"On the contrary, it is more than likely that the "who" which appears so clearly and unmistakably to others, remains hidden from the person himself" pg. 179.
Is Arendt then saying that we are the least knowing of who we are as individuals and that others know who we are better or more complete than our own thoughts of who we are? This is interesting to me because personally and I think the majority of people feel they know themselves better than others. And their true self resides in their idea of who they are, which many cannot tap into or fully understand. However, Arendt seems to be making a different point here, stating that the who is hidden from the person himself.
Arendt then goes on to state:
"Who somebody is or was we can know only by knowing the story of which he is himself the hero-his biography, in other words; everything else we know of him, including the work he may have produced and left behind, tells us only what he is or was" pg. 186
Using the words biography, rather than autobiography, it is once again furthered that the idea of who we are comes from others rather than ourselves. This is once again different from my previous views of who I am. I like Arendts focus on how difficult it is to figure out who we are, that it is the combination of our speech and deeds but still very hard to pinpoint. She illuminates the way in which we try to explain who people are but quickly fall into attributing them to what they are and discussing similarities to others such as traits.
I also really like Arendts ideas surrounding humans believing we can "make" things. As she points out there is no sole creation and we are, what we do, how we view things, all very much depend on externalities. The idea that we can "make" men "better" or "worse". Connecting to "who" we are and stories, Arendt discusses that it is "not the actor but the storyteller who perceives and "makes" the story" What do you think she means here?
All in all Arendt continues to have me thinking and rethinking many concepts that have seeped into our society as the unchallenged norm. Very much looking forward to the comments/discussion!
After reading your post I went back and re-read the passage on pg. 186. I thought you brought up an interesting question about "who" somebody is versus "what" they are. After that passage Arendt goes on to discuss the differences between Socrates and Aristotle in that regard. How Socrates does not have much written work so don't know "what" he was but since a lot has been written about him we know "who" he is (the opposite for Aristotle and Plato). I think Arendt is referring to actions make up who you are and that is more likely witnessed and discussed by others. Whereas ideas and thoughts make up what one believes. I had never thought about in this way though...
ReplyDelete