We write things about ourselves for a few reasons. One is to express something in the most direct meaning of that word. Another is to have this product to show to someone else, to see if our experiences have any points of commonality with theirs. The form that an expression takes will vary depending on individual temperament and social factors. Transmuting the experience of life into philosophy and art is a path many have taken.

In Western European culture, this idea reaches its artistic zenith in the totalizing self-expression of Wagner's Gesamtkunstwerk. In philosophy, we find it in the work of systemic thinkers like Hegel or Fichte. This is a private, "cathedral" personality, supported by close analysis of one's own thoughts and feelings and the thoughts and feelings of others. Asynchronous correspondence is the foundation of such a personality: developing and leaving records of ourselves in diaries, letters, and marginalia. These help to build a baroque structure of the self, which while extensive and understandable, can be fully understood only with great difficulty.

As communication grew more synchronous and reached the point of "real-time," the work of self-expression became less complicated. An individual was in increasingly constant communication¹ with others, so there was less need for her to spend hours working at expressing herself in precisely the right way. All the benefits one gained in the previous mode of expression were found here with less effort. Instantly, a person could compare her feelings to the feelings of others. Yet inevitably, the type and depth of that expression changed to fit their medium. Statements of self-expression were diffused: extending horizontally but shrinking vertically, increasing in number but lacking in depth.

Comparing their personalities to the older or idiosyncratic personalities of others, those used to the "real-time" mode of self-expression often feel that they lack a defined sense of self. Their thoughts seem to them much less complex or nuanced than the great historical examples, because they are less complex and less nuanced. The sustained, lateral thinking required for critical engagement comes to be more or less impossible for them. This situation is made worse by algorithms able to manipulate their thinking. Still, it is nevertheless possible to find some balance: a few are able to go away for a while and return with something resembling the old style of expression. Yet in every case it requires a private refusal and a private retiring, a temporary or permanent break with the majority to enable self-development.

Every person should decide for themselves whether a complex self is something worth preserving.