Do you know who you "truly" are?

The dynamic idea I wished to understand for persona and personality that does not Exist through itself to my understanding. What existed now was: is imagination determining of communication, or is it merely Real over and against Ideal? How are we constrained by nothing more than an alienating force? The dynamic needs the process of urban development and taming of growth that way to me. The individual is what I am essentially after, I believe. Existentially, it is orientation to subjective Faith not to be failed.

Thank you, for taking the time to answer.:mickey:

 

The ego is the self, and that 'self' was given rise by the notion that we are separate from the world. ( It was probably something that was necessary for human evolution at some point) You can't be ego-less and still have a self, if you did, I doubt you could function in society at all. You would by definition be 'maligned'. The trick with the ego is to figure out the bad parts and get rid of them while still keeping the good.

 

That is the perception of self as identified as ones own body or the idea of separation. The ego or sense of self can possess a different kind of identification or one that relies on the idea of sameness. A sense of identity or the proportions of the ego are in large part learned and as we learn to create an ego in this sense for ourselves we do so for others as well and they for us and in this way ego is acquired reputation.

Can't be stated categorically. I am called many things but taken together I am none of those in particular.

 

As a dualist are you consisting this Ego with organic members of it's own at necessity to fulfil the transcendental Hyle, the ego in Situation? I think I am in a situation that God did not create; the situation is for or against Me because of the opinion-ater, the Hyle.

 

Self can be recognized only by self otherwise we call it other. I am not a facsimile or representation of self but what you can say about me is.

 

i.e. an Organic member of the community. Who's to judge the realism of only your opinion?

 

...knowledge being shared

 

That's alright; I don't mind being Fascist for a while.:beatnik:

 

O.K. O.K. I don't know who I AM. Schopenhauer says: I could if I was truly irrational.

 

I'll get back to you Anaximenes, I just wanted to give a quick answer here:

I prefer, and agree with, the definition of ego that Jung put forth. The main purpose of the ego is to maintain a consistent concept of the self. I agree with you that you cannot be ego-less, and that such is a misguided understanding of self----but the whole idea behind seeking to become ego-less is cultural. It makes a lot of sense to people who have been brought up in cultures where the group ethic is the strongest.

The Jungian ego is really a filter---a filters out all the nonessential stimulus, feelings, and thoughts which are relegated to (or returned to as the case may be) the subconscious, everything else is perceived by the conscious mind. This consistent self is why you can go to bed angry at someone and then wake up the next morning and you are still angry at them. It filters out the reality we understand based on the concept it has of the self. Therefore there is much of reality we do not perceive because it is filtered out by the ego. The ego also develops an ideal self, and strives to achieve that---the ego-ideal.

The more we become aware of our true self, the more we open up the ego filter to allow greater diversity of stimulus. This is why people that are highly individuated can accomplish great things. The ego, because it develops a concept of self, is judgmental and divisive. As we open up the ego, we tend to break down this judgmentalism, in part because we open ourselves up to new and more divergent stimulus.

 

In the previous post, answering to Gongshaman, I gave my opinion of the ego. It really is little more than a tool of the psyche, but the more focused we become on conscious mind and objective reality, the more it becomes the key defining determinant of the self---but this is not the true self, but rather the ego-defined self, which is largely a conglomerate of personas.

We each have a unique personality. My wife was a TV actress in Tokyo and she had worked with numerous Japanese celebrities and a few American ones. We met Michael Douglas, Omar Sharif, Jackie Chan, and a few others. I was always amazed at how key personality traits that always shown through the different personas represented by the part the actor was playing, were very much a part of the actual personalities of these people. Michael Douglas was just as much Michael Douglas off the set as he was on the set. Several Japanese actors with personality traits I didn't think were exactly good---but certainly made them popular were the first ones I noticed this with---for example one guy who would play a Japanese version of Colombo, whenever he thought about something, would get this dumb look on his face and scratch his head. I thought it was just an act for his character, until they were trying to figure out how best to do a shot, and I watched him do the very same thing. Off the set he would do the same thing every time he was deep in thought or trying to figure something out.

So I think we each have qualities that show our true personality and plays into the various persona. But the persona are not divine, but just constructs of the ego.

