Sherapy probably released 20,500 comments before the 'like' button was brought in.
Which would probably raise her 'like quotient' far above the rest of ours.
This is just junk science, or a meaningless social experiment.
9
7 votes
Show us your EGO!
Online Ego.
Started by Professor T , Jan 07 2013 08:56 PM
Started by Professor T , Jan 07 2013 08:56 PM
368 replies to this topic
#136
Likely Guy
-
- Member
-
- 1,580 posts
Undecided, mostly.
- Joined:09 May 2012
- Gender:Male
- Location:Likely, B.C., Canada
-
"What we've got here is failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach." - Strother Martin
Posted 11 January 2013 - 01:49 AM
#137
Seeker79
-
- Member
-
- 7,904 posts
Non-Corporeal Being
- Joined:12 Jul 2010
- Gender:Not Selected
-
Potter: " is this real or is this in my mind?"
Dumbledore: " Of course it's in your mind....., but that dosn't mean it's not real."
Posted 11 January 2013 - 02:16 AM
Likely Guy, on 11 January 2013 - 01:49 AM, said:
Sherapy probably released 20,500 comments before the 'like' button was brought in.
Which would probably raise her 'like quotient' far above the rest of ours.
This is just junk science, or a meaningless social experiment.
Which would probably raise her 'like quotient' far above the rest of ours.
This is just junk science, or a meaningless social experiment.
"To know oneself is to study one self in action with another person. Relationship is a process of self evaluation and self revelation. Relationship is the mirror in which you discover yourself - to be is to be related."---Bruce Lee
#138
eight bits
-
- Member
-
- 5,715 posts
...
- Joined:24 May 2007
Posted 11 January 2013 - 10:40 AM
It is interesting, to me, anyway, somebody who is concerned with both psychology and quantitative reasoning, to see what is happening spontaneously to Professor T's newly proposed statistic, likes per post.
People without a dog in the fight come up with other factors besides "ego" that improve the interpretation of the statistic, and do so for reasons other than "defending" their own egos. For example,
- that the like button didn't exist until the end of April last year, but some people had thousands of posts before then, while others being compared with them weren't even members yet,
- that some subforums of UM are more generous with conferring likes than others, and many people concentrate their posts in a relatively small number of subforums.
- that not all readers are equally situated to confer likes (daily limits, time zone differences, and different accommodations for mobile users have been mentioned).
In the interest of full disclosure, I passed 5,000 posts right at the end of April 2012. Meh, Sheri had about four times that many posts by then... oh look, I have more likes-per-post than Sheri, and doesn't that give my ego a boost?
No, actually it doesn't. And from a Jungian perspective, that it doesn't, because I realize that the comparison with Sheri is bogus, root and branch is an example of my ego at work. I am conscious, and being conscious, I notice some features of reality. Like the features that make "likes per post" a silly thing to use when comparing myself (or anybody here) to others, without a good deal of both scepticism and attention to what the hell I want to compare.
Like everything else human, the ego doesn't work perfectly. Maybe my own ego works less perfectly than many other folks'. But ego is the light of consciousness we have. It is the place from which any "expansion of consciousness" will begin. The last thing anybody needs is to lose their ego. What almost everybody does need is more perspective about where their ego fits in, even within their own skull, but also in the larger world, too.
Ego is not a "false center," but it is very easy to wallow in false ideas about what the ego is the center of. Fortunately, one of the ego's functions is to try to fathom where it is. And yeah, that search almost necessarily starts from an illusory impression that it's at the center of everything. That's only a probelm when somebody gets stuck there.
People without a dog in the fight come up with other factors besides "ego" that improve the interpretation of the statistic, and do so for reasons other than "defending" their own egos. For example,
- that the like button didn't exist until the end of April last year, but some people had thousands of posts before then, while others being compared with them weren't even members yet,
- that some subforums of UM are more generous with conferring likes than others, and many people concentrate their posts in a relatively small number of subforums.
- that not all readers are equally situated to confer likes (daily limits, time zone differences, and different accommodations for mobile users have been mentioned).
In the interest of full disclosure, I passed 5,000 posts right at the end of April 2012. Meh, Sheri had about four times that many posts by then... oh look, I have more likes-per-post than Sheri, and doesn't that give my ego a boost?
