😃 WHAT ISN'T EGO 😃

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

The astute psychologist should be able to steer the prompts and questioning to help the patient firm up on their perception of the troubles (assuming said psychologist can act without too much bias from their background 'school' and other assumptions).

That's the theory anyway, a good therapist should be able to take their own bias out of the equation but that doesn't always happen, sadly. A good therapist should be able to steer the patient through the 'surface' layers of perceptions towards, hopefully, the root cause of their perceptions. Along the way they should also guide the patient towards constructive rather than destructive cognitive behaviour - what the Buddhists know as Right Thinking.

The problem with psychology is that there can be a web-like framework that any perception is built on, and sometimes going back to childhood. It might entail following a chain of 'effect and cause', because one destructive perception is going to affect so many others that come after it. This effect has this cause because of that effect.... The main issue is the unwillingness of the patient to cooperate willingly. Or not.

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

Our National Heath Service puts self-defeating bureaucratic limits on treatment such as 4 sessions of 40 minutes only, so I couldn't raise much enthusiasm.

It's all down to money with the NHS which is understandable to a point - every aspect of health care is the same.

It also doesn't help when the therapist makes assumptions then imprints them onto the patient, that's not very professional of them. A good therapist wouldn't have had that problem, she should have been able to accept that it works for you and is constructive as far as you're concerned - and not an issue.

Luckily the therapist I had was both professional and patient-led, and she made that clear right from the start. While it was gruelling in terms of emotions - I'm a very emotional person - but my whole perceptual framework was taken apart and examined. I tend to get cranky with people who try to tell me how I think and feel, so your therapist wouldn't have lasted too long.

It's the best of a bad job and we can say the same for psychology and psychiatry as we can for everything else that's medical-healthcare related. What changed my perspective was working in mental health, and when you see people taking life-threatening psychotic episodes in front of you because their medication is late.... It gives you another perspective entirely.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

EXCERPT

I truly can't see 'ego' as a fixed entity, something that can be switched in or out to make a person good or bad!

Great observation!

What a dilemma.

Originally Posted by BigJohn

Great observation!

What a dilemma.

Not so much of the dilemma. If I asked you to describe yourself, "I am" is your ego and everything after that is the 'contents'. Very simply. For an egotistical person it's "I am better than you." However, people can change and improve themselves, they can see the error of their ways and they become "I am a good guy." Your ego can change at a moment's notice - as in what happens when they suddenly decide they are 'Spiritual people'.

The ego is the sum total of what you perceive yourself to be.

I suppose it could even be seen as a trilemma:

The individual's perception of what they see themselves to be;
another individual's perception of what they see the first individual to be (based on their own assimilated experiences/ego);
the first individual's perception of what they believe the second (up to 'nth') individual perceives them to be on becoming aware of a mismatch of 'opinion' (or maybe that should be 'factor of difference')

So it's probably best just 'to be' and don't worry about what others perceive until some transaction occurs between individuals when some adaptation may be needed. The person more defensive about their state of being will be the less adaptable/more stubborn.

I have to admit it isn't something that bothers me except places like here where some individuals get misguided into thinking that ego=bad and that it can be abandoned which is, well, to put it mildly, dangerous if they made a serious attempt without preparation.
.

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

The individual's perception of what they see themselves to be;

That's the ego

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

another individual's perception of what they see the first

It's all down to perception.

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

individual to be (based on their own assimilated experiences/ego)
The first individual's perception of what they believe the second (up to 'nth') individual perceives them to be on becoming aware of a mismatch of 'opinion' (or maybe that should be 'factor of difference')

Regardless of how anybody else perceives them, it's the individual's own perceptions that count. How another perceives how you treat them is what will create their reality, so if you're being kind and they perceive you to be a busybody....

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

I have to admit it isn't something that bothers me except places like here where some individuals get misguided into thinking that ego=bad and that it can be abandoned which is, well, to put it mildly, dangerous if they made a serious attempt without preparation.
.

The people who have np ego have the biggest egos, if you don't have an ego you're dysfunctional. In severe trauma the ego can 'collapse' into the self - it's a safety mechanism so that the sufferer doesn't have to deal with the trauma. If you think about what some people can go through after divorce or betrayal you'll get the idea - or being told they have a life-threatening ailment.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by Greenslade

EXCERPT

If you think about what some people can go through after divorce or betrayal you'll get the idea - or being told they have a life-threatening ailment.

NICE OBSERVATION!

I can relate to that.