Why is the I so crucial in human development?

  • Thread starter Thread starter coberst
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the significance of the pronoun "I" in human development, particularly in relation to self-awareness and consciousness. Participants explore the transition from perceiving oneself as "me" to "I," examining its implications for identity, self-control, and the formation of values. The conversation touches on psychological, philosophical, and linguistic aspects of this transition.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that a child's understanding of self evolves from "me" to "I," indicating a shift from being an object to becoming an executive subject capable of self-reflection.
  • Another participant posits that early living creatures may have had a rudimentary sense of "I" when they began to model their environment, implying a link between self-awareness and environmental interaction.
  • A different viewpoint argues that "me" and "I" represent distinct states, with "me" being a more fundamental aspect of self that the "I" attempts to transcend, suggesting a conflict between conscious and unconscious identities.
  • One participant references Becker's work, noting the universal order of self-awareness development from "me" to "I" and its implications for human evolution and values.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between "me" and "I," with some suggesting a linear progression while others argue for a more complex interaction. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing perspectives on the nature of self-awareness.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexity of the concepts involved, including the psychological and philosophical implications of self-identity, but do not resolve the underlying assumptions or definitions of "me" and "I."

coberst
Messages
305
Reaction score
0
When me becomes I

A child’s symbolic action world is built from the outside in. We are sad because we cry; we do not cry because we are sad. Only when we ‘look’ at our self do we know what is going on.

A vital fact about all objects is that there is both an inside and an outside. We are born recognizing our self as a ‘me’. The ‘me’ is an object before ‘me’ becomes ‘I’, i.e. an executive subject. Only after this happens in an infant’s life can s/he “back away” from her or him self.

The child discovers first that s/he is a social product. Perhaps this will show us why we are so often mere puppets jerked around by alien symbols and sounds. Perhaps this is why we are so often just blind ideologues (blindly partisan).

In order to separate the ego from the world it seems that the ego must have a rallying point. It must have a flag about which to rally. That flag is the “I”. The pronoun ‘I’ is the symbolic rallying point for the human’s ego; it is the precise designation of self-hood. It is concluded by those who study such matters that the ‘I’ “must take shape linguistically”. The self or ego “is largely a verbal edifice”.

“The “I” signals nothing less than the beginning of the birth of values into a world of powerful caprice…The personal pronoun is the rallying point for self-consciousness.” The wedding of the nervous ability to delay response, with the pronoun “I”, unleashed a new type of animal; the human species began. The ‘I’ represents the birth of values.

Upon the discovery of the “I” the infant human becomes a precise form, which is the focus of self-control. The creatures previous to the arrival of humans in the chain of evolution had an instinctive center within itself. When our species discovered the “I” and its associated self-control centers a dual reality occurred. “The animal not only loses its instinctive center within itself; it also becomes somewhat split against itself.”

Becker, the winner of the Pulitzer for “The Birth and Death of Meaning”, notes that Kant was perhaps the first to impress upon us the importance of the fact that the infant becomes conscious first of itself as a “me” and then only as “I”. This order of discover has been shown to be universal.

I have noticed when an infant becomes an I, when all of a sudden they behave in a self-conscious manner. Have you noticed such a change taking place in a child?

Why is ‘I’ capitalized and ‘me’ is not?

Quotes from “The Birth and Death of Meaning”—Ernest Becker
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Early living creatures with a brain were probably able to simulate certain events and make models of their environment to varying degree of accuracy. When the individual itself becomes a part of that model, it could be argued that the notion of 'I' first appears.
 
Moridin

You might be correct. Becoming part of the model is becoming self-conscious.
 
coberst said:
...When me becomes I...
imo, "me" never becomes "I". The action of prayer is the I trying to contact the me. The I must accept that there is something greater than itself, which is the me, but the I refuses to acknowledge the me as having any control, thus the I creates the gods as the salvation of the I from the true power and control of the me. Only the me has free will, but the I falsely takes credit for having free will. In summary, the "me" is not a becoming of the "I"...I hold that "the me" + "the I" = "the you", a dialectic entanglement of the unconscious and conscious.
 

Similar threads

Replies
45
Views
6K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
17K