Among the many questions that one of us may face in life, perhaps the question "Who are you?" Is usually the easiest and the most indisputable. The answer is usually so-and-so, or preceded by a title or perhaps followed by your connection to a person or something.

But the question I mean here is not the same simple question all the time. It's a question I'm not sure my answer to is really possible. As many people have puzzled me before, I'm naturally in a philosophical dilemma. I do not think cooked and ready answers can solve it.

Throughout history, this question has been asked by many philosophers and philosophers of various orientations, each of which has its own answers that often contradict or at least disagree with others' answers. Although I am not in a position to compare with a philosopher or great thinker, But I want to review the way I usually think about it, and as it is my own point of view, I do not prepare any final answers or conclusions without doubt, but try as much as I can use logic in my analysis of the matter

Are you your body?

Do you stay lost if you lose a part of your body? Is it part of your identity in another person if you donate to one of your members?

The hard question here, if you are your body, is when you stop being yourself? The question may seem trivial, but the point is that if you lose a member, are you deficient or are you still? What if you donated part of you to someone, would that be you? Can you be alive if your friend remains in someone else's body while you are dead?

It seems difficult here, and the questions will not actually get easier. What about being literally losing your body all the time? Every time there are millions of cells that die in your body and millions more are generated, there are many atoms that enter your body in the form of air, food, drink or even injection, and many other atoms that leave it at all times, amid this constant exchange and continuous changes Is it possible to know about yourself with your body?

What if there was a teleport machine that reads your entire composition and disassembles and assembles it in another place with exactly the same structure as having the same atomic structure, the same cells, organs, shape, even the same ideas and memories. What if the machine created a new version? From you without deleting the original, which version are you? Original or new? In case you are original (most likely your answer will be) Is your move by a machine of this kind suicide and reassembling you later Create a new entity?

To illustrate the above paragraph, there is a famous philosophical question concerning a ship called Thessius Ship of Greek History, where it is said to be the ship of the mythical King Thessius and the youth of Athens from Crete to Athens and was saved to commemorate them. One after the other to maintain its strength until all the original pieces have been replaced, and here created the problem in terms of the ship being the original or not? If it is not original, exactly when did it happen? If it can be considered original, what if the fragmentary parts are re-assembled in its form, ie, the two structures are the ship here?

Are you your DNA?

The DNA of each person is distinct from others, but is not fixed and suffers from changes and mutations over time denies his supposed stability.

Apart from the nonhuman cells in the human body, even our human cells are not completely human. Within our cells there is a part called mitochondria responsible for cell energy generation and has its own DNA different from human DNA. This small part of the cell is believed to have been And if you think that the problems with dealing with DNA as a means of definition stop here, then you are mistaken. The last problem is probably the clearest one.

Normally, DNA is distinct from each other, with a particular case of identical twins, but here another problem arises. Although the identical twins are born with identical DNA, as the age changes, the DNA of the twins becomes slightly different from the others Under the influence of the surrounding environment and changes in the ocean, taking into account that the DNA does not reflect the entire human being (even with another human being with the same DNA) may be very different from you) as a criterion of identity that has its loopholes as well as dealing with the body as a criterion of identity.

Are you your brain?

After giving up the whole body and DNA, the brain and the central nervous system may appear to be a good choice for self-identification and self-expression. All your thoughts, memories, ambitions, senses, and personality are carried within this part of the body, apart from your virtual qualities. , So it is a logical candidate, perhaps to introduce self.

Here I will not address the problem of self-definition ideas or even changes in the brain because of growth and being in the end part of the body and what denies the self-definition of the body denies self-definition, but I will touch on the other hand I see interesting brain structure, Many know that the human brain is divided into two separate halves linked together by a bridge of neurons that allow the two hemispheres to work together, but it is interesting that this bridge, which connects the halves, is detachable without human death.

Are you your mind and your thoughts?

What if your thoughts and senses were translated programmatically and carried to a processing unit simulating the human brain, would you be the body or are you the mobile consciousness in a computer? Is separation of electricity for such a crime, for example?

As anyone else, the idea of ​​continuity after death has always encouraged my imagination and wondered what is immortality and is it really possible? For me, as a fully reproducing person, the idea of ​​genetic continuity has always been excluded. The other type of continuity was the idea of ​​science fiction to keep consciousness as an electronic device that mimics the human brain, or to hold on to my own ideas and philosophies on the assumption that philosophers and writers today Immortal intellectual production.

After abandoning the physical or even genetic identity, the remaining option was the intellectual identity, but here I found myself again in problems that I can not simply overcome or ignore. The first is that the ideas are very variable from time to time. Even with some of the positions and viewpoints, perhaps most of my thoughts and beliefs Even my positions and the way I express them have changed dramatically over time. Even during relatively small intervals I can not say that my thoughts or thoughts are really fixed. Every new piece of thought changes our minds, whether we know them only or they affect our view of the world. Identity sign the person in distress Real