Human beings often see themselves in fixed identity-terms.

A strong identity helps developmentally but can be arduous to maintain over time.

Understanding where someone was "excluded" can help them trace their identity roots.

Freud says, “Whatever you say you are, you are not.” Adam Phillips says that identity is a “self-cure for a feeling of exclusion” and puts us forever in a position to defend that identity.

Identity is thus false to begin with, and on top of that, takes effort and will to manage and reproduce. Both Freud and Phillips seem to say: What’s the point?

How can we metabolize or digest these pronouncements (or warnings?) in a culture that seems synonymous with the branded self, or the profilicity of our brand?

In a mental health context, isn’t this a recipe for rampant confusion—doesn’t it seem that a stable sense of self equates with a stronger ego, better choice of mate, career, and overall sense of direction? If we go to therapy, instead of this, isn’t what we’re in for, after all, a better sense of who we are, a richer sense of our real or true identity?

The Development of Identity

Our identity........

© Psychology Today