How can things like "individual persons" exist?

[blase6]

How can there be a “you” alongside “me?” I came up with this thought when I was very little (about 4 or 5) and I was very confused. I tried to ask this to my mom, but with the vocabulary and verbal skill of a 5 year old, it was fruitless. She just said that I was being selfish, and to this day I still can’t tell what she thought I meant.

I was confused with the idea of individual persons existing, because I had only the awareness of myself, and not the awareness that other people supposedly had. In this writing is repeatedly being referred back to something called “I,” but what is an “I?” Obviously I would say “I am a person,” understanding a “person” to be a “rational thing.” And this thing is experiencing the physical world through an individual body. But why is this rational thing not experiencing a rational awareness assumed to belong to another person, and only experiencing the physical properties of the body of another person, like speech and touch?

We associate this rational awareness with the existence of a spirit, but how can we be certain that this is true, when we have only our senses and internal thoughts? Why can’t this “I” be the product of the physical world, even if the “I” can’t understand this?

 

[GEddie]

The “I” and the “you” arise because we are minded bodies.

You are a mind and body; so am I; we have separate bodies, so are separate people.

ICXC NIKA.

 

[blase6]

The “I” and the “you” arise because we are minded bodies.

You are a mind and body; so am I; we have separate bodies, so are separate people.

ICXC NIKA.

You are effectively making the claim that the mind is intrinsically separate from the body, without any argument to back it up.

 

[GEddie]

You are effectively making the claim that the mind is intrinsically separate from the body, without any argument to back it up.

It may have sounded that way; my oops.

Instead of “mind and body” I should have said “minded body”. The two go together.

Because each mind is fitted to or grown in its body, separate bodies require separate minds, or “selfs.”

ICXC NIKA.

 

[blase6]

It may have sounded that way; my oops.

Instead of “mind and body” I should have said “minded body”. The two go together.

Because each mind is fitted to or grown in its body, separate bodies require separate minds, or “selfs.”

ICXC NIKA.

You are not taking into account that Catholics also believe that a person includes a spirit, unless you are equating “mind” with “spirit,” something I do not believe is necessarily true. As far as I can tell the mind may be only the manifestation of bodily processes, while the spirit is a more subtle part of one’s being than bodily and mental awareness. And you still haven’t tried to explain how it makes sense that persons can exist.

 

[Michael19682]

It’s a mystery.
As for the comment about the Mom saying it was selfish, probably just a reaction to what she perceived as imbalanced individualism; meaning, too much emphasis on the psychologically individuated self as opposed to the actualized self in community. We are all both individuals and integrated parts of the body of Christ.

 

[Michael19682]

You are not taking into account that Catholics also believe that a person includes a spirit, unless you are equating “mind” with “spirit,” something I do not believe is necessarily true. As far as I can tell the mind may be only the manifestation of bodily processes, while the spirit is a more subtle part of one’s being than bodily and mental awareness. And you still haven’t tried to explain how it makes sense that persons can exist.

HI Blase6,

You might very well say that the mind is nothing other than a name for certain brain processes, let alone a “manifestation”.

 

[GEddie]

You are not taking into account that Catholics also believe that a person includes a spirit, unless you are equating “mind” with “spirit,” something I do not believe is necessarily true. As far as I can tell the mind may be only the manifestation of bodily processes, while the spirit is a more subtle part of one’s being than bodily and mental awareness. And you still haven’t tried to explain how it makes sense that persons can exist.

I would equate spirit with soul, of which the mind is a part, but needs the live human head to express it, so inseparable.

If mind really were limited to bodily processes, then there can be no human afterlife, because your mind makes you “you” and that “you” would perish in your dead head!

In French (which until recently had no word for mind), “esprit” is often used as a synonym for mind.

To me, it is easy. You are a minded body/embodied mind. We call this assembled being a person. Because there are separate bodies, there must be separate persons.

I cannot be you, nor you me, because I cannot think your thoughts or move your limbs, nor you mine.

Maybe I just cannot say it philosophically enough.

ICXC NIKA.

 

[blase6]

It’s a mystery.
As for the comment about the Mom saying it was selfish, probably just a reaction to what she perceived as imbalanced individualism; meaning, too much emphasis on the psychologically individuated self as opposed to the actualized self in community. We are all both individuals and integrated parts of the body of Christ.

Yeah, “It’s a mystery” probably applies to most of my problems with Church beliefs…Oh well, I can’t understand everything because I am not infinitely wise. I never understood how people could talk about how they have a personal relationship with God and such. I am all alone in my mind, and interaction with people only makes this more apparent to me.

 

[Michael19682]

Yeah, “It’s a mystery” probably applies to most of my problems with Church beliefs…Oh well, I can’t understand everything because I am not infinitely wise. I never understood how people could talk about how they have a personal relationship with God and such. I am all alone in my mind, and interaction with people only makes this more apparent to me.

