Freud: EGO = True Self ?

[Wells]

Oh? Wow... fantastic!

 

Actually, in the higher teachings, the Buddha taught that since there is no ego from the beginning, there is nothing to deconstruct.

 

The construct was/is artificially built so that people can remove the idleness, see themselves as useful and worthwhile, by reinforcing a sort of dummy that was not there to begin with. Funny, isn't it?

True, I had to laugh when reading this...

It's like reciting something cryptic from the bible about what Jesus said to justify one's own declarations.

 

The "construct" was build because it was useful for survival. There is no aloof meta-reason behind the development of your Ego.

 

 

...it's still always a shock for me when I see again and again how detached from reality you guys are!

Edited May 24, 2011 by Dorian Black

[suninmyeyes]

Yeah, and if you would succesfully deconstruct fully the Ego and your Superego, you would revert to the state of a baby: Unable o contthink, to will, to act, to be in control[/b. Only sponaneous affects from your Id and the outside world would dictate your whole being.

If not successfully deconstruct them fully, you would just stay with a weak personality.

Seems to be the buddhist destiny...

Hello Dorian Black,

 

So who is this who is able to deconstruct the ego and superego in your opinion according to the ego theory youve posted ?

Intelect?Mind?'Higher' ego?Or?

And who is this who is in the control?

(see what is underlined in your post)

Does nature have an ego or is it our real ego?Or is the nature ego of god ?

Just something I am courious about latley..

[Wells]

Hello Dorian Black,

 

So who is this who is able to deconstruct the ego and superego in your opinion according to the ego theory youve posted ?

Intelect?Mind?'Higher' ego?Or?

And who is this who is in the control?

(see what is underlined in your post)

Does nature have an ego or is it our real ego?Or is the nature ego of god ?

Just something I am courious about latley..

The Ego/ the personality would destroy or deconstruct itself.

Nice act of self-hatred IMO...Buddhist's should think about that.

 

Edit: Concerning your last question: The TAO is not personal and therefore has no Ego, God personality, whatever.

 

Edit2: Your intellect/mind is part of your Ego. Watch a baby for contrast what it means to have no Ego (and Superego).

Edited May 24, 2011 by Dorian Black

[Sloppy Zhang]

In reality, your problems come from sick drives in your Id and from sick agendas in your Superego...and what you do is destroying the only thing that prevents your system from becoming taken over by these sickening influences! I wish much fun with the resulting Psychic Inflation, when you came far enough with the process! I guess you will interpret it as Enlightenment then! Tragically, the doctors won't!

 

With this framework, I would say that the "getting rid of the ego" isn't getting rid of the "ego" as it has been defined in your OP. It would be getting rid of EVERYTHING.

 

Get rid of the ridiculous impossible ideologies of the super ego.

 

Get rid of the ridiculous impossible drives of the id.

 

And get rid of the ridiculous, desperate rationalizations of the ego.

 

I don't think any serious practitioner of any serious tradition would, using Freudian terminology, advocate the shedding of the ego to allow the super ego and the id to rip each other apart.

 

And I highly doubt that the enlightened beings of this era, the eras past, or the eras yet to come, would be spiritually inflated, either riding their highs from an overbearing super ego, or caving into the excesses of the id. And I doubt even more that doctors would have anything to say other than "that person is the most mentally and physically sound individual I have ever seen."

 

But I suppose that's just another impossible, middle-road pedestal that my super ego has created which I will never achieve, while my id is desperately trying to get some pussy, and my ego is drawing the line at tantra.

 

Oh, Freud, if only you were around today to see the impact of your work. Would you pat yourself on the back? Or rofl? Hmmmmm.......

[Informer]

If your a nihlist why do you bother posting on a Tao forums? Obviously looking for attention.

 

So what is your purpose exactly? I highly doubt your views are going to rub off on anyone, and no one is going to be able to change yours. So what?

Edited May 24, 2011 by Informer

[Wells]

With this framework, I would say that the "getting rid of the ego" isn't getting rid of the "ego" as it has been defined in your OP. It would be getting rid of EVERYTHING.

 

Get rid of the ridiculous impossible ideologies of the super ego.

 

Get rid of the ridiculous impossible drives of the id.

 

And get rid of the ridiculous, desperate rationalizations of the ego.

Sounds like a good plan!

Also, recognizing the Ego as a plastic device one could program the Ego to become a better device to achieve one's goals.

