Hit Man

[Philosophy Now]

Jason Friend and Lauren Friend discuss reprogramming your self.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/170/Hit_Man

[Belinda]

Jason Friend and Lauren Friend discuss reprogramming your self.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/170/Hit_Man

"It's always our decision who we are" concerns a process not a thing. Our decision who we are is well within the existence precedes essence criterion.
Existence is a trajectory that may knocked sideways by a random stroke of fortune.
The self is not all -or- nothing but relates to the constantly-changing Dasein.

The Christian existentialist anchors their Dasein self to the permanence of God.

[amity_blu]

"It's always our decision who we are"

Thanks for starting the discussion with this pertinent and thought-provoking quote.
It comes from another of Linklater's philosophical films, Waking Life (2001). A series of philosophical discussions including characters playing themselves.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waking_Life

Robert C Solomon, played his part, engaging with existentialism.
From the article:
'Solomon flips the script and praises them [existentialists] as optimists, asserting that “one thing that comes out from reading these guys is not a sense of anguish about life so much as a real kind of exuberance of feeling on top of it. It’s like your life is yours to create.” He concludes his summation by insisting that the biggest takeaway from Sartre is that “It’s always our decision who we are.” Hit Man transports such Sartrean sentiments straight into Gary’s closing speech as he endorses the view that it is possible to radically change yourself, and emphasizes how liberating it is to refashion yourself into whoever you want to become.'

The article questions 'the film’s view of the malleability of the self'. 'Can key personality markers really be changed in a few months? Is it possible for someone to just fake it until he makes it and becomes a completely different person?'

Now, it seems we have slipped from life to identity to personality to behavioural transformations.
How possible is to change, even if we want or need to? What obstacles are in our way?

We are introduced to the concept of the 'identity algorithm'. With links to previous articles. WandaVision in Issue 152 and Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness in Issue 159.

According to the authors, this is a 'model that sees the self as a product of ‘code’ partially written by nature and partially by nurture, which dictates an individual’s reactions. One’s code is the cause of every thought, feeling, or action, and it creates patterns of predictable behaviors that we know as an individual’s personality.'

Well, I don't know what I think or feel about that. I tend to scepticism. I understand the influence of nature and nurture on human development but as to their part in a written 'code' that is the cause of all that makes up a personality or self...

A contrast is made between the authors' identity model and the idea of the self as a role that can be altered within a few months.

What is it about the self that can be changed? How do we know what the 'self' is ? Is it real, steady or do we have many 'selves' and roles. I suggest both can be true. We seem to have a continuing core knowledge and experience of ourselves but this develops and changes as we grow. Or not. It depends on a variety of factors over which we have no control but which can prove a challenge. Sometimes we need help to get through. We do not want to change our whole identity but aspects of problematic behaviour.

The authors discuss CBT:
'The process is slow and incremental, and while small changes in thinking can lead within a few months to tremendous relief from anxiety and other forms of destructive thinking, there is no evidence that CBT can lead to wholesale personality changes of the kind we see with Gary.'

CBT is not about making wholesale personality changes. It focuses on connections between thoughts, feelings and behaviour. Positive changes that can be made with mental health issues.

As for Gary's changes...
More later.

[Belinda]

"It's always our decision who we are"

Thanks for starting the discussion with this pertinent and thought-provoking quote.
It comes from another of Linklater's philosophical films, Waking Life (2001). A series of philosophical discussions including characters playing themselves.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waking_Life

Robert C Solomon, played his part, engaging with existentialism.
From the article:
'Solomon flips the script and praises them [existentialists] as optimists, asserting that “one thing that comes out from reading these guys is not a sense of anguish about life so much as a real kind of exuberance of feeling on top of it. It’s like your life is yours to create.” He concludes his summation by insisting that the biggest takeaway from Sartre is that “It’s always our decision who we are.” Hit Man transports such Sartrean sentiments straight into Gary’s closing speech as he endorses the view that it is possible to radically change yourself, and emphasizes how liberating it is to refashion yourself into whoever you want to become.'

The article questions 'the film’s view of the malleability of the self'. 'Can key personality markers really be changed in a few months? Is it possible for someone to just fake it until he makes it and becomes a completely different person?'

Now, it seems we have slipped from life to identity to personality to behavioural transformations.
How possible is to change, even if we want or need to? What obstacles are in our way?

We are introduced to the concept of the 'identity algorithm'. With links to previous articles. WandaVision in Issue 152 and Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness in Issue 159.

According to the authors, this is a 'model that sees the self as a product of ‘code’ partially written by nature and partially by nurture, which dictates an individual’s reactions. One’s code is the cause of every thought, feeling, or action, and it creates patterns of predictable behaviors that we know as an individual’s personality.'

