile of organs and processes aforementioned, there is one function that could be reasonably termed a self. It is a program constructed over a lifetime of experiences and ideas. What is it? An idea of entity, of unity – that all the mess that comprises this body and mind are a singular being with inherent properties of desire, distaste, will / agency, etc. Functionally this is true, which is why I don’t see too egregious of a contradiction in using personal pronouns (possibly more often than I should). Factually, I don’t think it is true.
It’s the word “inherent” up there. Every desire or distaste and the will that chooses how to act on them, these are separable from the concept of entity, aren’t they? Simple artificial intelligences are told how to react to stimulus ahead of the stimulus being encountered. If this happens, then do that. We don’t think of those AIs as having a self, and we’re right. But who’s to say we have a self either? Let’s say my desire and distaste are like the roomba’s instructions to move toward this and away from that, and my will is the roomba’s programmed way of acting on those inputs. Where is the entity in this analogy?
I got meat like a roomba has plastic. That is a singular locus where all the sensations and imperatives that comprise me reside. That’s an observable self, and meets a reasonably basic definition of such. My problem is self as the ghost in the machine. I ain’t feelin’ it. Yes, one of the programs within me habitually acts the role of the self, constructs a narrative of entity out of disparate extremely destructible and mutable elements, but it seems so fake…
I don’t know if, in the course of writing this, I’ve gotten any closer to pinning my problem. Let me keep trying for a minute…
Naw. I’m running out of sauce for daily posting. Certainly, I’m out of queue. Let’s just see how much longer the pile of organs can keep this baloney rollin’…
–