Advice needed: Is there a name for the philosophical problem I am trying to articulate? Or are these the ramblings of an unwell person? I think it is related to the idea of the illusion of the self.

Hello everyone,

I'm looking for some guidance in finding out the name of the philosophical problem is I am trying to articulate, if there is one, as well as finding any philosophers who discuss this issue that I will go on to describe.

I am unsure if whether or not what I am about to ask and say will be the ramblings of an unwell person so I am genuinely and sincerely looking for advice and criticism.

The philosophical issue I am trying to articulate seems related to the idea of the illusion of the self, although it is more specific.

The self is a term in philosophy that has many different definitions but I will define it for my purposes as "the experiencer", or "the subject". This view of the self is meant to designate the thing that is experiencing our mental states, senses, and our perceptions etc. It is also the thing that accesses our memory which will become relevant later on.

To give a very brief background of the ways in which I view reality that are relevant to this discussion is that I am essentially a hard incompatibilist, therefore I doubt the existence of free will. I am also a materialist/physicalist who therefore believes the universe is made out of matter and there is no such thing as a soul or spirit.

These positions are relevant to my question as it has recently occurred to me that if the universe is made out of matter, and I am essentially a deterministic biological machine governed by physical processes, and the matter present in these physical processes is continually changing, how can there possibly be a stable self across time?

If materialism and hard incompatibilism are true then wouldn't this mean that moment to moment there are different "experiencers" despite the fact that the characteristics including my name, my behaviour, my personality, my looks etc will remain stable. Wouldn't this mean that there is a different "experiencer" inhabiting my matter moment to moment? A different experiencer from one brain state to the next? Who was the guy from a moment ago, was he a different guy? Does it only seem like "the experiencer" is stable across time as all of the experiencers have access to my memory and therefore believe they are the same subject? Is the self an illusion governed by memory? Are there as many experiencers across time as there are brain states? Wouldn't this mean I would essentially "die" so to speak in that there would be a different experiencer in the brain and body from moment to moment?

Is the self similar to a waterfall in that although the cascading of the waterfall (all of my characteristics) remains present, the water molecules which flow through the waterfall (the experiencers) continually change, and therefore the self is an illusion with as many different selfs as there are brain states?

One half-baked argument against this is that our neuronal firing and neurons are somewhat stable across time and so the self is as stable as our neurons, therefore there would not be as many selves as there are mental states, rather the self would be as stable as the neurons which comprise us. However, isn't the matter which compromises the neurons continually changing?

Another half-baked argument against this is that although the matter is constantly changing, the way it is arranged is fairly stable across time. Therefore, the way matter is arranged as opposed to the matter itself the source of the self?

Is this the ramblings of an unwell person or is this a plausible logical consequence of materialism and incompatibilism? Are there other philosophers who have made similar arguments?

I am genuinely confused and have not made this post to proclaim my self as correct, I am honestly looking for anyone's advice and thoughts as they would very helpful as I genuinely feel like I am losing my mind.

Thank you so much if you read this far.