|
|
Post by patricktbutenhoff on Sept 26, 2013 13:58:46 GMT
As a human, Luke has a self. Self-awareness is not relevant to this; it means to find the self, not to create it out of thin air. As Hesse mentions in Siddhartha, we all have godliness, evil, the full human spirit within ourselves. We do have self, we do have personality, we do have wisdom and potential and happiness. Buddhism is not about creating these things; it is about discovering them inside ourselves. Luke may not have a strong sense of self and identity, but he does have individuality. He is clearly a unique human being (though maybe not genetically, if he's a twin). And because he is both human and unique, doesn't that give him his own identity, whether he has a strong sense of it or not? The self is one's own humanity. It's a collection of wills, dreams, desires, traits. Luke certainly has a personality. He certainly wants things. He doesn't consciously do the things he does; he doesn't really have the mental capabilities to analyze different options and pick the most logical one. He is instead motivated by his nature as a human. One could actually argue that babies are more driven by their selves than most adults since they are motivated not by education, not by memories, not by logic, but instead by the only thing they do have: their unique human nature. Not all babies will react the same to the same stimuli; as mentioned by some earlier posts, they have different natural forces--different selves, if you will--directing their actions. They may not be conscious of this self or its nature, yet they have it regardless.
From a purely biological perspective, humans do have an individual identity from birth. They each (again, excepting twins) have a different set of genes that dictate their personalities. Since birth, humans have a set of genes that have never been replicated before and will never be replicated again. In addition, all humans have slightly different personality traits. We may be shaped by are experiences and teachings, but on the inside, each of us has always had an individual code that makes us who we--individually--are. Even for twins, their selves are each individually shaped by their unique experiences. Everyone of any age has this individual identity that, though we may not understand it fully, exists and forms the basis for the person we are.
|
|
|
|
Post by robertxu on Sept 26, 2013 14:59:50 GMT
A self implies a sense of consciousness and a level of self-awareness. Assuming Luke has neither, his actions at this point are most likely determined by the subconscious part of his brain. With that being said, many adults envy Luke for the state he is currently in. The first example is Siddhartha. Siddhartha says to the buddha, "We Samanas seek release from the Self, O illustrious One" (Hesse 35). Siddhartha spends years trying to break free from his self, just so he can think like babies do. Siddhartha's belief that one should break from the self complements his idea of intuition. For the most part, he distrusts institutionalized forms of learning and would be more perceptive of the idea of listening to a lecture from Luke than a Brahman (for multiple reasons). The greatest complement that others can give Siddhartha is that he seems child-like. The Buddha says to him, "I have never seen a man look...so restrained, so candid, so childlike and mysterious. A man only looks and walks like that when he has conquered his Self" (Hesse 35). The Buddha is making a connection between being "child-like" and conquering one's self. The buddha's statement leads me to believe that babies like Luke either do not have a self or are able to conquer it. Some modern artists are also envious of Luke's state. I recently read a condescending study about how individuals are unable to distinguish between famous works of modern art, and pieces of art constructed by a child. I was unconvinced by the author's implicit argument that modern art is a lesser form of art than others. What I took from the study was that famous modern arts are renowned because of their ability to connect with their primal state, conquer their self and construct works of art that channel the same emotions that a child's work channels.
|
|
|
|
Post by Anna M. on Sept 26, 2013 20:02:47 GMT
I still am not sure exactly what a "self" is. Based on Siddhartha, I would say that the self involves our inner-most being. Siddhartha, on his quest to find self, lives as simply as possible. He doesn't eat food unless he needs it, he only wears clothes that he absolutely needs, and other than fulfilling those two needs Siddhartha rejects all other excess items while on his search for self. Using this as an example, I believe that baby Luke does have a self. In fact, our baby form could perhaps be the closest form of Self that we ever reach. Babies have no other concern than to stay alive. We don't see babies searching for new knowledge, money, or power. A newborn baby cannot talk. A baby's inability to communicate (other than crying) isolates it from others and in this way it is more with its self than it will ever be when it is older. Siddhartha himself does not interest himself in emotional human connection. Siddhartha's relationship with Kamala is a physical relationship and he views Kamala as his instructor. I know I'm comparing Luke to Siddhartha instead of self, but Siddhartha's quest for Self is really all I understand about the Self at this moment.
|
|
|
|
Post by samwerner on Sept 27, 2013 6:06:13 GMT
I feel that the argument must be based on how we define the "self." If, as I believe Siddartha would see it, the self is a part of our being that we ourselves may analyze and control, then it would make sense to argue that little Luke does not, in fact, have a self. There appears to be a fine line between "the self" and any sort of individualism or defining character traits, and it's crucial that they are not confused. Certainly, although I cannot remember it, I acted in a much different way in my first three days than my sister did according to my parents. Where some may point to the self in this case to describe why my sister and I acted differently, if the self is a conscious part of us that we are constantly examining, our differences have nothing to do with our respective selves and everything to do with character traits that last to this very day.
In the text, the self is a very conscious voice to Siddartha. It is most obvious in his time spent around the river, where he was able to listen to many signs from nature while still attempting to focus on his one true self. At the ripe young age of three days, Luke does not have a conscious train of thought far beyond eating and sleeping. Luke may have a subconscious awareness, but if the self is defined as something examined in a conscious state than it is impossible for Luke to have one at such a young age.
|
|
