Question of Identity

"

Boem wrote:

"

bwam wrote:

Not sure if it's your intention to be patronizing, but you're coming off that way.

Also: The existance of an identity permits an identifier (such as a name) to refer to the identity; the identifier does not dictate the identity, and declaring an identifier is discrete from forming an identity.

Maybe it's because i am using your handle, though it's not my intent it's just to direct some contemplation on the notion.

Your saying we don't all agree to name a cat a cat?

And to agree on fundamental attributes we can all agree on a cat exist's?

For all we know a cat is actually a blur beyond our perception range, but the identity we all agreed on seems to work in a way that we can co-exist with it and it provides us information necessary for our aims.

I don't understand on what basis your saying that the identified doesn't dictate the information that resides in the identity we attribute to it.

That's exactly what science tries to objectively do.

We find something without identity, we look at it and we attempt to form an identity as many people as possible can agree on with trial and error.

An identity is a tool utilized to store immensely complex data in a very simplistic form in my opinion which provides us the option to interact with it if required or ignore if desired.

I identify you as bwam, and i put some attributes within that "identity" and i act on those notions, but i don't presume you are as simple as the attributes i lump in that identity, it wouldn't even scratch the surface.
But it does allow me to interact with you without being in perpetual anxiety of what might happen.
As long as that "identity" holds, i will not experience anxiety and interaction will be possible.

Your free to disagree, but you haven't really laid out your thought pattern to me yet.

Give me some examples of how you would utilize the concept of "identity" in the way you describe that is beneficial to me, or other people?

Peace,

-Boem-

OK, let me make an analogy.

You program an object in Java. It has all sorts of neat attributes and is of class ObjectClass.

Declaring this object as "MyObject" doesn't dictate or change the attributes of the object; rather, it is way of pointing to that specific object, which has certain attributes (of class ObjectClass).

Make a bit more sense?

"

bwam wrote:

OK, let me make an analogy.

You program an object in Java. It has all sorts of neat attributes and is of class ObjectClass.

Declaring this object as "MyObject" doesn't dictate or change the attributes of the object; rather, it is way of pointing to that specific object, which has certain attributes (of class ObjectClass).

Make a bit more sense?

I don't think your understanding my question.

It makes complete sense and i have been understanding your perception of "identity" from your very first post.

But like i said, i think it's a wrong interpretation of "identity" since it doesn't hold meaning or intrinsic value when applied.

Conjuring up some mental example where it fits without actual implementation possibility doesn't change that fact.

Give me an example where your concept of "identity" can be applied in real life and be beneficial.
Then it would hold intrinsic meaning to all of the people you would like to converse with.

What is the goal/aim of your concept of "identity"?

I'm quite humble in taking in new views of concepts, but if it doesn't make me go "aha!" and clicks there is absolutely no reason for me to accept that new concept as relevant or usable.
And even then i would experiment with it in real time to keep undermining it's validity and utility.

Peace,

-Boem-

edit : for example i think your trying to find out why "identity" is a continues motion in time? Or trying to make sense of that?

I would argue it is in fact a stable non-continues construct that is constantly dying and resurrected.

You create identity "X" and use to move between other "identity's" for example

"hungry bwam"(=goal satiation)
you find something to eat and use that "identity" to fulfill the aim.(eating something)
At that point "hungry bwam" dies. The goal of it's creation was fulfilled so it get's absorbed in consciousness again.

Within that time-span, the "identity" was goal oriented or stable. But on a macro scale it is continues since a new goal is constantly formulated which requires a newly formed "identity".

That's why my contemplation is that consciousness is the actor that "aims", while "identity" is the vessel to achieve the aim and formed out of consciousness.