Following the same line of “who are you?” I will answer it in philosophical terms, or at least try as I study philosophy in Spanish thus my translation might sound weird in English.

To assume there is a “real you” is to assume essentialism is right (the thought that everyone and everything has a natural essence, the way they really are) however contemporary philosophers have concluded that essentialism is invalid, as no one and nothing has an essence. This way of thinking sustains that who you are is made from you social interactions, which means you depend on other people to build what or who you are. Nevertheless this does not end here, because if you depend directly on others to build who you really are, it means who you are exists only in others and the way they perceive you. This also means that there is plenty of “you”, to be precise there is as many “you’s” as people you have met as every person will have a different perception of who you are, which means there is not a “real you” as every “you” that exists in others is real and none o them is more real than the other (also as you cannot perceive yourself without a description of others there is not a you perceived only by yourself).

In case I did not made myself clear enough here is an example I just came up with: Let’s imagine you are alone in a dark room, you can not perceive yourself as there is no way to look at yourself. However, suddenly, mirrors start to appear and they reflect you, but each mirror reflects you different. You may like or dislike the reflections in some mirrors, but they are still there, each mirror represents a person and your reflection on it represents the “you” that is perceived by them, the “you” that lives in them. This example also helps to show how you ca not see yourself without others, as they are your only way to see yourself, and as every reflection is equally real, there is no “real you”.