Adam said in a comment:
"Whatever your obsession - be it money, sex or power it is impossible to satisfy. It's a spiritual impossibility to satisfy the human ego. "Once you have understood this the question then becomes how to get rid of the ego, so you can live comfortably and at peace."
I think Adam is right. I was thinking recently about why is it that the Ego will never be satisfied?
I concluded that the Ego is the outward result of a missing part of the soul or the Self. When you have a hole deep in yourself, you don't see it, but you keep trying to fill that hole, for instance with getting attention, confirmation, or possessions. And of course that will never work.
16 comments:
Plato? Plato anyone ... Plato? Freud? Hello ... soul looking to fill an empty hole? Plato?
:)
I think this has been discussed in Western philosophy regularly. Oddly, Western philosophy seems unable to come to grips with the idea. So, instead of resolving it, generation after generation merely rolls it over and over.
Easterners are more efficient. The Taoists simply dispense with the question altogether. "Unfulfilled desire is the root of all unhappiness." Blip. Then they move on.
I think there's a difference between a "bad" obsession and a "good" desire. Since you've put it in Freudian terms ("ego"), I'd have to suggest that the Freudian reading is part of the problem. I don't think we have an "id, ego, and super-ego", those oddly categorized and sub-divided agents each with his strange functions and secrets. Rather, I think we have a moral conscience, and a varying continuum of levels of drives and motivations, ranging from the most self-aware (perhaps pathologically and dysfunctionally so) to the least (perhaps also pathological, or not).
As I consider "what do I want to do with my life," regularly losing jobs and being dissatisfied with a work-oriented existence, I regularly come up against similar advice from a variety of fronts. The advice is usually something like, "stop trying to be famous, rich, and important, and simply live your life day by day, moment by moment." In other words, lose your EGO and your desire, and you'll be happier. Therefore, the question is directly related to this post. It's about ego.
But for me, it never worked out that way. When I'm the hero, I'm happy; when I'm not, I'm not. When I'm striving for success, I like the moment by moment existence. When I'm busy trying to "dare to be minor" (T.S. Eliot's advice, given to aspiring young poets when he was ageing), I feel as though I am wasting my gifts.
"Ego" serves the positive function, of encouraging positive ambition, striving. The contrary point of view -- to sit back and let the world flow over you, oddly Eastern in its "zoning out" -- to me, is a morally corrupt existence. Why not try to do something good with your life instead of just jackin' off and using the excuse that you "have transcended desire"?
Just a different point of view ...
No, no, noooo.
Ambition is healthy.
Ego is the unhealthy parts that look like ambition to the casual glance.
It's the part that's hurt if you don't win all the time and don't get all the attention in the room.
"When you have a hole deep in yourself"...
Shouldn't that be : When deep in yourself you are "a hole"?"
The Ego is a part of the complete self. When you mistake a part of you for "the whole"(!), you'll keep searching for harmony in every place except where you should.
Ego must be accepted... and it must accept some things, too! But this is probably more about the "Id" having insufficient Super-Ego. Common and scientific languages aren't the same.
"Super-Ego to the rescue! Dang, fans, isn't my heroic hairdo just amazing today?" ;-)
"I don't think we have an "id, ego, and super-ego", those oddly categorized and sub-divided agents each with his strange functions and secrets."
I'm not sure. While neuro-physiology tells us the brain functions as a whole (well, d'uh!), it also has specialized areas for most functions: senses, motion, memory, hunger, sleep... and many zones in the prefrontal lobes directly related to social (and moral) behavior. I don't know whether one day we'll discover the "Ego nucleus" (I doubt that), but functional and category divisions make a lot of sense, scientifically. While usually unable to explain the One Big Truth...
to sit back and let the world flow over you, oddly Eastern in its "zoning out"
Interestingly, Eastern philosophy has both opposing notions, often present in a same country, and as a bouquet in people. Part serenity and acceptation, part commitment and effort to change the world along with yourself. The yin and the yang. Most Asians believe in more than only one of these mutually balancing faiths.