Well, I don't know what I think or feel about that. I tend to scepticism. I understand the influence of nature and nurture on human development but as to their part in a written 'code' that is the cause of all that makes up a personality or self...

A contrast is made between the authors' identity model and the idea of the self as a role that can be altered within a few months.

What is it about the self that can be changed? How do we know what the 'self' is ? Is it real, steady or do we have many 'selves' and roles. I suggest both can be true. We seem to have a continuing core knowledge and experience of ourselves but this develops and changes as we grow. Or not. It depends on a variety of factors over which we have no control but which can prove a challenge. Sometimes we need help to get through. We do not want to change our whole identity but aspects of problematic behaviour.

The authors discuss CBT:
'The process is slow and incremental, and while small changes in thinking can lead within a few months to tremendous relief from anxiety and other forms of destructive thinking, there is no evidence that CBT can lead to wholesale personality changes of the kind we see with Gary.'

CBT is not about making wholesale personality changes. It focuses on connections between thoughts, feelings and behaviour. Positive changes that can be made with mental health issues.

As for Gary's changes...
More later.

True ,there are biological limits on who one is. In times gone by the ward sister may indicate which patient was to get the bed bath with "the duodenal ulcer in bed three". Now, a self is not a 'case' but is a person.

Emotions are as biological as duodenal ulcers--------fear and love are uncontrollable. However we are free to decide whether we behave according to fear ,or according to love. Like, if one is the "duodenal ulcer in bed three" nevertheless one is free to be a person- self and is not to be categorised by others whether or not the others are figures of authority.

Concerning its theory of existence, CBT is existentialist . CBT aims to make a person -self as free as they can be, within the determined limits of his biology. It's reason that is lingua franca not religion or any other arbitrary set of rules.

[Impenitent]

coming of age and pondering the existential question...

and there it is...

are you who you are outside of the descriptors you were trained to use to think from moment one from your interactions with others?

can you be who you think you are, described and understood, in a language you don't speak?

Sartre also said "Hell is other people..."

-Imp

[Walker]

... reprogramming your self.

What varies by person is where attention naturally flows. If it naturally flows towards a specific attachment, then experiencing attachment to its fullest will dispel all illusions concerning that specific attachment, which leads to a fuller understanding.

In other words, full attention to the reality of the attachment both in experience and theory, rather than just concepts of attachment through hearsay, is what ends attachment … which ends suffering. This is quite distinct from the conflict created by self-denial. It's going through, and not around.

One can either seek new and different attachments that lead to the same destination, or discover the equanimity of non-attachment, which is what happened to the first human being who realized within his or her heart, “Wherever I go, there I am, so there is no need go anywhere to find myself,” aka, no more reprogramming, just witnessing.

[amity_blu]

I haven't watched the film so only going by the authors' description of the fictitious character, Gary. What or who is he? What does he do? How does he behave?

1. The protagonist of the film (a vehicle used by Linklater, to stimulate philosophical thought in a fun way).
2. A philosophy professor teaching students. A soft-spoken, introverted intellectual.
3. He poses questions about the 'self'. How much of it is a construction, an illusion, an act, a single role perpetually played by a person? (central to film's exploration).
4. Also, an undercover agent for New Orleans police, acting as a 'hit man' to 'ensnare those who would purchase his murderous services'.
5. He plays a character Ron, a charismatic alpha male who happens to kill people for a living.

'As the film progresses it becomes less clear if Gary is merely acting like Ron, or is actually becoming the new self he invented.'

Is this an interesting question? Can we not see through the fiction right from the start?
It is not a shy man that would take on the perils of undercover police work. It is one who is willing to take a chance to explore the nether regions of society by submerging into the underground as a killer. How much of their selves and lives do UC agents have to discard to complete their mission. Their morals? What does it take to turn virtue to vice? Or are there no such absolute states of good and bad. No Either/Or.

Right from the start Gary shows the audience 2 selves. Good acting Bad will become what? Bad? Or play-acting fun, acting out a fantasy? How easy is to slip to the bad side of life. What factors influence change?

Love, lust and always a woman. The temptation of Eve. Same old story.

6. Actor, Lover and Killer.

''Seize the identity you want for yourself''. Gary exhorts his students.
It reminds me of another motto "Seize the day!" A different kind of encouragement. To live in the present. As you are.
Gary's seems more selfish, perhaps a dangerous call to a classroom of students mesmerised by the charming rhetoric of a hit man.

The article ends with a serious message re self-improvement, societal challenges and how structures should be changed. Barriers including childhood poverty, resources, time, energy, attention, gender.

