Regardless of whether you think it can be proven or not.
Are either of these the root substance of Reality? Is there something more primal?
2007-11-27 18:27:20 · 15 answers · asked by ? 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Gayman: pri·mal (prml) KEY
ADJECTIVE:
Being first in time; original; primeval.
Of first importance; primary.
2007-11-27 18:39:15 · update #1
skepsis : does this help?
i·den·ti·ty (-dnt-t) KEY
NOUN:
pl. i·den·ti·ties
The collective aspect of the set of characteristics by which a thing is definitively recognizable or known.
The set of behavioral or personal characteristics by which an individual is recognizable as a member of a group.
The quality or condition of being the same as something else.
The distinct personality of an individual regarded as a persisting entity; individuality.
2007-11-27 19:10:58 · update #2
Where does identity come from? Is it something that springs solely from within, or is it - even partially - something bestowed? My children had an identity long before they were aware of anything, just not a self-defined identity. And once they have a self-defined identity, how much of it will be purely self-defined, and how much will be the product of that identity with which they have been bestowed?
Perhaps the root of Reality is that all awareness and all identity come from somewhere - nothing comes from nothing (except maybe "god").
Peace to you.
2007-11-27 18:42:20 · answer #1 · answered by Orpheus Rising 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well, since you said primal, the answer has to be identity. Ego is the first type of energy in the manifest world amongst humans.....awareness is not necessarily a given. Awareness comes with experience but we're talking primal remember. Primal is base. Base energy is ego driven therefore identity is the primary concern. Sorry to burst all the spiritual bubbles. Even now, the % of highly evolved beings on the earth plane, that have a higher consciousness, is low. Primal still comes first for most humans. Coming in to the earth plane with awareness greater than identity is rare. If it were the other way around, the world might be a different place than it currently is.
2007-11-28 04:08:13 · answer #2 · answered by Lyra 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Reality in the microcosm of the mind requires some sort of awareness, but somehow I don't think it requires "identity" so much as simply "awareness." Once an entity is aware, it can function in reality; however, in order for continuity of understanding in reality, the entity must be aware of itself (identity). This brings sentience and another level of the experience of reality. It also brings another level to the microcosmic reality, that of reflection and analysis. I don't think there can be true understanding of reality without a "self-awareness," aka, identity, but it is not necessarily a requirement for simple reality, the unexamined, primal kind. I sure hope that made sense. Cheers!
2007-11-28 08:46:51 · answer #3 · answered by Black Dog 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Awareness is most primal. You can be aware without having an identity. There are tribes of humans that have no individual identities - they can't tell where they end and the next person begins - but they are aware of the world around them. Babies are aware without having an identity. Animals, too.
2007-11-28 02:57:28 · answer #4 · answered by Morgaine 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The primality of the two virtues you allude to are but developmental devices of the human psyche that are constructs of the Freudian age.
Awareness is brought about by the synaptic nerve receptors binding with the cortex and identity is realized through societal conditioning, tribal affiliation and experiencial components that make the sum total of what is known as 'self'.
'Primal' has nothing to do with what you've raised as a question because one is biological 'quantifiable reality' and the other is a self-determining felt experience, and therefore 'personal reality'.
The core of primality lays in survival, not developmental systems.
2007-11-28 02:35:50 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
By "identity", do you mean something like "SELF-awareness"? Obviously ability to interact with one's environment (awareness) is more fundamental than awareness of oneself. But you seem to be implying that reality depends on a perceiver. (If that's the case, reality requires a lot of lead time.) So I'm not sure where you want to draw the line. Rocks seem real enough to me.
2007-11-28 02:59:44 · answer #6 · answered by skepsis 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Awareness is essentially primal. Reality is an illusion of concept. Need is more primal.
2007-11-28 10:18:44 · answer #7 · answered by midnite rainbow 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
you have to be aware to have identity. A baby is aware of its needs and reacts to those needs with responses. It doesnt have an identity till later on.
2007-11-28 02:32:43 · answer #8 · answered by bradthepilot 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think that consciousness as such is the only unchanging aspect of our identity, and thus the only thing with definite ontological status.
2007-11-28 11:42:03 · answer #9 · answered by neil s 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Awareness and identity came together.... it is the awareness of self which emerges first.
before awareness there is love ...before love it is bliss...and before bliss all the cosmos in one unit enjoying and dancing in the cosmic rain
2007-11-29 03:39:23 · answer #10 · answered by ۞Aum۞ 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