What do you think?
Rate this book
True Self: Notes on the Essence of Being
Hardcover
Published February 1, 2022
2 people are currently reading
6 people want to read
About the author
Garret Kramer
4 books15 followersGarret Kramer is the founder and managing partner of Inner Sports, LLC. A former collegiate ice hockey player, Garret is credited with bringing the principles of mind, consciousness, and thought to the athletic community at large. He has worked iwth hundreds of athletes and coaches, including Olympians, the NHL and NFL, and collegiate players across a multitude of sports. His work has been featured on WFAN New York, ESPN, Sports Illustrated, The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
November 18, 2024
Garrett Kramer was not known to me, but the title of his book intrigued me the last time I went to HalfPrice Books and saw this on the Philosophy shelf. I read the first portion before buying and enjoyed his smooth and easy conversational style of writing over a bold and conceptually complex topic such as the self. In a nutshell, his argument is that the personal self does not exist as we intuitively believe it exists - as an independent, self-generating "thing" in the universe - a separate, purposeful, self-causing agent who can affect its' environment in goal-directed, meaningful ways.
To effectively argue for this counter-intuitive concept along with the implications of this where the average person would understand would take a great deal of careful thought to lay down clear arguments. Unfortunately, as you get more into the book, his arguments remain at the more basic level, never honing down to the nuances of the language, the history of the ideas, and the thought processes that led him to these conclusions. In this regard, his writing lacks depth and quality. The ideas he presents are not at all new as they do have a long history within philosophy that extends back thousands of years.
His main argument could be summed up in a few lines: That if we only look inward, we'll realize that the separate self we've taken to exist is merely a societal convention which distracts from our true nature represented by the "true Self", also known in different circles as "Consciousness", "God", "the Source", "infinite being", etc. There are no "things" that exist independently, for everything in made of Consciousness, including the concept of the separate self. Therefore, value and meaning are not "out there" as if they exist within an object external to us, but are a result of this broader consciousness which holds and creates everything there is. The Truth is that duality is a construction of a non-dual mind which divides the whole into parts. The true Self is Love and Connection. In this way, you can always identify someone who is in touch with this true nature as they would be far less apt to criticize, judge, threaten or harm others.
His main, and what seems to be his only, argument for this is is based within a question that is found several times throughout the book - Is there anything known to exist outside of our consciousness? No. Therefore, it's all consciousness and all "things" are a result of Consciousness, even the idea of separate consciousnesses.
It's an argument that falls flat with quite a few people. There are counter-arguments worth examining, but he doesn't go there. Additionally, as I said above, there is a long and intriguing history on this. Much has already been written about this very subject matter, and in a much better way.
That being said, I agree with his general ideas about the social construction of the self and the short-term benefits that maintain external reward seeking at the expense of inward value expression, but he lacks deeper explanation of how he arrived at these conclusions other than a noetic-type of deeper awareness one would get from looking inward with self-exploration. He offers no depth or quality beyond these stated ideas and does not really get into the paradox of language this lead to. Although he does state that language by its very nature is self-limiting, he does not offer an account of how to use our language flexibly.
I gave this book 3 stars which I think is appropriate. It's a quick and easy read. He's obviously done a bit of self-exploration himself. He knows what he's talking about for the most part. His style of writing has a nice flow and easily understood. He doesn't write in a boring scholarly-type of way, which I think appeals to the broader audience.
As for basic introductions to these concepts, I may recommend this book, but for anyone interested in exploring these concepts with any depth and quality, it probably would not have any benefit.
To effectively argue for this counter-intuitive concept along with the implications of this where the average person would understand would take a great deal of careful thought to lay down clear arguments. Unfortunately, as you get more into the book, his arguments remain at the more basic level, never honing down to the nuances of the language, the history of the ideas, and the thought processes that led him to these conclusions. In this regard, his writing lacks depth and quality. The ideas he presents are not at all new as they do have a long history within philosophy that extends back thousands of years.
His main argument could be summed up in a few lines: That if we only look inward, we'll realize that the separate self we've taken to exist is merely a societal convention which distracts from our true nature represented by the "true Self", also known in different circles as "Consciousness", "God", "the Source", "infinite being", etc. There are no "things" that exist independently, for everything in made of Consciousness, including the concept of the separate self. Therefore, value and meaning are not "out there" as if they exist within an object external to us, but are a result of this broader consciousness which holds and creates everything there is. The Truth is that duality is a construction of a non-dual mind which divides the whole into parts. The true Self is Love and Connection. In this way, you can always identify someone who is in touch with this true nature as they would be far less apt to criticize, judge, threaten or harm others.
His main, and what seems to be his only, argument for this is is based within a question that is found several times throughout the book - Is there anything known to exist outside of our consciousness? No. Therefore, it's all consciousness and all "things" are a result of Consciousness, even the idea of separate consciousnesses.
It's an argument that falls flat with quite a few people. There are counter-arguments worth examining, but he doesn't go there. Additionally, as I said above, there is a long and intriguing history on this. Much has already been written about this very subject matter, and in a much better way.
That being said, I agree with his general ideas about the social construction of the self and the short-term benefits that maintain external reward seeking at the expense of inward value expression, but he lacks deeper explanation of how he arrived at these conclusions other than a noetic-type of deeper awareness one would get from looking inward with self-exploration. He offers no depth or quality beyond these stated ideas and does not really get into the paradox of language this lead to. Although he does state that language by its very nature is self-limiting, he does not offer an account of how to use our language flexibly.
I gave this book 3 stars which I think is appropriate. It's a quick and easy read. He's obviously done a bit of self-exploration himself. He knows what he's talking about for the most part. His style of writing has a nice flow and easily understood. He doesn't write in a boring scholarly-type of way, which I think appeals to the broader audience.
As for basic introductions to these concepts, I may recommend this book, but for anyone interested in exploring these concepts with any depth and quality, it probably would not have any benefit.
Displaying 1 of 1 review