>>28571
You should try reading about Free Will and its limitations. I don't mean philosophers and modern scientists arguing whether it exists or not, or Libet experiments. I'm referring to the well-known psychological and biological factors that drive our daily behaviors without us realizing it. It's more practical than entertaining supernatural ideas like possession and understanding these things could help you recognize and change your behavior. Language and our culture shaping the way we see the world are already out of our control. The differences between collectivist and individualist cultures are fascinating to me.

>possessed by a persona
What do you mean by this? How are you defining the split between "us" and the "persona"? But yes you are basically a product of society and circumstance, and the notion of an independent free-willed mind is mostly a myth kept alive by the mind's own desire.

>>28576
>How are you defining the split between "us" and the "persona"?
That's what I'm asking.
If people can change their behaviour or their mind, doesn't that mean that is not really them?
Say someone was a nice person, but then he got alzheimers, lost all their memories and turned into a bad one.
Or a musician who lost their arms and can't play anymore
Or an artist who went blind.
What you are or what you do aren't really you, so what are you?
I don't really know.

>>28574
I wasn't really thinking about supernatural, but like you said, language and culture shape how we see the world.

Maybe it's like the "thing in itself" of Kant, as in, you can't really know yourself.

>>28582
I thought you meant a ¨persona¨, like a dualistic soul, but I think I get what you're saying now.
>If people can change their behaviour or their mind, doesn't that mean that is not really them?
Yes, I'd even say they can't change their behavior or adopt a persona by themselves. For example, if I decide to start drawing and call myself an artist, it's likely because I saw a nice anime art online. If I think of myself as a musician and learn to play the guitar, it's because I listened to a good song and wanted to play it myself.

The person with Alzheimer's, who used to be kind (by circumstance), isn't so different from me because we both changed due to circumstances, except his were biological and mine were more psychological. Going blind or losing my arms and having to drop those personalities wouldn't be in my control either.
Finding the reasons why me and others do what we do can be interesting.

>What you are or what you do aren't really you, so what are you? I don't really know.
Me neither and I don't think much about it. I'm not really into philosophy or pondering abstract things like this or the illusion of the self for my own sanity. I prefer to watch mugumogu's cat videos, it helps with overthinking because their lives are simple and I'm a living being on this rock just like them. Maybe.

>I thought you meant a ¨persona¨, like a dualistic soul, but I think I get what you're saying now.
Yeah I initially thought this as well, but after his clarification I think OPs question is closer to the infamous "nature vs. nurture" debate. While in terms of physical attributes (including mental abilities) genetics probably plays a decent role, I think when it gets to what defines our personality, the effect of society & circumstances you grew up in almost surely dominate. There is likely some base layer shared amongst all humans though, e.g. notions of selfishness, that are conserved instincts from more primitive roots.

You might be interested in looking up terms proximate to "collective unconscious".

Also I'll plug the anime Flip Flappers since the theme at its core is the interaction between perception, psyche, and (our view of) reality, and there's lots of good literature to read about this show.