These days, I become more aware of how everything I think about is some kind of story. Jerome Bruner and other educational theorists have touched upon the idea that our whole cognitive approach to thinking and being relates to stories: positioning ourselves, interpreting and understanding each others' behavior, and populating our narratives. But, knowing that our storylines can change based on attitude and outlook, perhaps these stories don't feel so concrete or tangible anymore.
For example, basing a person's character on one or two appearances might capture the essence of the person in that moment, but it overlooks how the person got to be where they are. People are arriving somewhere based on conditions, and they accumulate new understandings from what they learn in that situation. New interactions create new possibilities. There is a self there, but it's one that change from moment to moment and attains new perspectives. So while the cognitive theorists are correct in thinking of stories as ways of making sense of the world and learning, perhaps this making sense is only a temporary way of organizing experience, and it doesn't relate to a concrete, unchanging self or ego.
Stories exist as variations on themes, and these themes are fascinating, but can life be summed up in a single theme? This is where biography itself is slippery and elusive. I saw a video this evening by Master Sheng Yen which talks about the self forming through a disciplined series of choices where we decide to be masters of ourselves (through vows and determination) rather than being carried away by circumstances or the environment. But while I agree that this is how people achieve goals and get education, I wonder, is this really "the self", or is it really a temporary idea that helps people temporarily overcome the whims of their environment?
No comments:
Post a Comment