No, actually it doesn't. And from a Jungian perspective, that it doesn't, because I realize that the comparison with Sheri is bogus, root and branch is an example of my ego at work. I am conscious, and being conscious, I notice some features of reality. Like the features that make "likes per post" a silly thing to use when comparing myself (or anybody here) to others, without a good deal of both scepticism and attention to what the hell I want to compare.
Like everything else human, the ego doesn't work perfectly. Maybe my own ego works less perfectly than many other folks'. But ego is the light of consciousness we have. It is the place from which any "expansion of consciousness" will begin. The last thing anybody needs is to lose their ego. What almost everybody does need is more perspective about where their ego fits in, even within their own skull, but also in the larger world, too.
Ego is not a "false center," but it is very easy to wallow in false ideas about what the ego is the center of. Fortunately, one of the ego's functions is to try to fathom where it is. And yeah, that search almost necessarily starts from an illusory impression that it's at the center of everything. That's only a probelm when somebody gets stuck there.
#139
Professor T
-
- Member
-
- 1,633 posts
!
- Joined:11 Jul 2012
- Gender:Not Selected
Posted 11 January 2013 - 11:05 AM
Seeker79, on 11 January 2013 - 01:26 AM, said:
I used to do this actually... This is a bit like profiling. I am very good ( see my ego), but I have learned to refrain... Look up my thread " inner voice"......
The Inner voice thread in the Psychic Readings forum is irrelivant imo and has nothing to do with Ego. I read the first two pages only, it concerns communication with other entities, not Ego as far as I can tell.
#140
Professor T
-
- Member
-
- 1,633 posts
!
- Joined:11 Jul 2012
- Gender:Not Selected
Posted 11 January 2013 - 11:17 AM
eight bits, on 11 January 2013 - 10:40 AM, said:
It is interesting, to me, anyway, somebody who is concerned with both psychology and quantitative reasoning, to see what is happening spontaneously to Professor T's newly proposed statistic, likes per post.
People without a dog in the fight come up with other factors besides "ego" that improve the interpretation of the statistic, and do so for reasons other than "defending" their own egos. For example,
- that the like button didn't exist until the end of April last year, but some people had thousands of posts before then, while others being compared with them weren't even members yet,
- that some subforums of UM are more generous with conferring likes than others, and many people concentrate their posts in a relatively small number of subforums.
- that not all readers are equally situated to confer likes (daily limits, time zone differences, and different accommodations for mobile users have been mentioned).
In the interest of full disclosure, I passed 5,000 posts right at the end of April 2012. Meh, Sheri had about four times that many posts by then... oh look, I have more likes-per-post than Sheri, and doesn't that give my ego a boost?
No, actually it doesn't. And from a Jungian perspective, that it doesn't, because I realize that the comparison with Sheri is bogus, root and branch is an example of my ego at work. I am conscious, and being conscious, I notice some features of reality. Like the features that make "likes per post" a silly thing to use when comparing myself (or anybody here) to others, without a good deal of both scepticism and attention to what the hell I want to compare.
Like everything else human, the ego doesn't work perfectly. Maybe my own ego works less perfectly than many other folks'. But ego is the light of consciousness we have. It is the place from which any "expansion of consciousness" will begin. The last thing anybody needs is to lose their ego. What almost everybody does need is more perspective about where their ego fits in, even within their own skull, but also in the larger world, too.
Ego is not a "false center," but it is very easy to wallow in false ideas about what the ego is the center of. Fortunately, one of the ego's functions is to try to fathom where it is. And yeah, that search almost necessarily starts from an illusory impression that it's at the center of everything. That's only a probelm when somebody gets stuck there.
People without a dog in the fight come up with other factors besides "ego" that improve the interpretation of the statistic, and do so for reasons other than "defending" their own egos. For example,
- that the like button didn't exist until the end of April last year, but some people had thousands of posts before then, while others being compared with them weren't even members yet,
- that some subforums of UM are more generous with conferring likes than others, and many people concentrate their posts in a relatively small number of subforums.
- that not all readers are equally situated to confer likes (daily limits, time zone differences, and different accommodations for mobile users have been mentioned).
