When the Ego hinders the spirit

Originally Posted by knightoflenity

Valid points certainly but is it not dissimilar with trying to find God?

Doesn't faith or belief take leaps that science would surely not since it is not empirical, impossible to catalogue?

Is it not a form of cognitive dissonance?

In the logical science explanation of brain - personality & ego would create the notion of spirituality, but if you believe in a soul that is here to learn then where is the information stored?

One problem is the methodology which in my view is elitist. Another is that psychological research almost always involves the investigator in the result which means different investigators performing exactly the same experiments will sometimes get different results. (There are exceptions.) But that doesn't mean science won't find some of the answers...one day...

I look to Bertalanffy the biologist and systems thinker. Until him, people regarded (living) cells as bags of chemicals bestowed with this mysterious property called "life". A spiritual endowment sent by God. Bertalanffy started looking at how these cells worked and so it went.

Those who have past life regression for example that know details that they shouldn't - would suggest that memory is not purely "brain" centric.

A subject I won't touch on as recent research has shown (once again) that the hypnotists themselves can influence the results. We still don't know enough about DNA: if "memories" are passed from ancestors to child. What some people called "junk DNA" is now known not to be junk at all. Its regulatory powers are just being discovered. So I don't dismiss "past life".

The counter argument to that would be when the brain is damaged then personality is lost or changed - however perhaps the conduit is broken alone.

There's been a lot of work on this; damage to various parts of the brain that impair different functions. Agreed. But it would probably bore people silly to discuss here.

I'm not saying that I know but soul would be "above" the physical so brain is less important unless trying to refute soul/ consciousness merely as a construct of the brain?

Just bouncing ideas ideas here ...

Quite. Many questions are yet unanswered - and perhaps they'll never be. I don't know where the soul is - perhaps it's outside the body; perhaps there is a section of our physiology locked away because it can never become a part of that physiology but somehow feeds through. perhaps it's both through a subtle link. Perhaps it is in the brain. Who knows?

The very simplest schematic seems:
= = = = = = = = = =
Soul----> feeds content into our being somehow---->triggers processes that inform us that our skins physically separate us from what's out there-------> processes our behaviour in response (ego).

Ego (shop front) processes stimuli and actions----->categorises them as experieces, remembers what seems appropriate------->sends out to our soul for whatever processing is done there(wherever it may be).

= = = = = = = = = =

It's a pretty poor first shot ok, very basic. Each bit could be dissected many times. Whether "soul" is embedded in the brain I don't know. I like to think it may be and ask if that makes it any less spiritual? I don't think so.

.

[lemex]

This is what I hear people realizing.

- The brain actually hinders access of the mind, access of or to it or the Divine.

Originally Posted by knightoflenity

Doesn't faith or belief take leaps that science would surely not since it is not empirical, impossible to catalogue?

Not necessarily. Science is as prone to beliefs and leaps of faith as much as any belief system - as any scientist that knows anything about quantum theory or what was going on prior to the big bang, for instance.

Originally Posted by knightoflenity

Is it not a form of cognitive dissonance?

Kind of. Cognitive dissonance happens when it's 'this' versus 'that', which Spirituality has a penchant for. Nasseem Harramein said that "Spirituality is the science we don't understand." Einstein said that "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Many of the great scientists believed in God, or at least some description of a higher power at work. One scientist said that the Universe is so finely tuned for our existence as it is that there can only be an intelligence behind it.

Originally Posted by knightoflenity

In the logical science explanation of brain - personality & ego would create the notion of spirituality, but if you believe in a soul that is here to learn then where is the information stored?

What information? Spiritually there's the Akashic Records which is stored.... up there somewhere in some higher dimension but nobody knows for sure. That's where intuitive knowledge and Gnosis is stored. The Spiritual knowledge talked about in here is the same as any other kind of knowledge.

Originally Posted by knightoflenity

Those who have past life regression for example that know details that they shouldn't - would suggest that memory is not purely "brain" centric .

Mrs G had a brain bleed that cut off [part of the blood supply to her brain. Because of that she lost swathes of her long term memory and she'll never have it back. However, she remembers Past Lives with more clarity and her clairvoyance is stronger.

Originally Posted by knightoflenity

The counter argument to that would be when the brain is damaged then personality is lost or changed - however perhaps the conduit is broken alone.

Mrs G's personality changes intermittently nowadays, so yes.

Originally Posted by knightoflenity

I'm not saying that I know, but soul would be "above" the physical so brain is less important unless trying to refute soul/ consciousness merely as a construct of the brain?

