Is [Human] Identity Arbitrary?

I have been in a debate regarding identity, and I've come to a couple conclusions. First, identity is not arbitrary, it does not shift like a house built on sand. Granted personalities do change in regards to tertiary values, perhaps one doesn't like playing with pokemon cards anymore and the like, but the core values of curiosity and imaginative thinking still remain which drove a person to like such things earlier in life that it too drives the person to like similar things later in life. This means, whatever values a person takes on, their behavior from time to time may shift, but their identity never will. Does a person cease being a person of s/he/ze does not drive a car, but instead rides a bicycle, to work? Clearly not, so again, behavior does not change the person or that person's identity. Second, identity is not based in plurality of selves, it is onle absolutely singular self. No matter what the psycho-analytics will say or attempt to hat trick into the scientific community (which they often do and are promptly refuted by scientific skepticism...), their claim that identity is based on a plurality of selves or personalities, or 'families', will never replace the currently known reality that when a person speaks 'I' they are literally meaning self as singular and integrated. Not even D.I.D. can prove the existence of pluralization of identity, considering it's been under sharp criticism for decades. To suggest a pluralism of identity is to suggest homunculus argument, which is often met with problems such as where did the homonculus come from, how did the homonculus form, and/or what are the physical constants for a homonculus. In this case, it's homonculus times nth number of arbitrary divisions of self.





All in all, I liked the debate so far, but I believe the person in question has put me on ignore on the forum, therefore it's ended by my opponent's wish and not mine. I do not know if this proves my point in this regard, that personalities are singular and non-arbitrary, but it does prove when you pull out the facts and show contradiction to the claims given, an opponent's resolve to debate one will dissolve fast. Especially, if their claims rest on narrative and not normative explanations.



-- Brede