In the interest of full disclosure, I passed 5,000 posts right at the end of April 2012. Meh, Sheri had about four times that many posts by then... oh look, I have more likes-per-post than Sheri, and doesn't that give my ego a boost?
No, actually it doesn't. And from a Jungian perspective, that it doesn't, because I realize that the comparison with Sheri is bogus, root and branch is an example of my ego at work. I am conscious, and being conscious, I notice some features of reality. Like the features that make "likes per post" a silly thing to use when comparing myself (or anybody here) to others, without a good deal of both scepticism and attention to what the hell I want to compare.
Like everything else human, the ego doesn't work perfectly. Maybe my own ego works less perfectly than many other folks'. But ego is the light of consciousness we have. It is the place from which any "expansion of consciousness" will begin. The last thing anybody needs is to lose their ego. What almost everybody does need is more perspective about where their ego fits in, even within their own skull, but also in the larger world, too.
Ego is not a "false center," but it is very easy to wallow in false ideas about what the ego is the center of. Fortunately, one of the ego's functions is to try to fathom where it is. And yeah, that search almost necessarily starts from an illusory impression that it's at the center of everything. That's only a probelm when somebody gets stuck there.
tee hee!
Yep, for likes per post being irrelivant there's sure been a lot of defence as to why their likes are low..
Good spotting.. Ego's can't resist letting that slide. edited to add: Even though my spread sheet of most liked is a completely irrelivant sideshow..Also, I see you are of the Jungian persuasion.. Cool, I think most are Freudian, as far as Ego goes, so I look forward to a bit of discussion regarding how wrong you are about Ego not being a false center,
& how Ego is the last thing anybody needs to loose because there is at least one person reading this thread (no comments yet though) who has no Ego..
Edited by Professor T, 11 January 2013 - 11:19 AM.
#141
Mr Right Wing
-
- Banned
-
- 2,638 posts
Poltergeist
- Joined:16 Nov 2011
- Gender:Not Selected
Posted 11 January 2013 - 11:55 AM
eight bits, on 11 January 2013 - 10:40 AM, said:
It is interesting, to me, anyway, somebody who is concerned with both psychology and quantitative reasoning, to see what is happening spontaneously to Professor T's newly proposed statistic, likes per post.
People without a dog in the fight come up with other factors besides "ego" that improve the interpretation of the statistic, and do so for reasons other than "defending" their own egos. For example,
- that the like button didn't exist until the end of April last year, but some people had thousands of posts before then, while others being compared with them weren't even members yet,
- that some subforums of UM are more generous with conferring likes than others, and many people concentrate their posts in a relatively small number of subforums.
- that not all readers are equally situated to confer likes (daily limits, time zone differences, and different accommodations for mobile users have been mentioned).
In the interest of full disclosure, I passed 5,000 posts right at the end of April 2012. Meh, Sheri had about four times that many posts by then... oh look, I have more likes-per-post than Sheri, and doesn't that give my ego a boost?
No, actually it doesn't. And from a Jungian perspective, that it doesn't, because I realize that the comparison with Sheri is bogus, root and branch is an example of my ego at work. I am conscious, and being conscious, I notice some features of reality. Like the features that make "likes per post" a silly thing to use when comparing myself (or anybody here) to others, without a good deal of both scepticism and attention to what the hell I want to compare.
Like everything else human, the ego doesn't work perfectly. Maybe my own ego works less perfectly than many other folks'. But ego is the light of consciousness we have. It is the place from which any "expansion of consciousness" will begin. The last thing anybody needs is to lose their ego. What almost everybody does need is more perspective about where their ego fits in, even within their own skull, but also in the larger world, too.
Ego is not a "false center," but it is very easy to wallow in false ideas about what the ego is the center of. Fortunately, one of the ego's functions is to try to fathom where it is. And yeah, that search almost necessarily starts from an illusory impression that it's at the center of everything. That's only a probelm when somebody gets stuck there.
People without a dog in the fight come up with other factors besides "ego" that improve the interpretation of the statistic, and do so for reasons other than "defending" their own egos. For example,
- that the like button didn't exist until the end of April last year, but some people had thousands of posts before then, while others being compared with them weren't even members yet,
- that some subforums of UM are more generous with conferring likes than others, and many people concentrate their posts in a relatively small number of subforums.
