My suggestion would be a dynamic identity.
Instead of becoming rigid through attempting to find an identity, the identity remains light and changeable. It is no longer sought after, instead being dynamically present.
The search for one's own identity contains within it one of the big questions: „Who am I?"
This simple yet massive question. I suggest leaving it unanswered. „What do you do?" is, after all, the more cautious question, despite the fact that this one often gets answered incorrectly since, within capitalism, our identity is considered equal to that which makes us money. From this, the question often arises: Am I my job? Or is my identity separate from my job? This question is to be answered depending on how much I identify with my job. The artist probably identifies more with his work, the supermarket cashier probably less (although one can "find their place" there just the same). Besides work, one's identity is further forged from various elements such as one's surroundings, family, interests, thinking, activities etc. Over the course of our lifetimes, our identity becomes clearer. The newborn has no identity in this sense. The old man has a clear identity. From this supposition, I conclude that lack of identity stands for life, whereas the clearly defined, rigid identity stands for death. That which moves lives, that which is static is dead. I suggest staying alive, using identity as a stable surface to be jumped off of. This could be the role of our identity.
In my work as a teacher, I time and again witness how a rigid identity can prevent people from learning and from seeing life in its entirety. Rigidity and narrowness of identity retains its focus on a small fraction of life, thus preventing the acquiring of wisdom. The suggestion is to explore life in its entirety, thus acquiring wisdom. The way of reaching wisdom through ideologies, dogmas, systems and methods, may be questioned.
Because of this, I keep my method dynamic. It is methodic, but it is not a method in and of itself. What we do and what I teach constantly changes. I work methodically, but no static method arises. This is often difficult, and the line is a fine one. It requires a lot of contemplation. The procedure with the dynamic method gives me enough solid ground to jump off of and allows me to vary between landing on solid ground and hovering in the air. Challenging and reflecting creates the dynamic. The constant is change.
Translation: Oskar Henke