Losing Ourselves - Learning to Live without a Self - by Jay L. Garfield

Overview

The central thesis of the book is deceptively simple: We are not selves, nor do we have selves; instead, we are persons ^[1]. Drawing primarily from Buddhist philosophy (particularly the Madhyamaka tradition of Nāgārjuna), Garfield argues that the self is an illusion — not a permanent, independent, or intrinsic entity — and that recognizing this is not a cause for despair, but a path to liberation.
Losing Ourselves - Learning to Live without a Self - by Jay L. Garfield

Key Arguments

1. The Self is an Illusion
Garfield contends that what we call the "self" is not a thing that exists prior to and independently of the world. Rather, it is a conventional designation — a useful but ultimately empty concept. Drawing on the Buddhist doctrine of anātman (non-self), he argues that the sense of a fixed, enduring self is a cognitive construction, not a fundamental reality ^[1:1].

2. Persons, Not Selves
A crucial distinction in the book: we are not selves (permanent, independent entities), but we are persons — embodied, relational, narrative beings who exist in and through our relationships with others and the world ^[2]. The self is conceived as existing prior to and independent of the world; persons, by contrast, are constituted by their relationships and circumstances ^[3].

3. The Practical Benefits of No-Self
Garfield argues that recognizing we have no self is not nihilistic or despairing — it is liberating. Abandoning the illusion of a fixed self helps us:

• Abandon egoism — seeing through the illusion of a permanent self reduces selfish clinging
• Act more morally — when the boundary between self and other dissolves, compassion arises naturally
• Live more spontaneously — without the constant need to protect and defend a reified ego ^[1:2]

4. Persons vs. Selves
A central distinction: we are not selves (permanent, independent entities existing prior to and apart from the world), but we are persons — embodied, relational, narrative beings constituted by our relationships, culture, and circumstances ^[2:1]. The self is a philosophical illusion; personhood is real and relational.

5. Practical Implications
Garfield argues that recognizing we have no self is not nihilistic. Rather, it liberates us from egoism, opens us to more authentic connection with others, and grounds a more genuine ethical life — because when the self-other boundary dissolves, compassion arises naturally ^[3:1].

Our vault already engages deeply with these themes. The note 🌳Comparative Analysis of Cetanā and Free Will in Buddhist Philosophy cites a critical review of Garfield's book from the Secular Buddhist Network ^[4], and several of your evergreen notes — including 🌳Dissolving vs. Evolving-The Self in Buddhism and Jung, 🌳Generative Eye (McGilchrist and Buddhism), and 🌳Boltzmannian Coarse-Graining and Nagarjunian Emptiness — explore the same territory: the self as a constructed illusion, the relational nature of personhood, and the ethical implications of seeing through the self-other boundary.

Sources