- that not all readers are equally situated to confer likes (daily limits, time zone differences, and different accommodations for mobile users have been mentioned).
In the interest of full disclosure, I passed 5,000 posts right at the end of April 2012. Meh, Sheri had about four times that many posts by then... oh look, I have more likes-per-post than Sheri, and doesn't that give my ego a boost?
No, actually it doesn't. And from a Jungian perspective, that it doesn't, because I realize that the comparison with Sheri is bogus, root and branch is an example of my ego at work. I am conscious, and being conscious, I notice some features of reality. Like the features that make "likes per post" a silly thing to use when comparing myself (or anybody here) to others, without a good deal of both scepticism and attention to what the hell I want to compare.
Like everything else human, the ego doesn't work perfectly. Maybe my own ego works less perfectly than many other folks'. But ego is the light of consciousness we have. It is the place from which any "expansion of consciousness" will begin. The last thing anybody needs is to lose their ego. What almost everybody does need is more perspective about where their ego fits in, even within their own skull, but also in the larger world, too.
Ego is not a "false center," but it is very easy to wallow in false ideas about what the ego is the center of. Fortunately, one of the ego's functions is to try to fathom where it is. And yeah, that search almost necessarily starts from an illusory impression that it's at the center of everything. That's only a probelm when somebody gets stuck there.
Narcissism is a personality disorder caused by someone not being able to regulate their thoughts and feelings when it comes to stuff which undermines their ego.
If I walk down the street and come across a guy even more attractive than me (heaven forbid!) I regulate my thoughts by -
1. Not allowing myself to be negative.
2. I'm actually positive for the guy and see it as leading to future generations of good looking people which will benefit society.
A narcissist cant do that so they go negative about themselves. Unable to regulate their thoughts and feelings they resort to maladaption -
1. Undermine him by finding something wrong with him.
2. Go neurotic, convince themselves he's a weirdo and portray him as one.
3. Attack him.
4. Get a pint glass out and make a few modifications.
5. Murder him.
etc
The more severe their disorder the further they progress down the list. I can guarentee everyone has 1 or 2 of these in their office who are mistaken as bullies instead of the mentally ill.
Edited by Mr Right Wing, 11 January 2013 - 11:56 AM.
#142
Mr Right Wing
-
- Banned
-
- 2,638 posts
Poltergeist
- Joined:16 Nov 2011
- Gender:Not Selected
Posted 11 January 2013 - 11:58 AM
Professor T, on 11 January 2013 - 11:17 AM, said:
tee hee!
Yep, for likes per post being irrelivant there's sure been a lot of defence as to why their likes are low.. Good spotting.. Ego's can't resist letting that slide. edited to add: Even though my spread sheet of most liked is a completely irrelivant sideshow..
Also, I see you are of the Jungian persuasion.. Cool, I think most are Freudian, as far as Ego goes, so I look forward to a bit of discussion regarding how wrong you are about Ego not being a false center, & how Ego is the last thing anybody needs to loose because there is at least one person reading this thread (no comments yet though) who has no Ego..
Yep, for likes per post being irrelivant there's sure been a lot of defence as to why their likes are low..
Good spotting.. Ego's can't resist letting that slide. edited to add: Even though my spread sheet of most liked is a completely irrelivant sideshow..Also, I see you are of the Jungian persuasion.. Cool, I think most are Freudian, as far as Ego goes, so I look forward to a bit of discussion regarding how wrong you are about Ego not being a false center,
& how Ego is the last thing anybody needs to loose because there is at least one person reading this thread (no comments yet though) who has no Ego..Occult influences could cause an inflated ego.
If you have a NDE, meet God and God sends you back telling you that you're destined for great things your ego would take off. Thats not a personality disorder.
Edited by Mr Right Wing, 11 January 2013 - 11:58 AM.
#143
eight bits
-
- Member
-
- 5,715 posts
...
- Joined:24 May 2007
Posted 11 January 2013 - 01:08 PM
Mr RW
Yes, it could be described as an "ego disorder," if you'd like. Everything else in the human mind and body can malfunction, too. Amputation is not necessarily the correct treatment, however. So, just in case that's where the thread is headed, I take the chance to observe that.
