As the hookah smoking caterpillar once asked Alice prior to his
transformation into an angry butterfly, “who are you?” This is, of
course, an enduring question. Who are any of us? From an
existential philosophy perspective, one would turn to the
“Pinocchio Problem”. Which is to answer the question what
makes for a “real” human? This is a fascinating topic, to be
certain. However, I am far more interested to examine identity
and, to a larger extent, personality. I grew up in a Southern Baptist
church and I feel that my religious identity was centered around
answering the “who are you” question in the negative. I remember
youth pastors telling me “I’m not worldly”. I’ve seen so many
people with those “not of this world” stickers on their cars. It is
interesting to see what someone is not. I am, however, far more
interested in seeing who a person is. I firmly believe the question
of identity should be answered in the positive. For cohesion
purposes, it is far better to answer the identity question in the
positive. Not only does this facilitate understanding for the
listener, but for the speaker as well. It eliminates the need for the
one answering the question to go through the mental rolodex of the
things they are not. I would also say that stating what club or
group one belongs to is not necessarily the declaration of identity
or personality the way many in my life have presented it as. I’ve
asked people who they are and their initial was “well, I’m a
Christian” or “I’m a Muslim”. It is nice to know what clubs people
belong to but that does not really give any indicators of who they
are as a person. In 1998, I acquired membership to the Burger
King Kids Club. In 2002, I received a card naming me as an
honorary member of the Justice League of America. Being part of
a club absolutely has an effect on the development of our identity
and personality, but membership is not an identity in and of itself.
It is nice to have that sense of belonging, even though they
ultimately didn’t mean anything. Eating fries and a Whopper Jr.
doesn’t define personality. Nor does a desire to fight supervillains
such as Deathstroke or Sinestro. On the other end of the spectrum,
I have encountered people who have answered the question with
“I’m an agnostic” or “I’m an atheist” and that is certainly not an
indication of one’s personality either. Specific actions or interests
do not for an identity make either. For example, if someone asked
me who I was and I answered “I open blog posts with references to
literary classics in order to make myself seem smarter than I
actually am” that would not really provide someone a good
description. It can be surmised that I like literature. But not a
revelation of identity or personality. Figuring out who you are is
one of the most essential components of the human experience.
Answering the “who are you” question with a simple label further
contributes to tribalism which is part of the egregious degradation
of society and social engagement at large. Rather than adhering to
a specific label, it would behoove people to answer the question
beginning with “I am” as opposed to “well, I’m not”. I implore
people to explore and form their own identity outside the context
of avoidant behaviors, club memberships, and specific actions.
Personality is the essence of human identity and understanding that
goes a long way towards betterment of not only the individual but
society at large.