I watched a TEDTalk with a researcher called Anil Seth, his multi-discipline team still couldn't quite work out what consciousness was. What he did say was that consciousness is not merely a construct of the brain but our conscious reality is a two-way process between external stimuli and what's inside us. What we can become conscious of is not limited to the brain or mind.

Originally Posted by knightoflenity

Just bouncing ideas ideas here ...

I'm still ploughing through but I found these interesting -
http://www.gestaltreality.com/2013/0...ensional-self/
http://www.gestaltreality.com/2013/05/20/the-ego/

[Raziel]

Originally Posted by Greenslade

I'm still ploughing through but I found these interesting -
http://www.gestaltreality.com/2013/0...ensional-self/
http://www.gestaltreality.com/2013/05/20/the-ego/

I'm looking through so thanks - so far I essentially relate to the term outer ego.

I would say that this part had always been a bare minimum to me - I only use it because others expect to communicate from this.

I 'm not claiming to be gifted or chosen - just more attuned & familiar not relying on outer ego. It's difficult to honestly communicate with others at times as there is so much investment in it.

You may dress up as Batman or a police officer at Halloween but it isn't who you are. I am this person interacting in this way (human) but that is not my soul.

When it is said you speak from the heart - that is me.

[winter light]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

Thank you, Greenslade and SaturninePluto for your responses.

If I had a gripe it's about the way the word is bandied around as just a bad component of identity/personality without understanding of it being very much a part of spirit, the outer layer maybe, the public face, but I can't see how it (as an object as I read the title of the topic) hinders the spirit. Exchanges between it and the "outer world" feed the spirit that in turn modulates perception of that outer world. Isn't that "experience?"

If I had to model mind it would be nervous system in action. Ego is discernible as a series of responses to the summation of sensory inputs accessing life experiences in the various bits of working memory (associated with those senses) and wired to a database of deeper memories. It doesn't give all the answers and never as simple as one sense leads to just one part of the brain IIRC; but one's spirituality can be seen as the mediation between longer term memory and working memory; the refinements made in one's stimulus-response repertoire with heightened awareness/attention.

Trying to make sense of it is a work in progress though. Both Freud and Jung had the right ideas, attempting to get to a person's experiential data through how the symbols related to outward behaviour.

..

This is a great topic. Trying to catch up and sorry if I'm a few pages behind the discussion.

I have given up on the word ego. Eventually noticed that even thinking about it caused an inner conflict and stress rather than insight. So now if I mean self I just use the word self. Or, if I am introspecting about my a specific personality trait then I just use a specific word for it. But ego has become a non-useful word that does not really describe much. It seems also to be used primarily as an attack word. So to avoid attacking myself I would rather begin by thiking of myself first as a coherent core. Then if I must wrestle with negative ego traits then consider those to be a circumstance rather than part of an identity against itself.

The neuroscience aspects are very interesting and hopefully I'll have some energy to discuss later. In general I'm a bit obsessed with trying to figure out which parts of experience belong more to the brain box and which are better described by the spirit box, or what is the relationship between the two. It's frustrating when people ride the exteme of one side and dismiss the other.

Originally Posted by Greenslade

The search led me to Jung and what he was writing made so much sense, and I'd take his word over Victorian attitudes any day. Freud and Jung weren't besties it seems, but they were coming at it from very different perspectives and no doubt their own psychologies were affecting their research and therefore results. The interesting part for me is that a discussion about ego in these forums shows more psychology than Spirituality...

Freud was a pioneer who I believe had great respect for Jung as long as Jung was falling in line with Freud's theories. And Jung felt honored to have such a great mentor. But eventually Jung outgrew Freud's model as he discovered a whole new world of the self.

As I recall, one of their discussions together Jung was trying to explain his experiences of synchronicity, that there is a supernatural relationship between the world and the self. At the exact moment Jung spoke the words there was a very loud bang that came from a bookshelf in the room they were in. Jung said something like, "Don't you see? Clearly there is something going on here!" But Freud could not accept it. After that they just drifted apart.

Originally Posted by knightoflenity

When it is said you speak from the heart - that is me.

Or an expression of you? But yes, I know what you mean.

Have you ever seen the wave from of the human voice? Many people want to be 'high vibration' but they're missing something because 'high vibration' is monotone and has very little richness or fullness. Not at all like the human voice, because you see the voice is one of the truest expressions of ourselves into this dimension or density. So it's not just about the voice being an expression of our consciousness, it's also and expression of our core frequencies.

