The word “myselves” isn’t in the dictionary. Shouldn’t it be?
I can’t help but wonder if this construct that we call “I” is truly a one-dimensional, singular phenomenon. Aren’t we each composed of multiple facets of “self”: one self while at work, a different self while at play? Don’t we, in fact, present a unique “self” to each different person we interface with, while, at the same time, belonging to a race that has demonstrated the ability to conceive of a species-wide “self” made up of individual “selves”.
The word “myselves” isn’t in the dictionary, though. I think, perhaps, it should be, if only to reference the fractal nature of the multi-layered concept of ‘selves’.
The Austrian-British philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein once said, “The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.” As we speak individual worlds into existence with our language, the words we choose, conversely, construct and constrict our “selves”, simultaneously. We think we are using the words, while, actually, the words are remaking us.
I strive to become a wordsmith, using the kiosk of my vocabulary to describe that which I see, while creating the world I wish to exist in. When I discover a word that does not yet exist, I prefer to fashion one to fit my conceptualizations, rather than splice and dice and crop my “selves” in order to conform.
Thus, is the name of this blog site explained:
“Echoes of Myselves”
Herein lies a collection of utterances by my own various “selves”, interspersed, from time to time, with utterances of fellow Homosapianselves that make up the species to which we belong.