Don’t despair blase6. For me mysterious answer refers to the gift of understanding and knowledge, one of the 7 gifts of the holy spirit of God. When knowledge strengthens we can realize that the gift is God himself and therefore inexpressible. Yet you will be able to utilize your gift practically to know things and comprehend them profoundly. You will be filled with joy and confidence before God, because you will know his nature, his spirit, love, more profoundly in your heart. One of the great things of the scriptures is to inform us that all is reducible to one thing, the Holy Cross, which we bear in our hearts when we unify our suffering with his. PRAY FOR KNOWLEDGE. You don’t need to be infinitely wise, only wise enough to know what you are meant to know for your joy and salvation in heaven. We are all dumb clucks when we dare compare ourselves, to God and the Saints.

1 Cor 12:7-11
7 To each individual the manifestation of the Spirit is given for some benefit.
8 To one is given through the Spirit the expression of wisdom; to another the expression of knowledge according to the same Spirit;
9 to another faith by the same Spirit; to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit;
10 to another mighty deeds; to another prophecy; to another discernment of spirits; to another varieties of tongues; to another interpretation of tongues.
11 But one and the same Spirit produces all of these, distributing them individually to each person as he wishes.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

How can there be a “you” alongside “me?” I came up with this thought when I was very little (about 4 or 5) and I was very confused. I tried to ask this to my mom, but with the vocabulary and verbal skill of a 5 year old, it was fruitless. She just said that I was being selfish, and to this day I still can’t tell what she thought I meant.

I was confused with the idea of individual persons existing, because I had only the awareness of myself, and not the awareness that other people supposedly had. In this writing is repeatedly being referred back to something called “I,” but what is an “I?” Obviously I would say “I am a person,” understanding a “person” to be a “rational thing.” And this thing is experiencing the physical world through an individual body. But why is this rational thing not experiencing a rational awareness assumed to belong to another person, and only experiencing the physical properties of the body of another person, like speech and touch?

We associate this rational awareness with the existence of a spirit, but how can we be certain that this is true, when we have only our senses and internal thoughts? Why can’t this “I” be the product of the physical world, even if the “I” can’t understand this?

For one thing God said so in the Bible, it is all about individual people he said he created. Secondly, the Church says so. End of argument. Live by faith or slip into darkness.

Linus2nd

 

[oldcelt]

For one thing God said so in the Bible, it is all about individual people he said he created. Secondly, the Church says so. End of argument. Live by faith or slip into darkness.

Linus2nd

So, you have no positive answer. Thank you for your honesty Linus.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

So, you have no positive answer. Thank you for your honesty Linus.

It really is the only certain answer. I could appeal to common experience or argue endlessly philosophically but we have done that here dozens of times. If a person does not recognize himself as a unique person that would seem to rule out common experience for that particular person. Personally, if I were not my own person, exclusively, I would know it. But apparently some people don’t see that as convincing.

Linus2nd

 

[oldcelt]

It really is the only certain answer. I could appeal to common experience or argue endlessly from philosophically but we have done that here dozens of times.

Linus2nd

There are multiple answers for the unseen and that that cannot be studied rationally. Yours is as valid as mine…but, of course, you know that.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

There are multiple answers for the unseen and that that cannot be studied rationally. Yours is as valid as mine…but, of course, you know that.

No, I know that mine is correct so I dismiss any " earthly " explanation. I don’t intend to offend but we ( Christians ) live by faith, not by opinion, even very learned ones. God does not lie and neither does the Church.

Linus2nd

 

[oldcelt]

No, I know that mine is correct so I dismiss any " earthly " explanation. I don’t intend to offend but we ( Christians ) live by faith, not by opinion, even very learned ones. God does not lie and neither does the Church.

Linus2nd

Good for you for sticking to your guns…and I agree with your summation, just not the conclusions.

Be well

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Good for you for sticking to your guns…and I agree with your summation, just not the conclusions.

Be well

Have you read the Catechism, the Bible?

God Bless

Linus2nd

 

[Michael19682]

Good for you for sticking to your guns…and I agree with your summation, just not the conclusions.

Be well

In the absence of grounding faith, of what use is such force to the catechumen; baptized or not!

 

[Michael19682]

For one thing God said so in the Bible, it is all about individual people he said he created. Secondly, the Church says so. End of argument. Live by faith or slip into darkness.

Linus2nd

One of the difficulties here is that we more commonly “walk” by faith and always live by every word that comes from the mouth of God. In other words, Jesus is our light and our life. (It would be more precise) to say receive the word of God made flesh or else risk slipping into darkness; that latter place being a place whereto the spirit of God does not take us.

 

[Michael19682]

So, you have no positive answer. Thank you for your honesty Linus.

I’m curious oldcelt, in your signature you quote a great, great man indeed. Can you explicate for us in modest terms what Lincoln’s spirit means by the words “…see the right”?