Originally Posted by knightoflenity

I am this person interacting in this way (human) but that is not my soul.

The human is the expression or 'voice' of your Soul into this dimension/density. We are supposed to be multi-dimensional after all. Allegedly.

Originally Posted by winter light

I have given up on the word ego. Eventually noticed that even thinking about it caused an inner conflict and stress rather than insight. So now if I mean self I just use the word self. Or, if I am introspecting about my a specific personality trait then I just use a specific word for it. But ego has become a non-useful word that does not really describe much. It seems also to be used primarily as an attack word. So to avoid attacking myself I would rather begin by thiking of myself first as a coherent core. Then if I must wrestle with negative ego traits then consider those to be a circumstance rather than part of an identity against itself.

Understanding 'ego' has little to do with Spirituality and everything to do with psychology and/or neuroscience, because the bottom line is that the word and its associated meanings have been processed by what's in our heads. Sometimes ego is more about agenda.

Are there such things as "negative ego traits" or are we really talking about judgement? An ego trait is an ego trait, and through it a way to interact with the external Universe. Spirituality is an ego trait. If there weren't those with 'negative ego traits' Spiritual people wouldn't be able to feel as though they stood on the existential high ground.

Originally Posted by winter light

The neuroscience aspects are very interesting and hopefully I'll have some energy to discuss later. In general I'm a bit obsessed with trying to figure out which parts of experience belong more to the brain box and which are better described by the spirit box, or what is the relationship between the two. It's frustrating when people ride the exteme of one side and dismiss the other.

If your genes had been switched differently you wouldn't have been able to process Spirituality - I'm here in this forum because in that respect I have my mother's genes. My father was a very down-to-earth farm boy. Physical ailments that affect the brain affect the processing abilities, and so our whole reality becomes altered. Most on these forums come from what seems to be a very Spiritual-exclusive perspective, but experience of the 'real world' sheds a very different light on things.

Sometimes envisioning helps, so if you envision yourself as a data processing machine you'll get the idea. The while the brain box (and other parts of ourselves) is designed to process data (which sensory input is), Spirit box processes the data at a different level and - if you're intuitive/psychic etc - acts as a receiver for extra-sensory data.

Originally Posted by winter light

Freud was a pioneer who I believe had great respect for Jung as long as Jung was falling in line with Freud's theories. And Jung felt honored to have such a great mentor. But eventually Jung outgrew Freud's model as he discovered a whole new world of the self.

As I recall, one of their discussions together Jung was trying to explain his experiences of synchronicity, that there is a supernatural relationship between the world and the self. At the exact moment Jung spoke the words there was a very loud bang that came from a bookshelf in the room they were in. Jung said something like, "Don't you see? Clearly there is something going on here!" But Freud could not accept it. After that they just drifted apart.

It's not hard to see where Jung got his idea for the ego from, perhaps he psycholanalysed Freud. In many ways what we're talking about here is a Freud/Jung thing, perhaps an avatar of the collective consciousness even. Very often the same patterns are repeated over and over again only in different contexts and ways.

the be only snap over overwealm
mad. that doesn't make sense.
we want that no more. ok. none.

that doesn't
make sense.

m. m. : gone.

boshy b. good :

[winter light]

Originally Posted by Greenslade

Understanding 'ego' has little to do with Spirituality and everything to do with psychology and/or neuroscience, because the bottom line is that the word and its associated meanings have been processed by what's in our heads. Sometimes ego is more about agenda.

For me they are all related. I am having an experience in the world and trying to organize my understanding. The meanings go beyond what is in our heads. Based on my own experience and on the many stories I have heard about intuition, OBE, and past lives, where the personality is carried beyond what is possible based on a physical or neuro perspective. You also have the Course in Miracles, clearly a spiritual teaching, that goes for 100s of pages about the ego.

Yes there are aspects that are dominated by the physical systems but there are others that cannot be explained in that way. And it is very much a spiritual concern because these ego patterns form the framework through which my spirit interacts with the world. And they can be extremely limiting. They seem to be configured with specific intents behind them. I believe this is related to how our life paths are established before we incarnate.

Are there such things as "negative ego traits" or are we really talking about judgement? An ego trait is an ego trait, and through it a way to interact with the external Universe. Spirituality is an ego trait. If there weren't those with 'negative ego traits' Spiritual people wouldn't be able to feel as though they stood on the existential high ground.

