Do people have a soul? Where is it physically located?

I said:

We all have a concept of self. It has an internal aspect and an external aspect. How we perceive ourselves, and how others perceive us. It is based on the physical self – what we see in the mirror, and what others see when they look at us; and on the psychological self – the Id, the nucleolus of our thoughts and feelings of self and our place in the world.

A sense of ‘self’, the “I am” is not centered in a specific biological place – unless you consider the brain to be the ‘whole’ rather than a sum of the parts.

So when you write to Tracy Coyle that “I accept that you see yourself as a woman trapped within a male body. I don’t doubt that they pretend to you, to see you as a woman and some pretend to themselves as well,” you are making the assumption that many if not most people are pretending to perceive her as a woman. I don’t know; I’ve never met her. But perhaps if you were to meet her, even you would perceive her as a woman and not be pretending to perceive her as a woman at all.

You also ask, “In principle, how is that different from someone who thinks they’re Napoleon?” The answer is obvious: in the Napoleon case, no one other than the deluded person thinks he or she is Napoleon. There is no possibility of such a perception and it is impossible for anyone to be Napoleon other than Napoleon, who is dead.

LOL. Well, maybe not many people can pass themselves off as Napoleon or Julius Caesar, but then they are not considered by an expectant public to appear as saviors, prophets, or eternal gurus.

And plenty of folks have convinced numerous followers that they are the reincarnation of Baba Somebody, “the Cosmic Christ” , or take your pick of the most recent cult center and spaceship.

We all expect to see women every day. Some expect to see a prophet of sage, at some point or another. No one expects Napoleon! [Don’t say it! Don’t say it guys! No matter how big a Python fan you were, Don’t say it!]

Anyway, plenty of people pass themselves off as someone they are not, while knowing full well that they are not, because it brings them some perceived gain or advantage. They might even come to half believe it themselves.

I believe that you are making the same error that people who say “I can always tell when a man is wearing a hairpiece” make. In other words, because some – or perhaps even most – hairpieces are obvious and fairly easily discernible, they think that in noticing them they’ve noticed all hairpieces. But they are neglecting the fact that if a hairpiece is very good it could be undetectable, and those are they very ones they will miss.

So it is with trans people. You notice some, of course. But some look indistinguishable from those born into that sex. I have met such people, and the only way I could tell is because they are upfront about being trans. Otherwise I would not have known – and I’m not fooling myself.

So when you write to Tracy Coyle that “I accept that you see yourself as a woman trapped within a male body. I don’t doubt that they pretend to you, to see you as a woman and some pretend to themselves as well,” you are making the assumption that many if not most people are pretending to perceive her as a woman. I don’t know; I’ve never met her. But perhaps if you were to meet her, even you would perceive her as a woman and not be pretending to perceive her as a woman at all.

You also ask, “In principle, how is that different from someone who thinks they’re Napoleon?” The answer is obvious: in the Napoleon case, no one other than the deluded person thinks he or she is Napoleon. There is no possibility of such a perception and it is impossible for anyone to be Napoleon other than Napoleon, who is dead.

In your discussion of the Playboy cover, you write: “Look at the latest Playboy cover (it’s all over the internet) and witness even a petite male trying to ‘present’ as female.” If you mean this cover – well, that is not a trans woman, it is a gay man. It is a person identifying as a man but who is dressed in a woman’s outfit. Surely you know the difference between a trans woman and a gay man, right?

There are plenty of trans women models, though, who were born as biological men and have transitioned. They look like models – and most of them look like female models, who are after all an unusual subset of womanhood, taller and thinner and sleeker than most women. I’ve seen YouTube videos of trans people who appear indistinguishable on the outside from people born in those sexes (I cannot attest to the way they look naked, but we’re not talking about that, we’re talking about how they are perceived by neighbors and people they meet on the street when fully dressed, and whether those people perceive them as they wish to be perceived).

The word “psychological” encompasses a great great GREAT deal more than Freudian theory. Ego, Id, and Superego are Freudian terms in line with Freudian theory. Freudian theory is not and never was all of “psychology” even in the theory’s heyday. The terms are part of a particular theory known as psychoanalytic theory, and for many decades that theory has been out of favor anyway.

What’s more, even among the theory’s adherents, those things are concepts which do not amount to structures in the brain. Concepts are not imaginary, they are mental shortcuts to understanding something and they may or may not be useful in that endeavor. The world of thought is full of concepts that are not material things in the real world that you can point to. That does not make concepts “imaginary.”

But surely you already know this.

Oh, and if you’re actually interested in trying to learn more about the terms as they appear in Freudian theory, read up:

The Id is the instinctual component of personality that is present at birth, and is the source of bodily needs and wants, emotional impulses and desires, especially aggression and the libido (sex drive)…

The ego is the organized part of the personality structure that includes defensive, perceptual, intellectual-cognitive, and executive functions. Conscious awareness resides in the ego, although not all of the operations of the ego are conscious. Originally, Freud used the word ego to mean a sense of self, but later revised it to mean a set of psychic functions such as judgment, tolerance, reality testing, control, planning, defense, synthesis of information, intellectual functioning, and memory…

The super-ego reflects the internalization of cultural rules, mainly taught by parents applying their guidance and influence.

Do you think such things are imaginary?

Another reason the doctors and therapists belong in prison.

Thank you for your candor and sharing your personal story.

Thanks for getting back to me. You’re brave.

Sounds like something I can’t understand other than to grasp that it’s not something for me to understand beyond that there is a genuine mystery here.

I was a big fan of Walter Carlos, the “Switched-on Bach” synthesizer pioneer. Now I’m a fan of Wendy Carlos. I was taken aback by Carlos’s transition, but I’m still floored by his/her work and realized I had to take the transgender idea seriously.