EyeSeeCold
lust for life
After watching the film 12 Monkeys, the question has been fermenting in my mind: What would be the consequences of a person constantly shifting through timelines and habitations to the extent of uprooting their sense of identity and undermining their memories?
Regardless of what geographic region humans occupy we form relationships with the environment and people around us, there is a German word for this concept known as 'heimat'. These relationships serve to provide existential meaning and a static sense of reality.
In a similar way we form relationships with the time periods that we have lived through, which includes our unique memories of people we've met, places we've been, and things we've seen.
Question of sanity/memory:
Unless a person eventually returned to their original dimension, enough shifts of time period and timeline would make memories less and less convincing. With time travel how would a person determine what is real if reality is constantly being altered? In 12 Monkeys (***Spoiler***), the main character James Cole jumps back and forth between timelines to the point where he questions whether he really is a time traveler on a mission to save humanity from extinction or is just 'mentally divergent' and is fabricating these events out of insanity or desperation.
Migrating to a new land wouldn't be so impactful on sanity, at least not in the same way. You would still be able to distinguish what is real, but would constant space/time travel affect a person's ability to mentally and socially relate to local inhabitants? Does travel tend to cause more of a rift, or does it actually make a person more grounded in terms of universal connection?
Question of identity:
Regardless of what geographic region humans occupy we form relationships with the environment and people around us, there is a German word for this concept known as 'heimat'. These relationships serve to provide existential meaning and a static sense of reality.
In a similar way we form relationships with the time periods that we have lived through, which includes our unique memories of people we've met, places we've been, and things we've seen.
Question of sanity/memory:
Unless a person eventually returned to their original dimension, enough shifts of time period and timeline would make memories less and less convincing. With time travel how would a person determine what is real if reality is constantly being altered? In 12 Monkeys (***Spoiler***), the main character James Cole jumps back and forth between timelines to the point where he questions whether he really is a time traveler on a mission to save humanity from extinction or is just 'mentally divergent' and is fabricating these events out of insanity or desperation.
Migrating to a new land wouldn't be so impactful on sanity, at least not in the same way. You would still be able to distinguish what is real, but would constant space/time travel affect a person's ability to mentally and socially relate to local inhabitants? Does travel tend to cause more of a rift, or does it actually make a person more grounded in terms of universal connection?
Question of identity:
There is evidence that humans were hunter-gatherers for hundreds of thousands of years, which was the first, primary, and longest survival orientation only losing traction as of 12,000 years ago. So with respect to evolutionary psychology how accurate is it to say the (constant) loss of cultural identity would be existentially devastating, or that humans are not very adaptable?
When you leave a timeline, time period, or homeland there would be at least a temporary loss of meaning, wherein a person might cling to their memories as an anchor. But with the possibility of physical and temporal migration what would that identity mean anyway but familiarity? And if familiarity primarily cultivates identity, all it would take to reform that is to live in a certain dimension for awhile as relationships are established once again. Identity is malleable but what would change do to a person? And since it is not fixed, does that make it something to be regarded with less importance?
When you leave a timeline, time period, or homeland there would be at least a temporary loss of meaning, wherein a person might cling to their memories as an anchor. But with the possibility of physical and temporal migration what would that identity mean anyway but familiarity? And if familiarity primarily cultivates identity, all it would take to reform that is to live in a certain dimension for awhile as relationships are established once again. Identity is malleable but what would change do to a person? And since it is not fixed, does that make it something to be regarded with less importance?