TED Conversations

Charlie Davidson

This conversation is closed.

How does one define him/herself?

Does a person define their self by their work? Or their personality? Or maybe perspective? Does the way we choose to define ourselves truly bring out our "actual definition"?

Share:
  • Gail G3

    • +2
    Apr 12 2014: As soon as I attempt to define myself, I limit myself. Definitions are limits. Limits are the antithesis of freedom.
  • Apr 12 2014: Not defining is the only way to know thyself.
  • thumb
    Apr 12 2014: .
    I am a relay of my parents' living DNA.
  • Comment deleted

  • Apr 13 2014: A member of the TED community!
    I had similar questions and got some amazing responses and insights in the conversation linked below. Hope it helps.

    http://www.ted.com/conversations/23306/who_are_you_how_do_you_define.html
  • Apr 12 2014: I always liked an old saying, "A person is defined by his/her deed and his/her enemies and friends."
  • thumb
    Apr 12 2014: I believe we cannot really define ourselves. The true measure of a person is the value that others place on them.
  • thumb
    Apr 13 2014: Human
  • Apr 13 2014: I have a biological self-view. I am a central nervous system-guided blob of flesh and blood. No-one can argue with it and I wouldn't be offended if somebody called me it.
    • thumb
      Apr 13 2014: but each blob makes different choices that make each blob different?
      • Apr 13 2014: Each blob defines itself differently. I am a central nervous system-guided blob of flesh that defines itself as "a central nervous system-guided blob of flesh." If you define yourself as a lactoholic then I define you as "a lactoholic that defines itself as a lactoholic." What am I saying? There might be a word for it!
        • thumb
          Apr 13 2014: and that's your complete definition? It seems very neutral, it seems like self-definition would include talking about one's emotions?
        • thumb
          Apr 13 2014: Out of curiosity- What is a lactoholic?
      • Apr 13 2014: "Neutral" is the word? Go on then, you first, to give me an idea: self-define and include the words "I define myself" and "my emotions".
        • thumb
          Apr 17 2014: Well, maybe emotions isn't precisely the word. For example, I define myself as intelligent because I see myself having interesting, insightful thoughts most of the time. I define myself as nice because I see myself attempting to treat people well all the time.
      • Apr 14 2014: "Lactoholic" is a word I made up for somebody that lives exclusively on milk, like Greg.
        • thumb
          Apr 17 2014: naw, cause it's not an addiction, Rodrigo, I do have to do it because if I eat solid food I feel physically bad, but that's because something about the solid food irritates my cells, but doesn't alcoholism have a psychological component as well?
      • Apr 17 2014: That's two "I define myself" and they only amount to intelligent and nice. My way is neutral because it is more comprehensive, identifies with all central nervous system-guided blobs which allows me to be intelligent and nice, too, but much more else like stupid and horrible.
        • thumb
          Apr 17 2014: it just sounds cold and clinical to say niceness is a "central nervous system-guided blob"?
      • Apr 20 2014: Cold and clinical but only when I'm philosophising about myself.
      • Apr 20 2014: Lactophile?
    • thumb
      Apr 17 2014: To call you a 'central nervous system-guided blob of flesh and blood' is quite long a description. Would it be offensive to call you 'bloby' instead? ;o)