Groucho Marxism

The ‘self’ is a complex concept that refers to an individual’s unique sense of being, encompassing their thoughts, identity, and consciousness. Although it is difficult to pin down a precise definition of the self, most of us believe we have one. Or that we are one. Actually, which is it? Already we are starting to see how the concept becomes problematic as soon as you begin to examine it. The self has a peculiar property that the more you look for it, the less tangible it seems. Where is this ‘self’ exactly? Most of us think of the self as a little person sitting inside our heads. But this can’t be right, because that little person must also have a self, and where do they sit? Inside the little person’s head? This is just sending us into an infinite regress.

Another possibility is to define the self to be identical to the body. This doesn’t really work either though, as most people would say that removing a part of their body – say, their leg – would not make them a fundamentally different person. Perhaps instead we can take the self to be identical to the brain. This seems a better definition, as removing a part of someone’s brain can actually turn someone into a different person, at least in the eyes of others. We see this happen when victims of severe head injuries undergo fundamental personality changes. ‘They’re just not in there anymore’ is a common refrain from distraught family members, suggesting that they believe the injury victim’s old self has been either modified or replaced.

There is a problem with the ‘self = brain’ definition too though. The brain is not static; it is changing constantly through a process called neuroplasticity, whereby it reorganizes its structure, functions, and connections in response to external stimuli. In contrast, the self is usually understood to be a static thing which stays the same throughout a person’s life (barring any serious head injuries). However, the vast majority of neurons in the brain are not replaced, meaning the neurons you are born with are the ones you have for your entire life. Perhaps then we should identify the self not with the brain as a whole, but with neurons within the brain? This doesn’t really work either, as brain function is a result of the interactions between neurons rather than of neurons themselves.

Whatever part or parts of the brain we try to associate with the self, we will always run into the same difficulty. It is the interactions between different parts of the brain that results in thoughts, identity, and consciousness, rather than the brain’s individual components. Maybe then we should consider the self as an emergent property of the complex system that is the brain. However if we are to take this as our understanding of self then we must abandon the intuitive idea of the self as a fixed entity. Thus we have arrived at an impasse. If we want the self to be a fixed entity, then we must abandon our intuitive idea of what the self is; conversely, if we want to keep this idea, we must abandon the notion of the self as a fixed entity.

The only way out of this impasse is to accept that the self, as usually understood, is an illusion. This illusion emerges from a collection of different, often conflicting, thoughts, memories, and bodily processes, rather than from a fixed part of the brain. This subjective experience of a solid, independent self is a product of the brain’s storytelling and perception-making, not an objective reality. The brain creates a narrative to make sense of the world, and the self is the main character in this story. It is a fabrication that emerges from the brain’s storytelling powers. There is no single, anatomically located self in the brain, as most of us like to imagine; instead, the feeling of self arises from a complex network of processes.

In a previous blog post I argued that free will, as usually understood, is also an illusion. The obvious parallel between the argument put forward there and the argument being put forward here is no coincidence. The illusion of self and the illusion of free will are two sides of the same coin. In fact the latter can be seen as a consequence of the former, as the illusion of free will stems from the idea of a fixed self which is in control of our actions. The illusion of self leads also to the notion of ego, whereby we see the world only from our own perspective. In another blog post I pointed out just how harmful this notion can be to our well-being and the well-being of those around us. Understanding that the self is an illusion is the first step in taming the ego, which in turn is the key to a happy life.