Who Are You, Really?: A Philosopher's Inquiry into the Nature and Origin of Persons

by Joshua Rasmussen

What does it mean to be human? What is a person? Where did we come from? Many answers have been offered throughout history in response to these perennial questions, including those from biological, anthropological, sociological, political, and theological approaches. And yet the questions remain. Philosopher Joshua Rasmussen offers his own step-by-step examination into the fundamental nature and ultimate origin of persons. Using accessible language and clear logic, he argues that the answer to the question of what it means to be a person sheds light not only on our own nature but also on the existence of the one who gave us life.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction

304 pages, Paperback

Published March 21, 2023

Reviews

[Caleb Watson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Joshua Rasmussen is one of the finest philosophers working today. I have been consistently impressed and challenged by his work in metaphysics. His previous book, “How Reason Can Lead To God” provides not only one of the finest theistic arguments that I have encountered, but is also a remarkably clear hypothesis concerning the fundamental nature and foundation of reality.

This volume also addresses the fundamental nature of reality, by way of inspecting the nature of conscious beings. As is Rasmussen’s custom, the book is essentially a prolonged and methodical rational investigation. He thoroughly engages with a point of philosophical data until it has been wrung dry of its potential to provide insight to his central cause. As this process is repeated, an argument (consisting of smaller arguments) begins to emerge.

Rasmussen has the rare ability to present his insights with the same level of clarity as his thinking, which is an enormous aid to the reader. Having said that, the subject matter of this book rests at the very edge of human intellectual and conceptual capacity. This means that in spite of Rasmussen’s excellent writing, the volume can be quite dense in places. I intentionally took my time with this book, meditating upon its content. Ultimately, I found Rasmussen’s conclusions to stand in concert with many of my own intuitions on the topic. Regardless if one finds themselves agreeing with the author as I did, it cannot be denied that this is a remarkable contribution to a hugely important subject. I will be thinking deeply about this book for a long time!

[Joshua · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an interesting book.

My favorite part was on free will, which answered a lot of questions I had about the subject. You are a whole that controls your parts. It helped me understand free will better. I also appreciated the chapter on your identity over time. The mereological problems that he presented were nice

Now, I had some disagreements as an orthodox Christian.
First, I see no reason why our souls cannot be created ex nihilo. Joshua Rasmussen might argue against this because we don't see things come into existence ex nihilo, but that's just because under Classical Theism, only God has that type of causality. The difference between this and things being uncaused at all is that if something can be uncaused, then there is no cause to restrain what can be uncaused. Nothing cannot differentiate among things but in the case of creatio ex nihilo, there is something, namely God. So, we can say that things can come into existence out of nothing, even though things don't do it all the time, because they still require a cause, God.

Second, there is a differentiation problem in Joshua Rasmussen's theory. He says that all of our inner selves are actually the same, and are the same as God. This faces the problem of differentiation. Joshua Rasmussen spends a chapter talking about the unity of conscious experience. But, his arguments for the unity of conscious experience faces a reverse problem for his theory. If the conscious experience is unified, and the self is the unifier of all of these things, then how could it ever be broken up into different perspectives? It seems absurd to me that a unified conscious experience like mine could be broken up into different perspectives and persons. It seems to me that my consciousness is too unified.

Third, I give my response to the problem of too many thinkers. Dr. Rasmussen says that there are too many thinkers if you are not identical to your soul. There is your soul, which thinks, and you, which thinks. The problem resolves itself when we consider that the thought that the soul thinks and the thought that you think are numerically identical. There is just one thought. You have a GI tract. Do we think there is a problem of too many digesters because there are two "things," your GI tract and you, who digest the food? No.

In the end, I tend to think that you are a whole substance and that your soul is the essence of that substance, while you have an accident of materiality. That certainly doesn't mean you are your soul. You are not identical to your essence. You are a whole substance, with the accidental part being material and the essential part being immaterial, but they are just parts of that whole substance. You are composed of body and soul. Your accident of materiality changes over time, while your immaterial essence remains the same. In that sense, Joshua Rasmussen has moved me more towards survivalism instead of corruptionism. I think that although you are not identical to your soul, it grounds your identity as your essence.

[Tom · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very interesting philsophical review of the nature of humanity and the kind of universe the author believes is necessary to create first-person, conscious selves like us. Starting from the point of a human person, this reads like a reverse Summa Contra Gentiles (though more accessible to the average reader) ending where that book begins. To make a conscious first-person human being requires, the author argues, a conscious, personal, necessary ground of being. There is obviously much more to the book than this, but that's the conclusion and getting there is worth the journey.

A note on the style. The author obviously worked very hard to make the very difficult concepts in this book accessible to the typical, non-professional reader, but it doesn't shirk from squarely presenting those concepts.

[Spencer Snead · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a fascinating book. Joshua Rasmussen is able to explore difficult and complex subjects with clarity and focus. He approaches this subject from a place of humility. There are two sections to this book: the first explains what we are as conscious beings, and the second he explains how such conscious beings could exist. Rather than explain his account of consciousness first, he goes through competing accounts and shows how they fail. By showing the various constraints on consciousness, he makes it much easier to see why his explanation is plausible. This is a must read for anyone who is interested in understanding consciousness. Even if you disagree with his account, you will at the very least come away with an understanding that consciousness is an incredibly difficult thing to explain, and whatever the explanation is has far reaching implications for how we see the world.

[Monica · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is very dense and not very pleasant. I want to either have fun or learn something, not fall asleep. Three stars because there are some cool arguments being made and at points it made me really think about my own nature and my place in the world as a living, breathing sack of bones and flesh. But it needs some thorough editing to make it digestible to the common, everyday reader.

[Joel Wentz · Rating 4 out of 5]

A heady, thought-provoking and brilliant (if at times a bit dense) exploration of consciousness, and what kind of a world could make the emergence of consciousness possible.

See my full video review here: https://youtu.be/Z0YRvrO_kNk

[Thomas Zwilling]

To quote a long dead meme, it makes no damn sense. Compels me, though.

[Msema · Rating 5 out of 5]

interesting dive

Interesting dive into consciousness and reality it explains how beings like us could have come about and the conclusions go ham

[David Strong · Rating 4 out of 5]

My rating: 4 stars.