"Ego is [...] the part that's hurt if you don't win all the time and don't get all the attention in the room."
That's when the Id in excessively dominant in the Ego (a.k.a. the half-conscious Self), making it narcissic.
Basically, the Ego is at the wheel, and it has two back seat drivers. There'll be peace in the car and on the road if these two are reasonably satisfied by the Ego's driving, and none tries to take over because the other one would then have a word to say. If one of the passengers constantly orders the driver around (let's say, the Id likes wild rides, and the Super-Ego is all caution), the driver will in both cases get tense and/or clumsy, and is likely to have accidents. Like diving into a (pot)hole. ;-)
And hurting himself, others, or both.
I know, linking psychology and driving is all but original. Cars really bring out a lot of what we usually keep behind a mask, don't they? Like in that classic Disney Goofy cartoon. Phallic symbol, and all...
Obscene pornographic Hummers, here's looking at you!
It's all about searching for something to make you complete. Looking on the outside - money, someone else loving you, etc. will never work. You may achieve those external things, but they will never be enough.
The road to "making one complete" (though in actuality we are already complete - it is just our own perception that sees us as otherwise) will be easier by searching inside.
There's more to it, but I don't really want to ramble on here.
I am not talking about Freud's "Ego", I am using a wider concept of 3a below.
e·go (ē'gō, ĕg'ō)
n., pl. e·gos.
1: The self, especially as distinct from the world and other selves.
2: In psychoanalysis, the division of the psyche that is conscious, most immediately controls thought and behavior, and is most in touch with external reality.
3a: An exaggerated sense of self-importance; conceit.
3b: Appropriate pride in oneself; self-esteem.
I think final destiny needs to see a shrink. He has some major unresolved relationships in his life. Have youn taken your meds today destiny? Don't forget the physchotic tranquinlizer.
Eolake said...
I am not talking about Freud's "Ego"
I understand that. But when I myself talked about the Freudian notions, I had to point out the different uses of the word.
Otherwise, I might have been wrongly diagnosed with mental confusion. ;-)
Originally, "Ego" in greek simply means "Me".
So, it is equally adequate for the conscious Freudian self, and for the excessive vanity of self-centered people(3a). No dispute in this there discussion.
Why? Did anybody feel unintendedly criticized? Or his ego punctured? ;-)
"I think final destiny needs to see a shrink."
"Final DESTINY"??? Anonymous, isn't that, like, a very revealing slip of the tongue?
Our "platonic friend" (pun intended) seems to be reflecting more on his identity than on Fate's terminal whims. ;-)
Speaking of which, F.I. ... Nice hat, man. You're right, it's always a good idea to protect "your ego" from the sun.
"He has some major unresolved relationships in his life."
Hey, don't we all?
"It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues." - Abraham Lincoln
Yah, Freud's technical "Ego" versus the more general "ego" of searching to fulfill the self. I think we understand one another.
Except the anonymous comment about me. Strange, how I engendered that response, as though my self-expression angers others in its (?) honesty, directness, or failure to accept conventionality. That's happened elsewhere as well.
Oh well. Wuddever. No ego here. :)
Yeah, I didn't really get that one either.
"I let you win, because I love you and don't mind losing, and suddenly, I win too!"
Ooh, VERY nice.
[Green with envy] I SO wish I had come up with that one first! ;-P
Ah, that's kind of you.
God bless ALL of us, and to all a merry Christmas! :)
Thank you, Adam, I'd like that. :-)
What you've got is called panache. Like those musket-carrying whatchamacallthem guys, "One for all and all for me". Or something. ;-)
Oh, I almost forgot : happy Easter to you too, guys!
Pancake? Great, I'll have some, too!
Um...
I don't think the ego is at the wheel - it's the guy incessantly talking, telling the driver where to go and grabbing for the wheel. If we get it to tone down a bit we'll hear who else is there and may get somewhere.
"If we get it to tone down a bit we'll hear who else is there"
Are you saying my many and big posts intimidate the occasional visitor? <:-o
Nope, that was your ego listening. :)
Post a Comment