i remember writing about authenticity a little while ago and i feel like a fraud because i'm coming to realize that i am not exactly authentic in my everyday interactions. i often avoid situations that would cause too much of a stirrup when, in the end, it probably just builds up.
i've also come to realize that i am most often torn between doing and being. i have this desire, it seems, of appearing competent and capable, of looking like i am on top of things. there is something that i need to prove, but what? and to whom? i chose the savoir-faire (knowing to do) over the savoir-etre (knowing to be). and that seems to be the source of many little internal conflicts.
it reminds me of a excerpt from the little prince where he talks about how people define themselves by their jobs, their income or the kind of home they live in. of course, it probably simplifies things to categorize people that way.
but where does one stops doing and starts being in a society that mostly definites people by the income they generate and the type of work they do? and why do i so quickly fall into these types of dynamics without even being concious of it?
posted by cynicalcosmopolitan @ 12:02 PM
3 comments
3 Comments:
not that i have any answers, but i think it has a lot to do with the fact that we are social beings. and when you take the social-constructivist perspective, then i sometimes wonder whether an authentic self even exists. (sometimes, i feel that i am most mysterious to myself.)
"there is something that i need to prove, but what? and to whom?" is a question i have asked myself and have been told by people who have lived life longer than me that there really is no answer. you could come up with one, but its not going to be satisfactory. perhaps the difference lies in being aware of this. in knowing what youre doing. that self that self-reflects.
you know, 'self' is a word i have a problem with. because it seems that in most contexts, people refer to 'the self' or 'their self' almost as if it was a distinct entity. as if it resided outside of them and they thus had lost control over the way it functions.
as to whether an authentic self exists, well that's a good question. i think the self remains authentic in itself, it can only be authentic. it merely becomes inauthentic when you chose consciously or not to alter its external representation. and, that why you feel internal conflict.
the internal authentic self vs the external (altered) expression of this very self.
gosh, i think i've succesfully become more abstract than you.
love,
-j.
yes, i think words like 'self' and 'identity' are problematic precisely for the reasons you have mentioned.
i agree that the self can only be authentic in itself, but i cant help but think that this authentic self is also socially constructed. we seem to think of it as being independent and talk about it that way, esp when it gets constrained by external factors. maybe because it constitutes our unconscious/subconscious part? ...i dont know.
Post a Comment
<< Home