Thoughts about ego: The view from inside versus, the view from outside

Subjectivity vs objectivity ... a collection of different stories about ego.

by me

There is a paradox about subjectivity...

what i experience inside has ultimate value to me, yet is valueless view form outside.
For example: assuming there is no difference in my external behavior, how i feel about something cannot be seen from the view form outside, and hence must be valueless in that view.

i’m curious, just studying the form of this paradox, is it symmetrical ?

what happens outside me, has no value to what i experience, so it valueless from inside.
For example: (can be provided)

...

by CFR

Therefore he returns to the Way suited to his situation, where he is free to advance or to retreat. In nature of things this will bring good fortune, for it is wise & reasonable not to try to obtain anything by force. "LET THY VIRTUE THINK" deserves meditation. "In the primal beginning is the THought. & the Thought is with God. & a God-like Being is the Thought. In it is Life. & the Life of the Thought is the Light of the Ego. Let Light-giving Thought fill the darkness of the Ego, that we may grasp the Thought Divine, that the Soul may be liberated through its own VIRTUE!

...

by me

The ego is the seat or domain or place or constituent of subjectivity. Almost by definition. Perhaps another way to say that is that subjectivity creates or causes ego. Or maybe that separate identity where there is an inside and an outside creates or caused the existence of what we call our ego. Interesting, is that common knowledge in modern culture? Is it something that we all know and is so plane on it’s face that nobody needs even to talk about it or represent it.

...

by me

re though of RWG to ego relationship first said in 18827

it just dawned on me that the determination of "right/wrong" is always made subjectively inside each side. Based upon that how valuable could it possible be?

said differently, "There is no objective value of RWG , because without an objective frame of reference or judge, any one playing will obviously judge themselves to be in the right. Hence it is a waste of time ... a game whose oucome is known in advance. "

playing the rwg for the feeling of one’s ego being right at another’s expense is kind of like a criminal being allowed to judge his own crime ... he would always judge himself in the right ... so the whole process does nothing ... it is a useless game. To be useful it needs an objective judge. So, yes i judge the rwg played here as a waste of time, and i do that quite independent of whatever game we are playing here. In other words, I don’t say that just for the sake of argument.

Competition is another thing ... there you have the consequences of the world judging objectively. Judgements of the world are independent of your internal subjective glees, "

" or "

", whatever you feel when you yourself judge that you said something right whereas the other person said something wrong.

But "the rwg being wrong" doesn’t work for me either. Rather i’ve noticed that it just wastes my energy.

...

by me

The content and meaning of my life is what i make it to be.
There can be no objective judgement of that.

...

I think it was Freud who invented this usage of the word. Looking for pertinent things he said about it.

tag #InsideOutside

Comments

Mark de LA says

seth 2015-09-21 16:42:59 18837

(;-)) 2015-09-21 16:02:23 18837

seth 2015-09-21 15:49:30 18837

(;-)) 2015-09-21 15:38:58 18837

The word is as old as Latin

thanks, good to know its derivation

.

I'm looking for the place in our culture were people started using it as a noun, as a constituent part of our being, or as a functional part of being human, rather than just asserting a verb.

Yep, never forget to confuse what you want with what's so. It IS the Latin word for "I" not surprising that many have used it since then.

i am not saying that is not the same word ... i am just asking for the thought that started thinking about it differently. for example, Steiner talks about it as if it were a part of a human being ... he even calls it a body ... an ego body. that usage can be distinguished from somebody merely expressing something in the first person ...which is the distinction "I did this" distinguished from "John did this" ... which distinction does not carry the implication of a separate part of one's being.

Yep, from your Latin class there are different declensions of the word Ego - more here in the Wiktionary. For a better explanation of RS view maybe go see The Language of the Consciousness Soul by Carl Unger
which I am reading these days.

Seth says