For a while, I've been convinced that the question "Who Am I?" is not only confusing but counter-productive. It tries to identify as static something that is, by nature, dynamic. Some years ago, I started thinking about happiness and lately I've understood how "Am I Happy?" is just as rigged a question as "Who Am I?". Indeed, be it happiness or the self, these are ever changing entities. We 'know' we are happy but the moment we stop and try to bring it down to 5 bullet points, we're not as certain anymore. We 'know' who we are but the moment we try to pencil it down, the words feel eerie and disturbing.
Extending that understanding, I thought this might be the case for any feeling we have, or really any thing that makes up our life. "Am I rich?" and suddenly what I have is not enough. "Am I in love?" and suddenly the feeling puts his hand on the back of his neck and doesn't look that sure anymore. "Am I kind?" and suddenly every instance where I haven't been comes to mind before I try to summon the times where I was. Wealth, love, kindness are all dynamic. To spot the light of perception on them is to put them on the spot. And most often, they don't have answers. They're airy, dynamic by nature.
> I'm not making the case for not asking questions but rather for seeing them as clues. Why are we asking these questions in the first place. What is it that brought them to the surface. Questions about one self are mirrors more than torches. Have you ever noticed that 'static' questions hinder your thinking?
> I prefer questions that focus on what can be done. For someone trying to figure out his next professional move, "What can I do to get what I want for me and my loved ones?" is so much more useful than "What is my passion?". Would you agree?