But I suppose that's just another impossible, middle-road pedestal that my super ego has created which I will never achieve, while my id is desperately trying to get some pussy, and my ego is drawing the line at tantra.

[suninmyeyes]

The Ego/ the personality would destroy or deconstruct itself.

Nice act of self-hatred IMO...Buddhist's should think about that.

 

Edit: Concerning your last question: The TAO is not personal and therefore has no Ego, God personality, whatever.

 

Edit2: Your intellect/mind is part of your Ego. Watch a baby for contrast what it means to have no Ego (and Superego).

Oh I see,I was wandering becouse you have said"if you would succefully deconstruct ego.."so I assumed that there is somebody doing it,and then youve answered that it does it by itself(which I also believe it does but that is not known on some levels).

In my universe intellect is discriminative faculty and differs from mind (which is group of thoughts) and ego would be that which chooses to identfy with the thoughts and translates them into actions.

I also believe that the baby has an ego however tiny or not brought to frutation yet.But than again I am not a taoist.

[Wells]

Oh I see,I was wandering becouse you have said"if you would succefully deconstruct ego.."so I assumed that there is somebody doing it,and then youve answered that it does it by itself(which I also believe it does but that is not known on some levels).

In my universe intellect is discriminative faculty and differs from mind (which is group of thoughts) and ego would be that which chooses to identfy with the thoughts and translates them into actions.

I also believe that the baby has an ego however tiny or not brought to frutation yet.But than again I am not a taoist.

I see. Original Taoism does not identify an Ego. Several schools do, but they're always Taoism mixed with Buddhism. However, in Original Taoist practice there is only an "I" (= spelled "ee") or "Yi". Waysun Liao translates this simply as "mind". Instead of deconstructing the Ego, Taoists are concerned about cleansing and refining their Chi.

[xabir2005]

Ego is a real fiction. An actual self cannot be found, but there is a mental conjuration of a self. Like the dream of unicorn is undeniable, but the unicorn does not exist as such. It is a real fiction and exists only in imagination.

 

The ego is not a thing as such, it is not an actual entity but a process of mentally conjuring a mental fiction of a personal (or even impersonal) self and attributes this self to being a controller or agent of actions, thoughts, experiences.

 

In reality there is no thinker - thoughts simply occur. There is no doer, actions simply occur. There is no seer - the sight is itself the seeing happening without seer.

 

But due to self-view, we infer that a previous experience is "seen by me" - it always infers and references a previous experience to the mentally conjured "self" which in actuality cannot be found, much less have any control over reality.

 

Once we wake up from this mental fiction by the realisation that there is no actual self that is the agent of experience, life goes on as usual but with much greater clarity, freedom, wonder and delight. Seeing is still happening, thinking is still happening, actions still happen, but it is seen that there is no agent behind those experiences. Everything becomes luminous and a fairy-tale like paradise, and you see that to bring yourself forward to experience the myriad things is delusion... Awakening is that the myriad things comes forth and experiences itself, and life is just "tripping" on ordinary seeing and hearing/Life itself delighting, tripping on life... And there is actual intimacy with all things (due to the lack of a self at the center separate from the world)

 

Seeing through the illusion of self, speaking from experience, certainly does not result in one's being reduced to a state of a baby, as the accumulated knowledge, memories, experiences of a lifetime has not been diminished or adversely affected in the least from this waking up.

 

Furthermore our habits, traits, behaviours conditioned from young (commonly defined as personality though these are actually simply impersonal conditionings) may or may not be changed... Much of them wouldn't - especially the harmless ones (but afflictive emotions and behaviours stemming from craving, anger, fear, sorrow, conceit, ignorance etc will be gradually reduced and ultimately eliminated). But there is no refering these actions to a central agent. All these behaviours happen via dependent origination, via latent tendencies and conditioning.

 

Lastly having a healthy ego (self-image) is certainly better comparatively than having an unhealthy one. For example having a confident self-image is better than having a low self-esteem due to poor self image. However if you are liberated from self image then you will discover a kind of fearlessness and security that far transcends any "good ego". It is the security of not having self (to protect its interests), birth, death. That is why waking up transcends whatever psychotherapy you are doing to build a good self-image... It overcomes the same problems (for example, fear and insecurity) not by replacing one self image with another but by seeing through and letting go the illusion entirely so the problem does not even have a basis to begin with. For example low self esteem is not overcome by pride, but rather the base illusion of "self" is seen through and so both pride and low self-esteem has no basis at all.

Edited May 26, 2011 by xabir2005