The self orients itself toward abstractions it can never fully coincide with, and it is precisely this gap—the not-quite-matching—that constitutes the self. The difference is not a flaw but the inflation of the relational space within which intelligibility arises. The self is not a closed entity but the pattern of deferrals and resonances that language traces as it reaches for what always recedes.
In this sense, the ground of subjectivity is the unresolved space between expression and its elusive object, between language and the larger adaptive frames that exceed it. The self is intelligible only as a ripple within this field, a transient coherence within the continuum of relations. The orbit of approximation is not something to be overcome but the very dynamic by which persistence and identity emerge.
Daedelus Kite 
One reply on “Uncertain Selves”
The self persists in the gap between perception and world, where approximation to pattern is never complete but always in play. That margin of difference is an entropic gradient, a space of tension, torsion, compression, and slippage that both sustains identity and ensures its incompleteness.
You are, in essence, an approximation of a person—a probabilistic bias, a vector of implicature oriented toward an ever-receding horizon that can never be fully reached.
LikeLike