Prof T
In my post, I disclosed the dog I had in the fight. You can make of that whatever you like. However, the occasion of my posting was as follows:
Sheri contributed to the thread (most recently at # 132)
That automatically added her to your spreadsheet, where she came in dead last, and an order of magnitude behind me.
Seeker noted Sheri's "problem" in post 135. Likely Guy in 136 correctly pointed out the huge volume of her posting before there was a like button. (The relative recency of the like button had also been discussed earlier in the thread, before Sheri ever posted.) Seeker in 137 acknowledged the merit of Likely Guy's explanation, and asked about the mobile accommodation. Then I posted in 138, summarizing the situation as I saw it.
Sheri said not a word about it.
Hers did.
Does the thought not occur that your making a snide, and false, remark about the ego of those who do not embrace your invention might itself be an ego defense? Speaking of which,
I believe that defense, if that is what it is, is called "sour grapes."
But I do thank you for the "like." And I do think this is interesting thread, as I said way back when, before my ego was "threatened."
Quote
Narcissism is a personality disorder caused by someone not being able to regulate their thoughts and feelings when it comes to stuff which undermines their ego.
Yes, it could be described as an "ego disorder," if you'd like. Everything else in the human mind and body can malfunction, too. Amputation is not necessarily the correct treatment, however. So, just in case that's where the thread is headed, I take the chance to observe that.
Prof T
Quote
Yep, for likes per post being irrelivant there's sure been a lot of defence as to why their likes are low..
In my post, I disclosed the dog I had in the fight. You can make of that whatever you like. However, the occasion of my posting was as follows:
Sheri contributed to the thread (most recently at # 132)
That automatically added her to your spreadsheet, where she came in dead last, and an order of magnitude behind me.
Seeker noted Sheri's "problem" in post 135. Likely Guy in 136 correctly pointed out the huge volume of her posting before there was a like button. (The relative recency of the like button had also been discussed earlier in the thread, before Sheri ever posted.) Seeker in 137 acknowledged the merit of Likely Guy's explanation, and asked about the mobile accommodation. Then I posted in 138, summarizing the situation as I saw it.
Sheri said not a word about it.
Quote
Ego's can't resist letting that slide.
Hers did.
Does the thought not occur that your making a snide, and false, remark about the ego of those who do not embrace your invention might itself be an ego defense? Speaking of which,
Quote
edited to add: Even though my spread sheet of most liked is a completely irrelivant sideshow..
I believe that defense, if that is what it is, is called "sour grapes."
But I do thank you for the "like." And I do think this is interesting thread, as I said way back when, before my ego was "threatened."
#144
Mr Right Wing
-
- Banned
-
- 2,638 posts
Poltergeist
- Joined:16 Nov 2011
- Gender:Not Selected
Posted 11 January 2013 - 01:18 PM
eight bits, on 11 January 2013 - 01:08 PM, said:
Mr RW
Yes, it could be described as an "ego disorder," if you'd like. Everything else in the human mind and body can malfunction, too. Amputation is not necessarily the correct treatment, however. So, just in case that's where the thread is headed, I take the chance to observe that.
Prof T
Yes, it could be described as an "ego disorder," if you'd like. Everything else in the human mind and body can malfunction, too. Amputation is not necessarily the correct treatment, however. So, just in case that's where the thread is headed, I take the chance to observe that.
Prof T
Ah the beloved lobotomy lol
#145
Professor T
-
- Member
-
- 1,633 posts
!
- Joined:11 Jul 2012
- Gender:Not Selected
Posted 11 January 2013 - 05:23 PM
eight bits, on 11 January 2013 - 01:08 PM, said:
Does the thought not occur that your making a snide, and false, remark about the ego of those who do not embrace your invention might itself be an ego defense? Speaking of which,
I believe that defense, if that is what it is, is called "sour grapes."
But I do thank you for the "like." And I do think this is interesting thread, as I said way back when, before my ego was "threatened."
I believe that defense, if that is what it is, is called "sour grapes."
But I do thank you for the "like." And I do think this is interesting thread, as I said way back when, before my ego was "threatened."
