The tendency of the “I” to unconsciously identify with what the “I”, in essence, is not, creates confusion, obfuscating self-awareness and causing the “I” to be enslaved and dominated by the shifting contents of consciousness. In identification, the “I” identifies with whatever content occupies the field of awareness, it believes it is that content and forgets “to be what it really is”, that is, consciousness itself.

In other words, when identified with a content,
the “I” believes it is the “object” of which it is conscious,
rather than the “conscious subject” it actually is

(Alberti, 1997, p. 133).

Usually we identify with what makes us feel more alive and vital at any given moment, what seems more real or more intense. We may, for example, identify with a dominant psychological function:

• “I am my body”: some people identify with their body, perceive themselves in terms of physical sensations, as if they were their own body (“I am tired or rested”, “I am attractive or unattractive”, “I am healthy or sick”, “I am old or young” etc.);
• “I am what I feel”: some people identify with their emotions and affects, considering them as their most vital and authentic characteristic (“I am sad, happy, I am afraid, angry, in love, I am confident, I am desperate” etc.); thoughts and sensations may subsequently be perceived as distant and almost separate from who the person is;
• “I am what I think”: some people identify with their mind and, even if you ask them how they feel, they describe themselves in terms of intellectual constructions; emotions and sensations are seen as distant and peripheral, and often remain unconscious;
• “I am what I do”: finally, others identify with their actions and describe themselves exclusively in terms of the projects, activities, occupations, achievements for which they live etc.

Or we may identify with a predominant role and describe, live, function and experience ourselves solely in terms of that role:

• family roles (son, father, mother, grandmother, uncle, stepmother…);
• professional roles (artist, doctor, worker, psychologist, banker, manager, housewife, unemployed…);
• social roles (churchgoer, scout, intellectual, athlete, fan, film-buff, psychosynthesist, Buddhist…).

Or again, we might identify with a complex (inferiority, superiority, fixer/helper, eternal child, etc.), with a characteristic of our personality (aesthete, scaredy-cat, seducer, gourmand, clown, etc.) with an impulse or desire, with a passion, with a dominant image, perhaps induced or created by others, or with a complex of symptoms or illness (obsessive-compulsive, hysterical, delirious, depressive, etc.), with a project (healthy or pathological), with a particular age or stage of life (child, adolescent, youth, adult, aged). And the list could go on.

However, we should point out that, while the tendency of the “I” to identify, more or less unconsciously, with the changing contents of consciousness, can, on the one hand, lead us to a situation of confusion, limitation and alienation from ourselves and our true nature, on the other hand, it is through the ongoing process of disidentification and self-awareness – by learning to distinguish between ourselves and these contents – that we continue to develop and evolve (see Identification II).

• For more:
  • – Know, Love, Transform yourself (Vol. I) Psychosynthesis books (pp. 237-238) – Buy now
    – Know, Love, Transform yourself (Vol. II)– Buy now
  • The Way of Psychosynthesis, Synthesis Insights (pp. 233-242) – Buy now