Eh yo where's that mind exploding gif?

The title is what the jist of Sikhism is all about.

I think the metaphor of Indra's Net is apt at capturing the difficulties of self-definition/identification. It's a non-essentialist view.

Philosophical version of the Yoneda lemma?

Sometimes it hurts more to lose the version of yourself that they brought out. Especially if you really liked it.

Guessing it’s the other way around for most people. Self awareness first.

Testing it is a way to confirm it, but ultimately not fundamentally necessary. Every logical deduction that turns out to be false will be falsd because there was some error in the logic (either a false premise or a conclusion that doesn't follow).

That means that a (obviously purely hypothetical) person who is 100% perfect at understanding and applying logic could always deduce the truth with perfect accuracy - without testing anything.

While the above hypothetical example is of course impossible - it's simply taking what is to an extreme. Showing that logic does and must work regardless of whether science is involved.

Science is a good thing, it works very well - especially at obtaining knowledge that leads to technology. But that doesn't mean it's the be-all-end-all.

It's possible to be too "pro" a good thing and too "anti" a bad thing.

Yeah I lost a dear friend of mine 12 years ago. He was the kindest person I’ve ever met with a silly sense of humour that could brighten even the darkest times. Now I can never be as good as him in every aspect as I also have to be myself and do the things that make me me. However he changed me as a person both in life and death, and now I find people often saying that I’m the one that’s kind with silly sense of humour. And that feeling of knowing that to some I’m that kind of friend that he used to be for me, I must admit that has helped me getting over that loss.

Trying to obtain knowledge via the scientific method - which making and testing hypotheses.

That does not describe all arguments and premises that work.

Experiencing something isn't making and testing a hypothesis. Not sure what you're trying to get at.

Really thinking about or considering one's identity intently makes one have to create things about it, express it or otherwise relate what it's like to be you into words or sounds or images or other sensory things; in order to be unique among many people, there have to be other people around blah blah blah.....lol

More.

wait how is lonely advice turn to female voiced male make them trans??

ya... these "perhaps" responses confuses me.

We’re taught we’re all special unique snowflakes, forgetting that we’re all just weirdly shaped water.

The snowflake seeks to be cherished and preserved in its beauty. The water wants to be part of the avalanche or flood.

I don’t think that’s possible. Maybe look a little higher, look a little farther. I know you have, to begin with, us. Your family, present or absent, wield those brushes every damn day. That goofy conductor on the train. The lady that voices ‘Bart Simpson’(It’s true! Bart’s trans!) You can’t avoid being illuminated, like a 13th century manuscript; it may not be what you envisioned (Spoiler Alert: NONE ARE) but it’s your rainbow to flaunt!

That sounds pretty cool if you ask me

Depends on the state. I am quite happy with the government of the state of MN. I want others to be happy with the states they live in as well. I don't understand what southerners want but, I hope they get it for their sake (unless it causes damage to shared resources like the atmosphere).
But ultimately I think Americans should spend more time imagining the political structure they want to live under. Inequality will always exist. But what is a fair level? These are questions that have been pondered by humans for most of their history. I am a bit uncomfortable with the current, ossified nature of our political organization.

Can we not choose an identity and tell others to perceive us as such?

[deleted]

There's a profound point here that people are afraid of being forgotten, yet by this very analogy if we are largely the result of those we interact with "painting" us then there must exist an unbroken line of "paintings" back to the earliest social life forms.

Our.parents were "painted" by their loved ones including their parents, and the "paint" that they used in turn came from their own parents and friends, and so on.

So society in a sense is the buildup of "paint" across the ages creating certain patterns.

I agree with pretty much everything you said except for the idea that it equals discrimination. If everyone is given a fair opportunity, I agree and its evident that there will be unequal outcomes that highlight biological differences in gender.

I agree that these results shouldn't be looked at negatively. The important thing to me is that people are treated fairly and given equal opportunity regardless of who they are. I also agree with channeling most of our resources toward developing those who have shown to be exceptional at something.

I just don't think any of that is discrimination. You could say nature and evolution are discriminatory for making us unequal but I'd even disagree with that. I believe its only modern society and the way we live now that makes our differences more noticeable. As hunter gatherers, women had it pretty good not having to be as involved in the dangerous tasks of hunting and battling other tribes. But with women being a part of our military and so many other things that were typically done by men of course it creates challenges. I'm not saying women shouldn't be in any particular line of work, just that there are challenges.

States are fucking huge by anarcho-communist standards. Self rule at that level is like an apartment complex population. We can’t effectively run equitable services at the apartment complex level. We’re stuck with massive agencies and federal bureaucracy. States aren’t better and are arguably much worse.

Many things make you unique. Your location in time and space, for example.

Your relationships compose the dialectical matrix of social extensions and affects you have. These are part of what makes you unique, but definitely not the whole story.

[deleted]

If I am I because I am I, and you are you because you are you, then I am I and you are you. But if I am I because you are you, and you are you because I am I, I am not I, and you are not you.