good question. im going to assume that boundaries of self is the same as saying, what is the "self"?
so here it goes. if the self is just the body, then are we a self when body parts are missing. if you are just a brain in a vat...are you still a self. the body is also constantly changing....reproducing cells etc...even neurons...are we still a self.
however, you assume the body is at least constituting the self...so i'l answer with that assumption.
u ask if a body part or subsystem can make up a self, then wouldnt that imply that we too are part of some greater self.
for some people that is true when it comes to states....they believe the individual would not exist without the state or nation etc...and so the individual is inferior to the state and should conform its will to the goals of the state. so, to some...we are part of a greater self...called the state.
there are those who believe that the self is independent of the body and is really just a consciousness or soul etc... and that this consciousness is part of a collective consciousness....which is the same as the above....for those who believ the individual is subordinate to the state.
and there those who believe that we are part of god/Gods consciousness and thats how he/she is able to know all.
but...to find boundaries of the self just strip away evrything the self has and ask yourself if the self still exists.....unti you get to the self. everyone comes to different conclusions and thats why their really is no answer.
to find out if the self is part of something greater....then assume it is.....and ask, if your "self" was not a part of this greater thing...would you still exist and would the greater thing still exist..
if your "self" still exists without the greater self....you just might not be part of something greater...and if the greater part exists without you....then maybe the greater self is not so great after all...lol.
2006-09-01 11:13:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by Bogey 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
What kind of boundaries? Physically, we cannot inhabit the same space, so that is one boundary. When it comes to the concept of self, the boundary is only where you stop imagining it to be. Some think the self stops with the individual, others with the family, some say state, and some say species.
2006-09-01 11:03:00
·
answer #2
·
answered by James P 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
The "self" as it has been understood in the West is part of the problem in answering your question. Most Western trained minds can not easily conceive of the absence of a "self" without imagining utter extinction of identity. For my culture, that identity is never singular, but always collective. Therefore, our view of "self" is far more pliable. The boundaries are infinite, just as the community is eternal.
2006-09-01 11:02:48
·
answer #3
·
answered by Isis 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
All the systems that are part of what makes us who we are, are part of our "selves". They are always a part of ourselves. Nothing that is not a physical part of us, is part of ourselves.
Our thinking processes are part of ourselves; they do not extend beyond our physical bodies.
So, it stands to reason that our "boundaries" are our physical selves.
Some might argue otherwise, but I think they may be confused with "space". What is our "space"?.
The answer to that is much more metaphysical, and can depend on a myriad of variables, changing as rapidly as those variables might change..
So we may ask someone to share our space, or get out of our space, and that might mean getting close to, or away from your self, your physical being, and that distance may be great of close..
I like sharing both my space, and my self ( a part of me, anyway) with a desirable other "self" of an opposite gender.
2006-09-01 13:11:18
·
answer #4
·
answered by seeitmiway32 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
every step of life is like the rungs of a ladder. since in the human state we are far from perfect it may not necessarily be that we are the top rung of that ladder, or whether the physical self is a means to the greater self - being the top rung. the question is most difficult to answer unless one has been with and a part of the greater self.
but i think from the way you've analysed and questioned that you believe in the great self.
2006-09-01 11:15:06
·
answer #5
·
answered by karroozer 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are no boundaries of self, as a wise man once stated, In my father's house are many mansions. our greater self is the essence of the universe, once we elevate to the point of oneness with the universe we become emortal, thus complete, and perfected in the spirit. The mind is a vast dwelling for many various little dwellings, our emotions inhabit these, and allow their spawn to rule , thus creating mortality within the mangod.
2006-09-01 11:20:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by lktt71 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
exactly which boundaries are we looking at? The physical self is that only which others can see. The non-physical, or soul, self is limitless
2006-09-01 11:39:48
·
answer #7
·
answered by katlvr125 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
You are pretty weired Daniel -:) but a great thinker.
Think more like: self respect: self discipline, self sufficient, self control, self sacrifice. and think some more.
2006-09-01 11:26:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by John D 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
my opinion...it is the limit we set for our selves? we achieve greater self once our boundaries are limitless. it is in our mind to achieve greater self......
2006-09-01 11:21:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by Night Angel 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
maby the matter it self
space dont exist, it just a way of understanding the relation of it
2006-09-01 11:09:17
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