很高兴接到你的电话，卡帕头。自我。叙述。阅读。从内心来说，所有这些都是存在的重要方面。
They help us, or better, enable us to cope with, adapt to, and, sometimes, understand what it is we experience.
Self develops from human experience. Without that, we are as baby wolves in the woods. There is anecdotal evidence of such.
Narrative, the result of narration/story telling, came as we developed language, and stories were passed down,from one generation to the next. Somewhere or when, we developed written symbols, which later became the stuff of sentences, paragraphs---and, eventually, books. By this time, some of us could read. Later, there would be others.
The world would never be the same--of course not. That is the point that philosophers make---the point that other oracles of civilization claim for their own because they do not accept the validity of philosophy. Sound familiar? I thought you might think so. So, here is a short history of ALMOST everything. Less than a page. How's that?

re: rewriting a narrative James Ellroy wrote a beautiful prologue to The Balck Dahlia twenty years after it was first published. So honest, heartfelt, personal.

There has been some fascinating research in social cognition theory that strongly suggests a child's sense of personal history contributes to frontal lobe development and is thus a critical part of cognitive development. I am a psychologist and a mitigation witness in forensic cases where my primary task is to obtain a detailed and accurate social history of the defendant. In most cases, defendants' understanding of the chronology of their lives is similar to taking a box of photo slides, dumping it out on the floor, throwing away a few handfuls, then putting the rest back in the carousel and trying to make sense out of it.
On a different issue, there is no history without interpretation, whether you call it narration or not, and whether it's individual or "historical". Even when simply lining up facts, an answer to even just one simple question- like "Why did your family move?"- opens up an interpretation. The individual may say because his father lost his job, which he may believe is due to the fact that his father was unfairly treated, or to the knowledge that jobs in that field were being off-shored, or that a new owner took over and only wanted his own people on the job, all of which are both factual and interpretive.

The modern scenario for culpability, blame and retribution is rather simple: If you cannot bear to blame yourself for something, blame someone else. Even if you are the guilty party in a compromising situation, you may be able to bluff or bluster your way out of retribution. If you are successful in doing so, the success makes it easier (you think) to bluff or bluster your way out again.
This leads to many problems, but the practices are nurtured and therefore create a circular manifestation of deception which, in and of itself, erodes humanity. Call it what you may. I call it a facet of Historionicity.

If we try "to become what we've told ourselves we are," then changing our detrimental choices and decisions should as easy as reinterpreting our narrative, right?

关于Huber的评论:不。一旦我们做出选择;一旦我们做出了决定——这些基本上都是确定的事情。今生无重来。当你的狗因为在地板上拉屎而被你杀死后，重新解读故事就变得毫无意义了。当然，除非它是你丈夫/妻子的狗，而你又讨厌它。但我不指望丈夫或妻子会太在意你是否在重新解释你的叙述。杀死我的狗;我把你的响尾蛇咬烂，再加柠檬黄油和大蒜煮。

If we try "to become what we've told ourselves we are," then changing our detrimental choices and decisions should as easy as reinterpreting our narrative, right?