One the first point.. nope.. & Actually I wasn't just referring to Sherapy, I was also referring to anyone who has made defensive remarks regarding likes per post..
On your second point, no sour grapes here.. But on the Ego front I did have a giggle.. (I guess that is a defensive gesture)
My only gripe about Sherapy's posts is she has invested her time and energy in Quizzing me about Ego, my intention to disect it, and my purpose for picking it apart, and how I percieve it.
But she hasn't answered my one Question below????
Professor T, on 10 January 2013 - 03:41 AM, said:
Your a ticky one Sherapy..
I've read a few of your posts in the past and to be honest I've found your posts very difficult to read and understand which makes me think that your Ego & personality is at a completely different wavelength to what I know.. I'll take a stab at part of your personality from what I can glean anyway, and say that you over anylise far to much to the point of missing points altogether..
Am I right?
I've read a few of your posts in the past and to be honest I've found your posts very difficult to read and understand which makes me think that your Ego & personality is at a completely different wavelength to what I know.. I'll take a stab at part of your personality from what I can glean anyway, and say that you over anylise far to much to the point of missing points altogether..
Am I right?
Failure to get back to me on this is a sour grape offence imo for the following reasons..
- I invested my time and energy to seriously draw a picture of Sherapy's Ego, and she has not confirmed or denied whether I was right or wrong.. This leaves me sitting here thinking "Well, I just wasted my time and energy for nothing..."
- Failing to get a result from this little experiment in gleaning now leaves me thinking "Why did she not answer with a simple Yes or No?" Was I bang on and somehow offended her? Or was I completely wrong and her failure to answer my simple question (after answering her tirade of questions) is just a symptom of a Ego who just takes and doesn't give back to others who are percieved as unimportant satellites around her ego?
- My ego enjoy's being right.. and let's face it, if you have an ego (even if it's on a leash) it loves being right, but more importantly it loves to be acknowleded and not quzzed then thrown away without so much as a response or a thankyou..
#146
Seeker79
-
- Member
-
- 7,904 posts
Non-Corporeal Being
- Joined:12 Jul 2010
- Gender:Not Selected
-
Potter: " is this real or is this in my mind?"
Dumbledore: " Of course it's in your mind....., but that dosn't mean it's not real."
Posted 11 January 2013 - 07:34 PM
Professor T, on 11 January 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:
The Inner voice thread in the Psychic Readings forum is irrelivant imo and has nothing to do with Ego. I read the first two pages only, it concerns communication with other entities, not Ego as far as I can tell.
For me it was an exercise in connecting with guiding spirits/egos without being in trance, which I am perfectly willing to admit may be deep archetypical aspects of myself.
"To know oneself is to study one self in action with another person. Relationship is a process of self evaluation and self revelation. Relationship is the mirror in which you discover yourself - to be is to be related."---Bruce Lee
#147
Blue Star
-
- Member
-
- 3,107 posts
Poltergeist
- Joined:18 Mar 2012
- Gender:Female
- Location:Wales
Posted 11 January 2013 - 08:04 PM
Professor T, on 11 January 2013 - 05:23 PM, said:
One the first point.. nope.. & Actually I wasn't just referring to Sherapy, I was also referring to anyone who has made defensive remarks regarding likes per post..
On your second point, no sour grapes here.. But on the Ego front I did have a giggle.. (I guess that is a defensive gesture)
My only gripe about Sherapy's posts is she has invested her time and energy in Quizzing me about Ego, my intention to disect it, and my purpose for picking it apart, and how I percieve it.
But she hasn't answered my one Question below????
Failure to get back to me on this is a sour grape offence imo for the following reasons..
On your second point, no sour grapes here.. But on the Ego front I did have a giggle.. (I guess that is a defensive gesture)
My only gripe about Sherapy's posts is she has invested her time and energy in Quizzing me about Ego, my intention to disect it, and my purpose for picking it apart, and how I percieve it.
But she hasn't answered my one Question below????
Failure to get back to me on this is a sour grape offence imo for the following reasons..
- I invested my time and energy to seriously draw a picture of Sherapy's Ego, and she has not confirmed or denied whether I was right or wrong.. This leaves me sitting here thinking "Well, I just wasted my time and energy for nothing..."
