If a person change with time

Does it mean that they do not know who they are to begin with ?

It’s has been sometime that this idea was walking inside my head. I always hear “People change”. But, to be wouldn’t mean to be somebody that doesn’t change ?

What we are is partially a construction of what we experienced, ok, but reached the adult age, who we really are shouldn’t it be a immobile matter ?

For example :

I know who I am because I know how to react to that situation, and no matter what kind of situation, in my range of possibility I will always act in the same way.

For example a marriage contract. In France, you can cancel a marriage, if you rise the right of “Erreur sur la personne”, so “Mistake on the person” which mean that you believe you marry somebody that isn’t the person you thought it would be.

A simple example would be I marry somebody that I believed was a woman, but in the end, it’s seems that she was a men.
So I cancel the marriage contract because I was deceived somehow.

This example bring me to the second point of being.
Nowadays we can change almost everything (in aspect), a man can be a woman, and a woman can become a men ect.
The third point would be, that if I have a accident/disease that disable my brain somehow, and then change my personality, so in the end who I am, is bound by what I am physically … However as we can change these facts, what makes us what we are in the end ?

Because we can decide how to change, so what makes us decide and what makes us what we are ?

Somebody understand what I mean ?

We have to change to conform to the status quo. If we don’t we’re lost in it and that’s a precarious position. So that becomes us. And then we want to change.

To be yourself you don’t have to do anything. To be something other than yourself you have to do a lot.

This is absolutely true with or without an accident that damages your brain.

What you are is also what people perceive you to be. Which doesn’t necessarily conflict with what you say, as long as who you are may be physically vastly more than just the material contained in your body.

not really.

It’s one thing to say that the perception that others have of you will affect your perception of yourself . That is true, but if they affect you, that experience is taking place in your brain.

It’s simply external stimuli. But it only affects you or changes who you are after being processed in your brain.

How so OH?

An old joke:

We’re not special little souls cut off from the Real World, as I’m sure you’d agree. Who we are depends on our relations to our families, our friends, our colleagues, our communities. If all your friends know you as untrustworthy Jim, it doesn’t matter much how trustworthy you consider yourself to be, deep down - that part of you is out in the public domain, out of your control. Your brain might even delude you to the contrary. Your perception of yourself is not the sole (or maybe even the significant) arbiter of who you are.

You can decide to change your name, that’s a bit of trivial social boilerplate. Changing your reputation can take a lot of hard work, and is measured in deeds not thoughts.

If you want to stick to the hardcore physicalist line, your physical makeup in some ways translates to your character, and so forth. But it’s also dependent on others’ physical makeups in how they react to that, as well. And if you want to make things more interesting, take someone like Elvis, Hitler, Heracles and try to match their meaning, the who-they-are-to-us, to their physical remains.

So, if society accused me of and found me guilty of murder, but in reality I was innocent of this crime–would I define myself as a murderer in my own mind?

!st of all, thanks for the joke :smiley: A laugh is always welcome.
Anyway, I’m not denying that others influence us and even change who are are. That’s the subject of social psychology. It’s a fact.
I’ll give you a simplistic example of what I’m trying to explain:
Let’s say that you’re pondering whether to steal something or buy it. You start thinking about it a bit more, perhaps you weigh the pros and cons and the first thing that comes to mind is, what would x,z and y think of me if they knew I had stolen this? Because of this thought, you abandon the idea and buy the product. Clearly you were influenced by the existence of others but the “process of being influenced” so to speak clearly took place in you brain. You had to process the information that others exist, and that others may judge you and that you don’t want to be judged and so forth…If you wanna be really precise about it, actually you influenced yourself if that makes sense.

This thing stayed in my mind like forever after I read it here. Simple, yet impressive thing I never really though about :astonished: