It's come to my attention that, maybe, my identity is nothing more then what I've built piece by piece with various beliefs; I've cobbled it together from views of spirituality, sex, gender, morals (or lack of), and motivations. Even what's there though, right down to the foundation, is loosely stacked together like a game of jenga block, because I remove and place blocks of my identity to suit my needs, in whatever way is convenient as the game progresses. So what then do I do when that is challenged, when someone else walks into my life and topples my tower? I realize my immediate response, just like anyone else, would be to prevent this from happening by aggressively defending it. I've come to realize though, that it is a battle for defending my ego, and that ego should not take precedence over accepting the raw reality that the ego matters not, and regardless of whatever metaphor of that toppling force is, the blocks are always there to build with.
I can't say I've ever had anyone trigger an identity crisis, I meant it more as a hypothetical question... sort of. I guess I should elaborate more; as early as I can remember I've struggled with a sense of self, an identity. I couldn't tell who I was, other people were thrown off because they couldn't tell either. My personality and identity was like this shapeless mass. I came upon a useful coping method though: depending on the kinds of people I interacted with, and by extension the other people who would frequently be around them, I would shape a personality to suit their needs and especially more importantly my own needs.
At the end of the day though, I still am that identity shapeshifter that only changes when no one is looking. It's an itch that creeps in the corner of my mind that keeps coming back though that maybe someday someone will really see me for what I really am.
"we are more than what we think or believe"
Based on what? We're nothing without those things, just sacks of meat that consumes to continue existing.
we perceive ourselves to be separate entities from the environment, and that causes the foundation for a person. conclusions we draw about things are like addons to the person.
unless you think consciousness is somehow a belief. i dunno. i think i'm just confusing myself now
"i exist because i am me, a person aware of myself, and this is a phenomenon of beauty"
Your awareness tends to have you on the gloomier side if your public journal here is to be taken into account.
Would you call wanting to die something of beauty?
meh. i guess it would be more accurate to say that my existence is sometimes a thing of beauty and more often empty and repetitive.
what i was trying to say with that was that i base my identity on the fact that i exist, not some beliefs or things.
"Reality is not a delusion itself and its made up of what the majority of people think and feel over the entire time of history as a whole"
That sounds more like a belief than anything. Even something as expected as "The Matrix" challenges this sort of thinking. All it takes is the presentation of superior evidence to show facts as the beliefs that they are. To call something a "fact" is to deny the other possibilities that arguably carry equal plausibility.
To me though, everything is a belief. To call something a "fact" is to rigidly say it can be no other way.
"we have no evidence that supports this, but it is assumed its true, to make sense of the rest of things."
I think someone could function without believing that top part. Someone believing that they're a part of a simulation or a construct of one's rigidly designed imagination for instance could still function within the real world.
"we perceive ourselves to be separate entities from the environment, and that causes the foundation for a person. conclusions we draw about things are like addons to the person."
But why does this matter? True or not, what gives it value beyond someone believing that it has it?
"unless you think consciousness is somehow a belief. i dunno. i think i'm just confusing myself now"
It's not so much that consciousness is a belief so much as that we believe that we are conscious.
"what i was trying to say with that was that i base my identity on the fact that i exist, not some beliefs or things."
Definitely sounds Empirical anyway. Even so, what we observe isn't always what turns out to be the case, we simply believe what we know to be the case.
What really separates the perception of facts from beliefs? Reinforcement. A belief has room for error while a fact has more conviction behind it. Beyond that there is little to no difference between them.
"we are more than what we think or believe"
Based on what? We're nothing without those things, just sacks of meat that consumes to continue existing.
"i exist because i am me, a person aware of myself, and this is a phenomenon of beauty"
Your awareness tends to have you on the gloomier side if your public journal here is to be taken into account.
Would you call wanting to die something of beauty?
"if someone comes and disagrees with you then i don't feel like that should trigger an identity crisis or something"
If it does, then that person likely needed that to happen to inspire them towards learning more about themselves. An existential crisis is a fairly healthy phenomenon.