Inventing the Self

Making the right question.

October 29th, 2013 by Gabriel R. Seijo · 2 Comments

The juxtaposition between this week’s readings seems favorable to the process in which we find ourselves in the writing activity. On the one hand, a very academic and scientific scrutinizing of different ways in which to manipulate or understand the biological process of voice hearing; on the other hand a personal recount of how to manipulate and understand voice hearing through a psychological or holistic standpoint. The first, seemingly super technologically advanced, not necessarily reaching a conclusive and desirable effect; and the second having the capacity to be confidently helpful when considering a humane approach to a very human difficulty. This chapter and lecture rectified the need for balance, and a broader standpoint in order to achieve a better understanding of a complex query. Made me think of how the last class discussion lead to the point of knowing that the right question, will lead to a more confident answer.

I share Jason’s recalling of Alva Noe’s “something else going on”. The grasp for understanding the self seems unreachable from any of the standpoints that have been evaluated because the rhetoric always falls short. The self always seems to have the ability to elude a definite statement once the efforts within a school of thought have been exhausted. There is so much that biology can do, and there is also as much as psychology or philosophy can. In this sense, May’s recognition of the fact that insistent voices must have something important to say, makes me think that the insistent underachievement to finding the self within specific academic specters can only tell us that it is not to be found uniquely in any of them. In other words if consistently the self cannot be found through biology, psychology, philosophy, anthropology or any other ology individually, then maybe it never will. I guess it is just a matter of waiting for someone to make the right question.

Tags: Uncategorized

2 responses so far ↓

  • Adam Wagner // Oct 30th 2013 at 2:06 pm

    I love this. It is exactly what I have been getting at all class. The self is a concept and that is specifically why all of these disciplines fall short, because it is not a tangible thing to be found. Attempting to define these broad concepts (self, love, justice) have led to hundreds of years of debate, with no definite answer. Similar to some of our writing projects, I’m sure, they are too broad to clearly define and thus impossible to accomplish singularly. That is why biology and neuroscience fails; that is why psychology fails; that is why philosophy fails. It’s not one of these things, it’s all of these things. I believe there are biological underpinnings and processes that can lead to every aspect of the concept self, however, they are not an interconnected network that produces it unless you zoom way out and include life itself (environment, biology, etc…) as the interconnected network in which case we are just back to broad.

  • Yana Walton // Oct 30th 2013 at 5:26 pm

    While I too greatly enjoyed May’s video, I agree with your implication that May might be making an unfounded assumption in the “recognition of the fact that insistent voices must have something important to say.” While this may be true, it also may not – and the desire to add meaning to these voices as a way of dealing with them – even in alternative ways – shows our impulse to explain phenomena empirically – even as we negate the ways that all the “ologies” have failed to help folks with AVN (or have failed to identify the self). We just aren’t cool with not knowing.

Skip to toolbar