We embark on a journey to personality: Who are we? Who were we? On the way there, we will examine historical concepts of identity until we arrive at the topic of digital identity and blockchain – and can ask ourselves: Who and how will we be? Today: Identity 1.0.: History of identity.
Who am I? Who am I? Who do I want to be? And why? These are questions that people have been asking ever since the age of procrastination, digitalization and the World Wide Web. Whether Socrates in antiquity, Sigmund Freud in Vienna in the 20th century, Friedrich Nietzsche right next door or Judith Butler in the present – great thinkers of all times dealt in one way or another with the question of the core of the ego. In order to find it in the digital realm and later on the blockchain (or at least to dare the attempt), one has to understand: Where does identity come from?
The Bitcoin news of Identity
If you have questions about the origin, it is always useful to search for Bitcoin news on: http://www.onlinebetrug.de/en/bitcoin-news-trader-review Where does the term identity come from? From Latin: Identidem stands for “again and again, to repeated painting, repeated”, identitas for the same, equality, complete agreement. Here one can recognize two important components of identity: the time and the core. The idea, then, that there is a unity that repeats itself again and again. But who or what possesses this core that is always repeated? The individual.
The individual – indivisible and yet bursting
A look at the root of the word also helps with the word individual. The Latin word individuum stands for the “indivisible” (in-dividuum). One speaks here of a single thing, an entity or even a being – something that exists. However, in order to distinguish it from things, something human is attributed to it – identity.
His head also broke over identity: Immanuel Kant
So how do these two categories come together? An individual is ascribed an identity. If you like, it becomes a human being. Something indivisible, then, which always has something the same, something that repeats itself: a fixed identity.
One also speaks here of the “subject of enlightenment”. At the time of the Enlightenment it was therefore assumed that man is a being that has a fixed core – an identity. With this identity, filled with qualities that define the person more closely, it was, according to Immanuel Kant, subject to and capable of the categorical imperative:
“Enlightenment is man’s exit from his self-inflicted immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one’s intellect without the guidance of another. This immaturity is self-inflicted if the cause of it lies not in the lack of understanding but in the resolution and courage to make use of it without the guidance of another. Sapere aude! Have courage to make use of your own mind!
The centre of these people, then, according to the idea common at the time, is a firm, unchangeable core – identity. John Locke, who is regarded as the forerunner of this epoch, recognized a connection between consciousness and thinking and described identity as a “selfhood”:
“Because consciousness always accompanies thinking and makes everyone what he calls his self and what distinguishes him from all other thinking beings, this alone is the personal identity, i.e. the selfhood of the rational being.
Not quite as differentiated as Locke or Kant: Mark Zuckerberg
By the way, Mark Zuckerberg has very similar ideas about the concept of identity, even if he comes from a different mindset:
“Having two identities is a lack of integrity.”
What does the whole thing have to do with Bitcoin formula?
So far, we are still in the enlightenment phase. Before one can understand how (and whether) identity can come onto the Bitcoin formula, one should first know what these terms mean. Read the explanation about Bitcoin formula on onlinebetrug.
So let’s summarize: At the time of the Enlightenment it was assumed that man has an unchangeable core, an identity and thus becomes an unmistakable, indivisible individual. But the perception of this central Insta