Who Am I?

How often do we ask ourselves, ‘Who am I?’ If we seriously ask this question, what sort of answer do we come up with?

We are not alone in asking this question. The question has been one of the most fundamental questions of western philosophy. The answer in most cases has been that I am I, or that I exist. The most famous statement of this conclusion is that of René Descartes who in 1637 published Discourse on the Method.

Writing in French, Descartes expressed his famous maxim as ‘Je pense, donc je suis’ (translated as ‘I think, therefore I am.’) Descartes considered this declaration to be his first principle – a “first principle” is a principle that cannot be deduced from any other assumption.

At first glance this principle seems logical, even intuitive. Yet, it is a circular argument, verging on tautological. The British progressive/symphonic rock band The Moody Blues articulated this tautology on their 1969 album On The Threshold Of A Dream. The confusion inherent in the maxim is expressed in the opening lyrics of that album; ‘I think… I think I am. Therefore I am!… I think…’

Of course, Descartes was not the first to express such an idea. The ancient Greek philosophers had been pondering existence, individuality, and the distinction between body and soul more than 2,000 years earlier. Aristotle, for instance, declared that ‘…whenever we perceive, we are conscious that we perceive, and whenever we think, we are conscious that we think, and to be conscious that we are perceiving or thinking is to be conscious that we exist…’

The existence of an independent and autonomous self (the “I”) has underpinned western worldviews ever since. Over the past few centuries, the I has become a cult of individualism, and more latterly, toxic individualism, narcissism, and the rise of the rugged individual.

Descartes maxim contains the roots of this individualism within it – “I” think, therefore “I” am. The phrase begins and ends with an individualistic notion of being in the world. The phrase did not immediately kick-start the cult of the individual, but it is one of the foundations of that cult.

We can recognise the inherent individualism within Descartes’ principle by contrasting it with two other, lesser known in western cultures, assumptions. The Zulu concept of ubuntu is especially vivid. Desmond Tutu (the South African Archbishop and opponent of apartheid) describes ubuntu as, ‘the philosophy and belief that a person is only a person through other people. In other words, we are human only in relation to other humans. Our humanity is bound up in one another … This interconnectedness is the very root of who we are.’¹ Tutu begins from a place of relationship between people as the root of who we are, even as individuals.

In a different part of the world, and another religious tradition, the Vietnamese Buddhist monk, Thich Nhat Hanh, coined the term interbeing to sum up his understanding of the way in which relationship is at the heart of who we are. He defines interbeing as, ‘the many in the one, and the one containing the many.’ In a nod to Descartes, he articulates it as a first principle: ‘I am, therefore you are. You are, therefore I am. We inter-are.’²

These two expressions of the self are at odds with the western view, and point to a philosophical and psychological road that western thought failed to travel upon.

During the 20^th century the westernised path of individualism incorporated a number of philosophical ideas and spawned others, such as existentialism, one form of anarchism, libertarianism, and Ann Raynd’s objectivism. Together, these ideas paved the road towards the toxic individualism, egocentrism, and narcissism.

The relationship understanding of who I am, reflected in ubuntu and interbeing were not only rejected, but never considered during the construction of individualism. Community, society, the public good, and even kinship were all discarded along the way. By 1987, the then Prime Minister of the UK, Margaret Thatcher, was able to paraphrase Ann Raynd’s objectivism with the words, ‘There’s no such thing as society.’

The over-identification today with the I has resulted in the wanton destruction of ecosystems, polarisation and hatred of one another, and paradoxically, individuals unable to cope who attempt to escape with drugs, alcohol, fast cars, inordinate wealth, and in its extreme, self-harm and suicide.

We, individually, culturally, and socially, have to reconsider the fundamental philosophical and psychological question:

Who am I?

Notes:

1. Desmond and Mpho Tutu, The Book of Forgiving, William Collins, London, 2014

2. Thich Nhat Hanh, Interbeing: Fourteen Guidelines for Engaged Buddhism, 1987