(I assume you’re a fan of process philosophy? If not, check it out!)
I’m interested in understanding what you mean.
However many years ago there was a ‘beginning’ of the organism DanMcD.
However many years hence there will be an ‘ending’ to organism DanMcD.
In-between the organism persists and evolves in a unique particular way.
Do you agree? If so why wouldn’t you call the organism an individual?
When I see a herd of deer, a flock of birds, a school of fish, etc, ‘individuality ‘, as being separate and ‘unique ‘ doesn’t seem applicable. Same with mammals, monkeys and humans, the brains are more complex but each species ,humans included ,have the same brain. Thought/ memory creates this idea or belief in one’s individuality or originality. ‘Anonymity’, is not ‘prized’ in human society.
What about when you see a single deer, single bird, your beloved dog, your spouse, your child, yourself?
Donald Trump?..
Him too! 
Do you see these things as individuals?
I’d say “I am the world” means I am seeing the world according to my prejudice, according to the conditioning through this world. According to this conditioning I am seperate - here am I and out there is the world.
This (imo our common view) is contradicting K’s sentence “You are the world”.
This being seperate, this not-being-the-world is what is common, is the sameness of "I’s.
Not the various capabilities and skills one may be gifted with and physical appearances, which of course differ.
You are asking about the I that is thought, and is your, anyone’s, perception of self, right? That is where it matters, or not.