Thedope has brought up the issue of a universal mind---that we are all of the same 'mind, or self.'

My answer to that, i.e. my humble belief (not to force it on anyone but in order to answer the question), is that everything within the universe is part of God. Where does God not exist? (An atheist of course would have a different answer, but opposed to his 'God exists no where' the most logical other answer is 'God is everywhere.') So yes, thedope is right in what he is saying. But I would disagree that the implication of that is that we need to focus on that, or that we should seek to become one with that common cosmic consciousness. I would point out that there is just as much God in a rock, as there is in you and I. But here is an example of how I feel about this: What if all the fingers in my hands suddenly became self-aware and the thumb decided that they are not any different, that they are all of the one human, and that they therefore should focus on becoming that one human because only then would they find happiness. So they all turn into thumbs---now what good would that do me? Or what if they all went deep into meditation (fell asleep as I would see it) and then meditated so hard that they achieved remerging with the Great Humanness---and then all reverted into the inside of my hand. What good would that do me? How would that fulfill the purpose of my fingers?

I believe we are here to experience life but not to remerge with the cosmic consciousness. I feel that our unique individuality is extremely important to who we are. I had a very lucid vision one time which shapes my belief that our individual consciousness is of a higher dimension, and that it is this consciousness penetrating, if you will, into the four physical dimensions (the three physical dimensions plus time), that manifests as our physical being. While the ego maintains a consistent perception of the self, it also filters out all stimulus that does not support that consistency within physical reality. This is why as people open up their ego, gain a deeper understanding of self, that they tend to become more spiritual, and even gain a deeper control over reality. Now I know a lot of people, particularly atheists, would have issues with that last statement, but the list of people that Jung listed as highly individuated consisted mainly of people who did amazing things. I know people who do amazing things.

In fact I would argue that at least some the amazing things that are achieved through prayer are probably done at the individual level---one’s own individual consciousness at its higher dimensional level.

 

I'm my body! Seek hyle! :-D

 

I'm really Dr Jekyll...no wait, I'm Mr. Hyde. No, I am Dr. Jekyll..... Ha

Seriously though, at the rate I'm going, I will die without knowing who I truly am. I'm not sure if it is possible to know anyway.

 

I'm going to say that these personas in general are not integrated in the individual and do not know or recognize each other. You might hear a person called upon anger say of themselves I don't know where that came from or I didn't act like myself or all I could see is red. The one with good sense is not around when the other angry one takes over. Then there is the one that is full of enthusiasm about tomorrows project and the one who wakes up tomorrow and doesn't want to get out of bed. These two will even fight with each other over who will ascend all the while yet another you is asking why don't I have any will power.
The answer is you are full of competing interests.

I disagree with the implication that I might be implicating that oneness is what we need to focus on. If oneness is so as in reality is one thing then there is no need for a particular focus and I personally bristle at the idea that love can be taught or that some are essentially more loving than others. I happen to think that we are not in the making but that being itself is all real accomplishment and it is ever forthcoming. My suggestion is that anxiety is an indicator of errant perception and represents a superstitious theorem about the world. Our model of the world informs our quite reasonable responses, as we react invariably in accordance with that model. You hear this when people say that god told them to do something or you see it in the increasing militarization of our civil police forces as our models of suspicion make it seem like a good idea.

It is my idea that you cannot get a level accounting out of the effort to do good or enforce the law but you will consistently perform on the basis of your level of identification, our pro-tections extending without effort or caution because of the absolute value we place on self. The universal moral imperative is there is good for me and I must have it. Where our treasure lies there is our heart or vital investment also.

 

I'll take a piss.

 

I'm just like you, only . . . different.

 

I disagree, though I can only speak from my perspective and my understanding of the psychology of the persona---maybe you experience it differently.

I think you are confusing cases where the shadow is acting out with a persona. If someone realizes they just did something that they don't think is normal for them, and they suddenly blurt out, "I don't know where that came from." Or even if they know that they sometimes act that way, but know it is wrong, and yet can't help it----then that is the shadow acting out.