Gary is not an everyday man. He is the hero of a film. Fiction. How much fiction is there in real life? The stories we tell our selves...

The article ends with a plea:

'Our societies need to prioritize policies that truly nurture children to developing the cognitive capacities necessary for self-reflection and growth, such as food security, quality education, and safe housing. Society also needs to create social structures that give adults the space and support they need in order to have the time and energy to engage in reprogramming their own identity algorithms if desired – such as affordable daycare, quality healthcare, and a shorter work week. It must also provide educational opportunities for both students and adults to learn about and implement self-changing strategies that actually work.'

Yes, yes, yes. The question remains, "How?"
The authors take the opportunity to push their model of reprogramming identity algorithms.
Whatever that means.

In the meantime, films like 'Hit Man' engage the public with philosophy and different ways of seeing, thinking, ways of being.

To return to Solomon, in the film he says:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0243017/ch ... /nm1100234

[amity_blu]

reprogramming identity algorithms. Whatever that means.

From https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12289686/:

The algorithmic self: how AI is reshaping human identity, introspection, and agency

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is no longer a mysterious technological presence hiding behind screens; it is intertwined with the most intimate dimensions of who we are.

In spite of the worldwide love for AI for its revolutionary utility in various sectors, it is necessary to examine how it exerts a subtler, but no less impactful, psychological impact on personal self, self-awareness, and agency (Banja, 2020; Namestiuk, 2023). This article examines the idea of the “Algorithmic Self”—something that indexes how AI's interpretive feed starts mediating self-knowledge, not merely shaping what we do, but also who we become and the narratives we narrate to ourselves.

The “Algorithmic Self” refers to a form of digitally mediated identity in which personal awareness, preferences, and even emotional patterns are shaped through continuous feedback from AI systems (Turtle et al., 2024). It is not merely a self-reflected in technology but co-constructed by it—where algorithms do not passively reflect the self but actively participate in its formation (Masiero, 2023). This concept draws loosely on post-humanist and surveillance capitalism frameworks, which describe the self as increasingly entangled with and constructed by digital infrastructures (Bartley, 2019; Leander and Burriss, 2020). In this view, the self is no longer autonomous and inwardly derived, but assembled across interfaces, platforms, and predictive logics.

[amity_blu]

Concerning its theory of existence, CBT is existentialist . CBT aims to make a person -self as free as they can be, within the determined limits of his biology. It's reason that is lingua franca not religion or any other arbitrary set of rules.

I did not know that CBT had a theory of existence. Or that it is existentialist. Or its aim to make someone 'free'.
Grateful if you could explain what you mean.

My understanding is that it is based on theories of behaviourism and stoicism.
The main aim is to help people understand any maladaptive behaviours by examining their thought processes.
The idea is to improve mental wellbeing.
The basic idea is that people are not disturbed by negative events but by their beliefs about these events. Look up Stoic philosopher Epictetus quotes, for starters.

This may well result in a kind of freedom, if it releases the individual from the chains of unhelpful beliefs. And negative automatic thoughts.
Sometimes, it can involve following 'rules', guidance or daily practice. Similar to religious rituals?
Perhaps, having a mantra as a reminder. Like:
https://thecasualreader.com/7-stoic-mantras/

I am open to existentialism as a way of thinking about the world and our place in it. However, there are different interpretations of its meaning and consequences.

We can all think of practical, perhaps spiritual, implications of holding certain ways of looking at life, can't we? Each appraised as being more or less beneficial to wellbeing. This 'judgement' can become part of our 'core' self. Our deepest values unchanging...until they are challenged...even then, it is not easy to change if it is part of our identity. Becoming someone else sounds scary. But not if the change is simply being more aware of alternative perspectives.
And a willingness to consider alternatives before acting, or not acting, on them. The choice is ours, no?

[amity_blu]

Perhaps better than CBT is ACT. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy.
https://contextualconsulting.co.uk/know ... bt-and-act

ACT is based on the contextual behavioural science model and emphasises acceptance, mindfulness, and values-based action. It views psychological suffering as a normal part of being human and seeks to help individuals accept their experiences, including difficult thoughts and emotions, without judgment or attempts to control or avoid them. ACT aims to enhance psychological flexibility and promote committed action aligned with one’s values.

It seems to be more of a philosophical approach.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/bl ... 9946c6959

'Where change takes place in ACT is not in what one believes but in what one does. ACT places great emphasis on the clear articulation of one's values and in acting in accord with those values, whatever one's beliefs.'

I have drifted away from the Hit Man. The article is certainly thought-provoking!

[amity_blu]

coming of age and pondering the existential question...

