Massimo,

So I'm still not getting how we don't have some individual set of lenses, filters, beliefs, habits, obsessions, interests, etc, that don't constitute what might in the overall sense be described as our "character?" Yes, all the various aspects are all tangled networks, but it seems some general node is to be assumed.

Obviously it is plastic, but the alternative wouldn't make sense. Who really considers character to be some absolute, unchanging state? Isn't the absolute the flatline in the middle, where all the squiggles and ups and down all cancel out. No life, no character.

Ps, Wouldn’t someone whose network of proclivities didn’t cohere into a general whole, but possibly have a distinct polarization, or possibly multiple points of intersection, be described as being schizophrenic, or have multiple personality disorder?

Which raises the question of whether personality is synonymous with character? Wouldn’t a person lacking personality be an oxymoron? Even if they had such symptoms as schizophrenia, wouldn’t that be considered a significant aspect of their character/personality? Some people I know come to mind.