The Self

[Anonymous No.17411230]

What is the primary opposition of takes with respect to the self?

Intuitively, it seems like it would be between the existence of a substantive, unified, soul-like self versus a kind of illusionism. However, nearly all of the philosophical literature seems to accept the self as non-substantive, and they're mostly concerned with how it emerges.

I've read people saying that it emerges psychologically on an individual level, and postmodernists who say it emerges through social relations. There is also a wealth of people who say it's a combination of the two. People also have takes about it being narrative-driven, and others saying that it's a result of "mental time travel", projecting ourselves into our past and future. Once again, there's a gradation of takes in the middle.

Does anyone actually make the case for the self as substantive (since Descartes/Locke), or does everyone just accept that it's a mental construction?

What is the main debate here?

[Anonymous No.17411257]

>>17411230
Kohut's the guy you're looking for.

[Anonymous No.17411303]

>>17411230
German Idealism

[Anonymous No.17411521]

>>17411230
Unironically, Lacan, Elizabeth Grosz and Judith Butler.

[Anonymous No.17411585]

>>17411230
You type like a fag

[Anonymous No.17411615]

>>17411585
your shit's all retarded

[Anonymous No.17411644]

Just B.E. yourself

[Anonymous No.17412031]

>>17411644
Stupidest shit ive ever read.