- Failing to get a result from this little experiment in gleaning now leaves me thinking "Why did she not answer with a simple Yes or No?" Was I bang on and somehow offended her? Or was I completely wrong and her failure to answer my simple question (after answering her tirade of questions) is just a symptom of a Ego who just takes and doesn't give back to others who are percieved as unimportant satellites around her ego?
- My ego enjoy's being right.. and let's face it, if you have an ego (even if it's on a leash) it loves being right, but more importantly it loves to be acknowleded and not quzzed then thrown away without so much as a response or a thankyou..
i often find the Ego will get offended by seemingly unimportant things and will point the finger and accuse others of the very thing it, itself, is actually doing. As a smoke and mirrors deflection, one of the ego's most used approaches to getting what it wants. It can be such a whining child.
Oh and by the by, whilst I have read much by most on the ego......I hold little to any of Freudian thinking. Plus, whilst I do lean more to Jungian theories. i try to think for myself. Neither, Freud nor Jung hold the monopoly on the aspects of ego interpretation or understanding..... As I said in an earlier post.... Ego comes into many philosophies, psychology work and spiritual beliefs.
#148
Tutankhaten-pasheri
-
- Member
-
- 933 posts
Conspiracy Theorist
- Joined:22 Sep 2012
- Gender:Male
- Location:KV35 - Menefer - Dark Pyramid
Posted 11 January 2013 - 08:35 PM
This may not work, but I will try anyway. So, to take this "Show us your Ego" literally, I here show the ego...
Я Бог, я держатель и владыка миров. Я Хора в славе, я владыка света,
я победным, я наследник бесконечного времени
я победным, я наследник бесконечного времени
#149
Professor T
-
- Member
-
- 1,633 posts
!
- Joined:11 Jul 2012
- Gender:Not Selected
Posted 11 January 2013 - 10:03 PM
Blue Star, on 11 January 2013 - 08:04 PM, said:
i often find the Ego will get offended by seemingly unimportant things and will point the finger and accuse others of the very thing it, itself, is actually doing. As a smoke and mirrors deflection, one of the ego's most used approaches to getting what it wants. It can be such a whining child.
Oh and by the by, whilst I have read much by most on the ego......I hold little to any of Freudian thinking. Plus, whilst I do lean more to Jungian theories. i try to think for myself. Neither, Freud nor Jung hold the monopoly on the aspects of ego interpretation or understanding..... As I said in an earlier post.... Ego comes into many philosophies, psychology work and spiritual beliefs.
Oh and by the by, whilst I have read much by most on the ego......I hold little to any of Freudian thinking. Plus, whilst I do lean more to Jungian theories. i try to think for myself. Neither, Freud nor Jung hold the monopoly on the aspects of ego interpretation or understanding..... As I said in an earlier post.... Ego comes into many philosophies, psychology work and spiritual beliefs.
I admit, I do ignore some posters because I don't want to waste energy on them.. There are one or two here in UM that I've personally identified as people who don't find any other people's opinions worthy and as such they only post for their own egocentric amusement. Apart from that, I do answer most questions when asked.. I rarely point the finger, exept in this case where Ego is being questioned...
What makes Jung's philosophy on Ego so appealing to you?
#150
Professor T
-
- Member
-
- 1,633 posts
!
- Joined:11 Jul 2012
- Gender:Not Selected
Posted 11 January 2013 - 10:08 PM
Seeker79, on 11 January 2013 - 07:34 PM, said:
During that thread I was accessing thoughts from several aspects of different entities/egos. To basically create a profile of the person I was reading. Its basically what you are doing here on this thread. Only i was focused on the reading of specific roblems and potential solutions. Picking apart an ego, profiling, listening to your inner voice about Somone... All pretty much the same thing.
For me it was an exercise in connecting with guiding spirits/egos without being in trance, which I am perfectly willing to admit may be deep archetypical aspects of myself.
For me it was an exercise in connecting with guiding spirits/egos without being in trance, which I am perfectly willing to admit may be deep archetypical aspects of myself.
Hmmmmmmmm... This is a very vague response..
There's no clear definition here between entities & egos..
no clear definition here between spirits & egos..
Do you mean Entities and Spirits as extentions of your Ego?
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
