I think this dualism, this image of the “technical guy” versus “George Clooney,” reason versus the passions, is oversimplified. Why only two selves?
When I think about the problem of the “divided will,” the issue isn’t really that my actions are hijacked by my subconscious. It’s not a rational good guy overcome by an irrational bad guy. The issue is that there are different, incompatible lenses through which to see the world, and most human beings haven’t picked a single lens.
Think of a single decision—should I go on a cross-country charity bike trip? My experience-seeking self, my vain self, and my humanitarian self like the idea. My danger-averse self, my professionally responsible self, my people-pleasing self, and my brutally honest self despise the idea. The decision I make will depend on which selves are dominant at the time. How much I regret the decision afterwards will depend on which selves are dominant afterward—for example, if someone yells at me for neglecting my academics for a dumb-ass bike trip, my responsible self will pop into the foreground, and I’ll regret my decision.
The point is, it’s not just the “real you” versus “your brain.” You don’t have only one “real you”!
Sometimes (procrastination, addiction) it’s pretty clear cut that there’s a smart self and a stupid self. But sometimes even on reflection it’s not clear which “self” is superior. The article makes a good point that “selves” that require deliberative thought tend to be weaker. But that doesn’t mean that there’s a single “technical guy” or that he’s always right.
I think this dualism, this image of the “technical guy” versus “George Clooney,” reason versus the passions, is oversimplified. Why only two selves?
When I think about the problem of the “divided will,” the issue isn’t really that my actions are hijacked by my subconscious. It’s not a rational good guy overcome by an irrational bad guy. The issue is that there are different, incompatible lenses through which to see the world, and most human beings haven’t picked a single lens.
Think of a single decision—should I go on a cross-country charity bike trip? My experience-seeking self, my vain self, and my humanitarian self like the idea. My danger-averse self, my professionally responsible self, my people-pleasing self, and my brutally honest self despise the idea. The decision I make will depend on which selves are dominant at the time. How much I regret the decision afterwards will depend on which selves are dominant afterward—for example, if someone yells at me for neglecting my academics for a dumb-ass bike trip, my responsible self will pop into the foreground, and I’ll regret my decision.
The point is, it’s not just the “real you” versus “your brain.” You don’t have only one “real you”!
Sometimes (procrastination, addiction) it’s pretty clear cut that there’s a smart self and a stupid self. But sometimes even on reflection it’s not clear which “self” is superior. The article makes a good point that “selves” that require deliberative thought tend to be weaker. But that doesn’t mean that there’s a single “technical guy” or that he’s always right.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/11/first-person-plural/7055/