Strange but I always think of male teenage angst when I think of existentialism. That is wrong, I know.
There is not just one existential question for one age or gender. Identity and Voice matters.

'can you be who you think you are, described and understood, in a language you don't speak?' - Imp

I don't understand the question. What do you mean by a 'language you don't speak'?

[Belinda]

Concerning its theory of existence, CBT is existentialist . CBT aims to make a person -self as free as they can be, within the determined limits of his biology. It's reason that is lingua franca not religion or any other arbitrary set of rules.

I did not know that CBT had a theory of existence. Or that it is existentialist. Or its aim to make someone 'free'.
Grateful if you could explain what you mean.

My understanding is that it is based on theories of behaviourism and stoicism.
The main aim is to help people understand any maladaptive behaviours by examining their thought processes.
The idea is to improve mental wellbeing.
The basic idea is that people are not disturbed by negative events but by their beliefs about these events. Look up Stoic philosopher Epictetus quotes, for starters.

This may well result in a kind of freedom, if it releases the individual from the chains of unhelpful beliefs. And negative automatic thoughts.
Sometimes, it can involve following 'rules', guidance or daily practice. Similar to religious rituals?
Perhaps, having a mantra as a reminder. Like:
https://thecasualreader.com/7-stoic-mantras/

I am open to existentialism as a way of thinking about the world and our place in it. However, there are different interpretations of its meaning and consequences.

We can all think of practical, perhaps spiritual, implications of holding certain ways of looking at life, can't we? Each appraised as being more or less beneficial to wellbeing. This 'judgement' can become part of our 'core' self. Our deepest values unchanging...until they are challenged...even then, it is not easy to change if it is part of our identity. Becoming someone else sounds scary. But not if the change is simply being more aware of alternative perspectives.
And a willingness to consider alternatives before acting, or not acting, on them. The choice is ours, no?

You wrote:-

The basic idea is that people are not disturbed by negative events but by their beliefs about these events.

In other words one should decide for oneself who one wants to be, one should not accept others' definition of oneself. Passively accepting others' definition of oneself and consequential unhappiness is what CBT aims to put right.

[amity_blu]

You wrote:-
The basic idea is that people are not disturbed by negative events but by their beliefs about these events.

In other words one should decide for oneself who one wants to be, one should not accept others' definition of oneself. Passively accepting others' definition of oneself and consequential unhappiness is what CBT aims to put right.

Yes. That is one aspect of mental health issues related to identity, concerning the effects of others' opinions on the person's psyche.

However, there are different kinds and degrees of 'unhappiness' - imbalance in wellbeing - with complex causes.
How can one not be disturbed by stressful life events, related to control or perceived lack of power?
A single therapy or philosophy can't 'put things right' in any world.
But it might alleviate mental distress to some degree.

If fearful, angry or full of hatred against oppressors, can we hire a Hit Man?
All it seems we can do, is to learn how to regulate thoughts and emotional states. As in Stoicism.
Not dwell in existential angst.

[Belinda]

You wrote:-
The basic idea is that people are not disturbed by negative events but by their beliefs about these events.

In other words one should decide for oneself who one wants to be, one should not accept others' definition of oneself. Passively accepting others' definition of oneself and consequential unhappiness is what CBT aims to put right.

Yes. That is one aspect of mental health issues related to identity, concerning the effects of others' opinions on the person's psyche.

However, there are different kinds and degrees of 'unhappiness' - imbalance in wellbeing - with complex causes.
How can one not be disturbed by stressful life events, related to control or perceived lack of power?
A single therapy or philosophy can't 'put things right' in any world.
But it might alleviate mental distress to some degree.

If fearful, angry or full of hatred against oppressors, can we hire a Hit Man?
All it seems we can do, is to learn how to regulate thoughts and emotional states. As in Stoicism.
Not dwell in existential angst.

CBT can't address every unhappiness or affective illness.
However it is a comparatively inexpensive therapy that can help states of unbalanced cognition.

[Impenitent]

coming of age and pondering the existential question...

Strange but I always think of male teenage angst when I think of existentialism. That is wrong, I know.
There is not just one existential question for one age or gender. Identity and Voice matters.

'can you be who you think you are, described and understood, in a language you don't speak?' - Imp

I don't understand the question. What do you mean by a 'language you don't speak'?

when you tell yourself (or anyone else) who you think you are, you do so in language you understand.

you are limited to the extent of said language

if you understand more than one language, are you who you are in language A as well as who you are in language B?

the meanings may overlap, but they are not identical- same is true for the audiences

you may be who you think you are (and described and communicated as such) in English or French, but maybe not in Mandarin...

-Imp