NationStates Jolt Archive

Choose from the poll an answer that best describes your person. "I am..."

I know that we are all a combination of the above, but which stands out the most when you think of your person.

I put my mind, since I don't consider "feeling" to come from a different place (my heart has a purely circulatory function) and my deeds are caused by my thoughts and feelings.

I was also disappointed that this wasn't a discussion of which word in the title was best...

i put my heart meaning my essence

I put my mind, since I don't consider "feeling" to come from a different place (my heart has a purely circulatory function) and my deeds are caused by my thoughts and feelings.

Same here.

I was also disappointed that this wasn't a discussion of which word in the title was best...

Same here...

A combination of 2 and 3, though 2 just wins out by a whisker. Definitely about 55/45 between them though.

My body, what I do, and my deeds is the obvious choice, I think. What's in your mind can be great and noble, but it doesn't mean anything if you don't walk your talk, so to speak. That ignores knowledge and intellect, which you can't 'do', but if I have to pick just one option then the first one fits the best. Especially if I were to, say, explain to a business or college why I'm better then everyone else. What others think of me is more important to me then what I think of myself. This doesn't mean that I'd compromise my principles to impress someone, but I will wear a tie to an interview, despite thinking that having to wear a tie to impress someone is silly.

i put my heart meaning my essence

well if your essense is so important, i must ask:

do you stink or do you smell good?

hehe

2 and 3

well if your essense is so important, i must ask:

do you stink or do you smell good?

hehe

I smell delicious and taste even better :p

Of course my essence is important. My luminous energy field isn't there for show.

I am no longer able to devine my feelings and have long since lost contact with my 'heart' so i shall have to go with my mind. Though many people judge me by my deeds i'm afriad the things i say are the things i say, i can' fit in i dont know how.

i am what i do

I am... what I eat?

No, seriously, I said my mind, because without it, I simply would not be me.

It's hard to understand. Well, just for me.

I'm a thinker, not a feeler. I like a high level of intellectual stimulation, to the point that my family and friends get "tired" of my constant demands.

I'm also really goddamn lazy. I don't apply myself to things that don't give me instant gratification.

I am the act of expression.

I went for the first, because that's the way I would go if asked to describe myself. However, I'm not sure that I am in any position to define my self - that's for others to do.

Can you undo? I accidentally put "Myrth" ;)


Seriously, it's my mind that matters, or lack thereof. I don't have much else.


~Czardas, Supreme Ruler of the Universe

I went for the first, because that's the way I would go if asked to describe myself. However, I'm not sure that I am in any position to define my self - that's for others to do.
Oh, dear. Why's that?

I was also disappointed that this wasn't a discussion of which word in the title was best...
Which do you think is best?

I think "person" is the personality we've built up over the years, and "people" is a more general term.

I say it is what one does. All the other things, the mind, the heart, etc are part of the body. Just as your knowledge and feelings are useless if you do not use them, and how you use them or how you act is how you are defined.
You could love thinking, but if you never DO anything you will never be known as a great thinker. (Speak and do are related but not the same)
you may be a tender person at heart, but if you never show tenderness, you are not tender. Thinking and feeling are but subfunctions of doing.

Oh, dear. Why's that?
I'm not sure it's anything to be sad about. There are a number of reasons:

I'm not sure I want to define my self, it feels like it would limit my options to do so. More generally, I think the self is too vague a concept to operationalise so simply. It requires multiple layers or dimensions to do so, including the external perspective. People have too great a capacity for self-delusion in both good and bad ways to be wholly reliable witnesses of their personality or self, and I have to include myself in that caveat. If I tried to define myself, I would know the definition to be incomplete and that knowledge would make any self-contained definition false.

I'm not sure it's anything to be sad about. There are a number of reasons:

I'm not sure I want to define my self, it feels like it would limit my options to do so. More generally, I think the self is too vague a concept to operationalise so simply. It requires multiple layers or dimensions to do so, including the external perspective. People have too great a capacity for self-delusion in both good and bad ways to be wholly reliable witnesses of their personality or self, and I have to include myself in that caveat. If I tried to define myself, I would know the definition to be incomplete and that knowledge would make any self-contained definition false.
Alright. But it seems to me that if defining yourself is limiting yourself, it would be doubly bad to have others do it for you. They can't know you like you do.

I went for my mind, too. My defining point is allegedly my creativity and intelligence, or so I've been told since I was a kid. I'm inclined to agree with them, though I'd have to say that in my opinion, I'm split 30/40/30 between deeds, mind, and feelings. All three are important, but my mind edges ahead of the other two by a nose.

I chose heart, because it is the great motivator. It inspires and is inspired by thought, and in turn motivates the body to action. I do things, deliberate ones, because I care about the results. I say things in the hope of affecting changes, small as they might be, for the better. My mind is constantly being manipulated by my feelings (and I am aware of it), and my body follows suit, content to be led by whatever the other two can imagine.

Alright. But it seems to me that if defining yourself is limiting yourself, it would be doubly bad to have others do it for you. They can't know you like you do.
Indeed. If I allowed my self to be exclusively defined by others, I would find that confining. However, it's not an either/or situation. Both perspectives are needed for a proper definition. Also, I have limited control at best over how others percieve me; that, and their multiple viewpoints, leads to a pleasing random ambiguity and spontaneity in the definition of my self.