I would like to express a doubt in this respect. Or is this perhaps just another use of language. This view, that I am essentially the same, has no real substance in itself, no handy characterization, you can't really describe it or attach it to anything. I suspect that this is an error, the error of believing that you have a core or an immutable nature simply because you are alive. The fact that I am alive leads me to suspect that this experience of "permanence" would be equivalent to the experience of an unchanging essence/ego. Since I see that people can live for a long time and grow old, that they describe themselves, for example, as typically so and typically so, and that these attributions are confirmed by others who, in my view, usually confirm these attributions because they accept this image without question, since they themselves believe in an unchangeable I and in an unchangeable in being. Or they question it because they permanently perceive something else.

Unchangeable, in my opinion, is only what makes a human being as such, his impulsive reactions, his unconscious and conscious typical human qualities, but not something concretely personal.

I have had too many contradictory experiences on the subject of the core of being. And I would certainly say that as a child I was a completely different person, different at 5 years old than at 12, different at 25 than at 30 and so on. Of course I cultivated exactly those character traits that my environment told me were present, such as "gentleness" and rejected those that were negatively reflected, such as "choleric" and the like. One of my childhood friends, who knew me for over twenty years, once said to me: "You are easily overwhelmed. It's easy to handle you." Another one, also from that time, said: "It's difficult to come up against you. "You're not a match for anybody else." They described me and my supposed character exactly the same way they either perceived me positively or negatively. Closely tied to how they saw themselves or thought they had to portray themselves. What others see of me predominantly, I attribute to the intention that I want to influence how they see me. Which partly succeeds when it matches, but which fails when it does not fit the other person's image of me. For my colleagues I am "calm", "level-headed", for my son I am "impatient" or "compassionate", for others I am a cold-hearted and selfish personality, and I am one hundred percent so.

Everybody is constantly building their image and people are capable of amazing character constructions. Which is not to say that they should not. I think such character constructions are necessary to a certain extent to find one's way in the world. But one should keep in mind that these character constructs are not really there, just as a core that eludes description is not immutable, since it cannot have anything like a fixed identity. This mysterious self is therefore for me rather something like a potential, an ever present possibility to change identities. So for me it is the opposite of what you describe the I. It must even be extremely changeable, because, to put it bluntly, it would come into conflict at every turn and have an accident.

The "unchangeable I" becomes untraceable when you start looking for it.

Glad, that I could contradict you a little :)