Yes there are negative ego traits. And I see them like a system that reacts to the world outside of my conscious control. It establishes boundaries both for myself and for others attempting to enter my space. Whereas a judgement is a single event and is assumed to be conscious control in the present moment.

I just found out the Buddhism has concepts of Iron Chains and Golden Chains. The Iron Chains are like the negative ego traits that we rail against and Golden chains like the positive ego traits that we are attached to because they feel good. Both restrict us and in some ways the Golden Chains are worse because we think they are good and may not realize how the attachment is limiting our growth.

If your genes had been switched differently you wouldn't have been able to process Spirituality...

Sometimes envisioning helps, so if you envision yourself as a data processing machine you'll get the idea. The while the brain box (and other parts of ourselves) is designed to process data (which sensory input is), Spirit box processes the data at a different level and - if you're intuitive/psychic etc - acts as a receiver for extra-sensory data.

The genes are just the form for the physical aspects. I do think genetics are overrated and misunderstood. A topic for another day. By box I meant only the way we classify the world as either spiritual aspects or brain aspects. Sorry for not being more clear. Thank you.

Originally Posted by winter light

For me they are all related. I am having an experience in the world and trying to organize my understanding. The meanings go beyond what is in our heads. Based on my own experience and on the many stories I have heard about intuition, OBE, and past lives, where the personality is carried beyond what is possible based on a physical or neuro perspective. You also have the Course in Miracles, clearly a spiritual teaching, that goes for 100s of pages about the ego.

Yes there are aspects that are dominated by the physical systems but there are others that cannot be explained in that way. And it is very much a spiritual concern because these ego patterns form the framework through which my spirit interacts with the world. And they can be extremely limiting. They seem to be configured with specific intents behind them. I believe this is related to how our life paths are established before we incarnate.

Today I'm going to indulge myself, I'm off work for a few days so it's time for some serious slobbing out. I'm going to drag out my Bladerunner DVDs and watch two of the most influential sci-fi movies of all time back-to-back, even though there's quite a dew years behind them. Sometimes sci-fi movies have a knack of getting to the Spirituality without trying or meaning to, and often they're more Spiritually inspiring because of it. A programmed replicant dying peacefully because he's had a deeply Spiritual Journey resonates with me.

I've always had a 'sixth sense' so from an early age I was very aware of something beyond the usual five senses. Later on I discovered I was clairsentient and that was quite interesting because it very much helped with my Past Life exploration - and that took some amazing turns. I'm still learning to walk 'in two worlds', still learning because the more I learn the more there is to learn. The personality has little to do with intuition etc, intuition is something beyond any neurological or psychological 'systems' and as far as I'm aware hasn't been explored by science to any degree. If I'm using my intuition or clairsentience (sometimes it happens automatically) I'm aware of a shift in consciousness as though, just for a short time, my consciousness is tuning into higher extra-physical frequencies.

Originally Posted by winter light

Yes there are negative ego traits. And I see them like a system that reacts to the world outside of my conscious control. It establishes boundaries both for myself and for others attempting to enter my space. Whereas a judgement is a single event and is assumed to be conscious control in the present moment.

I just found out the Buddhism has concepts of Iron Chains and Golden Chains. The Iron Chains are like the negative ego traits that we rail against and Golden chains like the positive ego traits that we are attached to because they feel good. Both restrict us and in some ways the Golden Chains are worse because we think they are good and may not realize how the attachment is limiting our growth.

So far, with all the great Spiritual minds nobody has been able to tell me what makes positive positive and what makes negative negative. Psychology will tell you that they are cognitive dissonance or the 'lock on, lock out' principle; people 'lock on' to what they like and 'lock out' what they don't like. It's basic human nature but Spiritually it 'locks out' the lessons we're supposedly here to learn.

Originally Posted by winter light

The genes are just the form for the physical aspects. I do think genetics are overrated and misunderstood. A topic for another day. By box I meant only the way we classify the world as either spiritual aspects or brain aspects. Sorry for not being more clear. Thank you.

The genes are a lot more than form for the physical aspects and could well be responsible for you being Spiritual in the first place. They are also the basis for your brain patterns and those form your Spirituality - what you believe and why you believe it. We all have 'filters' and they begin with our genes, so in a way they 'dictate your Spiritual destiny'.

And yes, we do classify the world into - specifically for most people - Spiritual versus everything else, then shuffle the 'everything else' to the back of our minds. The consequences are that our Shadow Self grows, and 'All That Is' means all that is just Spiritual and forget the rest. It's all underpinned by brain aspects.