But the personas for the most part are integrated. The 'me' that found it very hard to get up in the morning, was always the same 'me' from my perspective that acted one way in front of my bosses, and acted another way in front of those who worked below 'me' or where at the same corporate level as myself, as the same 'me' that secretly fondled women in crowded elevators. (I'm joking! I have never fondled women in elevators). I have always recognized that I acted differently in different social situations, even when I didn't like how I was acting---for example, I always hated how I acted in front of superiors---I felt that I wasn't aggressive enough

(What Doctor? Why do you want me to tell you about my relationship with my father?) ;-)

I especially hated how I would act in Japan in front of senpai's and bosses (Those in superior social rank). I was a hippy for Christ's sake. Though truth be told I always used my blonde hair, and American nationality to my advantage. When I worked for a Japanese Brokerage House, I would do my best to stay after work with everyone else----but never more than half an hour----I was always the first one to leave.

The point is that even though I was acting out a different persona, and that there was a sort of competition between personas, as you say, I always saw it as the same 'me.' I would switch back and forth naturally and without even knowing it, but between one persona and the other, I was still me, and being the same me.

And when you get down to it---it wasn't really a competition---I know why I acted out one way in front of superiors than I did among underlings. Even if I did not like how I acted, I still knew that I was acting in a way that was most beneficial for me at that point. In fact I usually associated the problem as one of---the social situation---rather than one of a competing version of me.

I disagree with the implication of the implication that you might be implicating that the oneness is to be focused upon... (Just kidding)

I agree about love, or that one is not loving than another. I think that anxiety occurs when we are not in tune with our purpose or nature, particularly our own nature.

But I think that our purpose is to experience life, and in that sense, we are in "our own making."

And I do agree with your conclusion about the oneness---though I express it from a different perspective. I see life and nature as a multiplicity---the indigenous or native view----but that we are all related (Mitakuye Oyasin). Since all of creation is related---is my own relative---then there is no basis in discrimination, divisiveness, reductionism, group ethic, etc. There is no single right belief, or chosen people, or eternal evil. Human, animal, animate, inanimate, it doesn't matter---we are all related---within the core of the Great Diversity, there is a oneness of essence.

After all every thing that exists within our universe, is composed of the dust from the first exploded stars after the big bang. Mitakuye oyase.

 

What is human nature? And what if part of human nature is to have no purpose?
Some of the oldest sages recommended giving up desires, achievement and purpose, as they are simply constructs of the ego.

IDK, I have a strong feeling a basic part of human nature is to chill and have as much fun as possible.... one things for sure, If everyone knew who they truly are, it would be really bad for the economy...heh.

 

:smilielol5:

Forgive me for laughing, but that post is just so... so cute!

The moment you start thinking like this is A) the moment you go blind, because we stop exploring the possibilities
B) The moment you trap yourself so you can't be anything else

Let me share with you a story about myself. I used to feel a lot older than my years. I've been through a lot of shit, especially for someone my own age, dealing with things most people don't have to. I used to wonder how there could be much more. So, I was literally standing there taking a piss one day when I realized something wonderful about the human consciousness - there is no limit, not really, and all the limits are just entrapments people place on themselves. In the words of a wise friend of mine who was probably quoting some philosopher, "we are not human beings having a spiritual experience, rather, spiritual beings having a human experience"

So no, there is no way to determine who we "really are" because in truth the potential for so much more is there. I realized in that moment there is only experience, and no such thing as age connected to it, because it simply isn't relevant. Thinking we know all about a certain thing is just another way of lying to ourselves, and hurting ourselves

Though, this is both only a basic sense of the fullness of what I can say on the subject, and there are other things which we can take into consideration that complicate the matter, such as personality types, etc. although the basic idea there is, in my opinion, somewhere on the right path

 

But those same sages enjoy the aesthetic nature of life, they only do it with unattachment, or at least a focus on the temporal nature of natural beauty.

I too think that is the best way to experience life. sadness and sorrow are a part of the human experience---but I will do everything I can to avoid that.

Yes definitely. And I have no idea what I'd be doing right now, since I have made most of my money based on the follies of human nature---the crowd who has no idea of who they are (as opposed to the human nature of those who truly know themselves). I have made my money for many years trading against those who are lost in greed, and those who are lost in fear.