“Know thyself,” the famous inscription on the Temple of Apollo at Delphi, marks the beginning of many philosophical journeys. Even today, we frequently ask ourselves, “Who am I?” and more broadly, “Who are you?” The unavoidable challenge is this: Is it truly possible for us to know ourselves? This predicament is often referred to as the dilemma of self-reference and reflexivity. No matter how much effort we put forth, the more we attempt to understand, the more we recognize the inherent impossibility.
A notable framework for exploring this question is the Johari Window. This matrix is divided into four categories: 1) the aspects of yourself that both you and others know, 2) the aspects of yourself that only you know, 3) the aspects of yourself that only others know, and 4) the aspects of yourself that nobody, including you, knows. The Johari Window is a useful tool for increasing self-awareness and identifying potential blind spots. However, the dilemma of self-reference and reflexivity exists on a more fundamental level.
The true paradox lies in how we can accurately know ourselves when we are the very ones seeking this knowledge. Even if others tell you who you are, it is ultimately you who acknowledges and interprets what they say. In other words, we can see the eyes of others, but it is still through our own eyes that we recognize them. The ultimate confinement is the very truth that you are the observer at all.
We can make efforts to put ourselves in others’ shoes, but while this is a commendable attempt, it can also be deceptive. Ultimately, we can never fully put ourselves in anyone else’s shoes. Even if we try to assume someone’s perspective, it is still us who see things, including ourselves, from these supposedly borrowed shoes. Whatever we see is our own view, not anyone else’s. We can’t escape our own perspectives.
Understanding others is inherently difficult, especially when trying to comprehend the maturity of ourselves and the society to which we belong from the perspective of the hierarchical structure of the developmental process. Most of the time, we regard ourselves, either consciously or unconsciously, as normal and justified. Whatever we say or do, there is always a rationale from our perspective. We act in a certain way because we believe it to be right. Even if we do something wrong or inappropriate, our intent is still based on what we believe to be justified.
Even divine beings like God think they are right. Likewise, the Devil, Satan, or Demon believes he is right or has a “right” reason for doing wrong and destructive acts. After all, whatever they see is their own perspective. We often imagine how God views us and our society, pondering how sinful we are or how destructive society is, and so on. Conversely, we might think from God’s perspective about how good we are and how we’ve been saved from the rest of sinful humanity. Either way, these are still our own perspectives. We may think we know what God would think, but we can never truly put ourselves in God’s shoes (if such a thing were possible), just as we can never fully put ourselves in the shoes of another human being.
I see a glass of water in front of me. In the same manner, someone beside me can see this same glass of water. This glass of water in front of us is an objective fact that both the person beside me and I can agree on. Likewise, we exist in this world and the universe. What I see and what they see can be both shared and individual experiences. Nevertheless, what they see is not what I see, and what you see is not what I see. A series of objective facts are ultimately no more than approximations of intersubjectivity. That’s our existential confinement. I was born alone, and eventually, I will die alone. I didn’t see the world around me before my birth, and I will never see the world around me again after my death. So it is with everyone else.
Once again, let’s ask ourselves: Who are we? Are we lonely existences confined in our own cognitive, existential jail? You try to see yourself, but it is still you who see yourself. You attempt to see yourself from others’ perspectives, but despite this effort, such perspectives are still your recognition of them; it’s still you who sees yourself. You try to see yourself from the perspective of God. Can we do that? Can we see how God sees us? Can I see how God sees me?
The Book of Job, the oldest book in the Bible, describes this endless struggle of the impossibility of understanding oneself from another’s perspective, including God’s. Job thought God blessed his life and loved him and everything in it. But when his life became extremely miserable, he could no longer discern God’s will. Job’s friends also tried to understand what went wrong. They did their best to comprehend God’s will and Job’s situation, but they all failed. Job himself was also devastated by the fact that he couldn’t understand anyone’s viewpoints, including God’s.
As Job’s existential loneliness reached its peak, Elihu’s answers exposed the impossibility of understanding. Before Elihu, all three of Job’s friends, Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, failed in their efforts to understand each other’s intentions, as their reasoning was confined to their own perspectives. Likewise, Job’s efforts were never able to break free from his own limitations. Statements like “Probably God’s will is this or that” are nothing but assumptions made by Job and his friends.
Behold, in this thou art not just: I will answer thee, that God is greater than man. Why dost thou strive against him? for he giveth not account of any of his matters. For God speaketh once, yea twice, yet man perceiveth it not.
Job 33:12-14
Elihu’s answer was different and radical. The issue lies in all these efforts to understand others, including God. Whatever we say and do, the results are nothing more than approximations of pseudo-objectivity or intersubjectivity. Elihu’s point is that we can never understand God’s will. We will never comprehend His will as long as we are bound by our own selves. We can never truly see anyone’s point, including God’s, as long as we remain confined by our own perspectives.
You know you exist here and now. You know your life, how it started, and how it will end. The same is true for me and everyone else. But all of these realizations can never be more than vague approximations. We assume our lives in general. Our faith is based on God’s will, something inherently beyond our comprehension. All our arguments, articulations, and interpretations are mere bubbles popping up and down. Should we give up and become nihilistic, echoing the Preacher’s declaration that everything is vanity?
Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity.
Ecclesiastes 1:2
No, God forbids. In this total surrender of knowing and pursuing who we are, who you are, who I am, and who God is, we can find insight. Only after experiencing the same degree of suffering as Job and being reminded by Elihu, can we catch a glimpse of God’s will, as Job did when he heard His voice for the first time. When we die to ourselves, we can finally break free from our self-imposed confinement. The maxim at Delphi could be “Know thine confinement.”
Image by Gerd Altmann
Tom’s Blog 