If philosophy can be summed up as one thing, I think it’s this: self-knowledge. This is usually how Plato defined it. The search for self-knowledge, seeking self-knowledge, developing it, and using it, etc. But what does this mean? To what end is this done? Why is self-knowledge important, and what is it?
I think the phrase self-knowledge can lead us astray right off the bat—it promises this idea that we can know something about ourself. Some kind of positive source of knowledge that we can access, develop, and draw from—a storehouse of knowledge that you have about yourself that you can carry with you and add to as you progress through life. This is generally what the phrase “self-knowledge” brings to mind, yes?
But ths is the wrong way to think about it—because ultimately no such storehouse can be created, not really. You can get little bits of insights, bursts and flashes here and there, about “who you are.” But who you are is always changing, and knowing things about yourself isn’t really all that useful anyway. So you have some self-insight…so what? That won’t get you much in this world.
So instead of self-knowledge having value in itself, I think an inversion is the better way to think of all this. Self-knowledge does have value—but mainly for what it keeps at bay; namely, self-deception. Self-knowlege is the antidote to self-deception; put differently, the more self-knowledge you have, the less room there is for self-deception to take root inside you.
What is self-deception, and why is it so bad? Socrates has a memorable line about it in the dialogue Cratylus: “…for there is nothing worse than self-deception—when the deceiver is always at home, and always with you—it is quite terrible…” You are carrying the deceiver around with you all the time—wherever you go, you bring deception around with you. So you can never encounter anything truly, never think truly, never be free of deception, manipulation, misdirection. You see a world of mirrors and shadows; you are filled only with mirrors and shadows. You never know what’s real—truly nothing can be worse than this.
To avoid this fate—the worst fate there is—self-knowledge is needed. Not for any positive content about who you are as a person, but for keeping this worst fate at bay, as much as possible. Self-knowledge has more of a negative value or negative function—to minimize self-deception. So self-knowledge isn’t really something to gain for its own intrinsic value—and it’s not even clear that you can ever really know that much about yourself. It’s more of a practice to engage in so that the amount of self-deception you carry within you is reduced as much as possible.
reading this i thought of the theme in Dexter about his “dark passenger,” which could be an illustration of either intense self-knowledge (knowing one has a dark interior), or a lack of self-knowledge such that one’s interior is misinterpreted. i didn’t watch the last season, but i’d hoped they might take the narrative to a place of “misinterpretation” of Dexter’s self, b/c i think that’d be interesting.
either way, tho, not-knowing the difference btwn what’s “essentially human” and what’s “essentially me” can definitely lead to one into darkness.