• hopeful
    2
    I think there is a difference between the sense of self and the self itself. Perhaps a person can lose the sense of the self but the sense continues to exist. However there are some who believe that the self itself ceases to exists e.g. some sufis concept of fana.

    I fail to see how either is possible especially the latter where the self ceases to exist yet still exists. If the self ceases to exist then that is a state of non-existence with no experience possible at all. A person cannot experience ego death if they cease to exist as a separate entity.

    I also fail to see how the former (the loss of the sense of self) can exist in the absolute sense. It is possible for a person's senses/awareness or thoughts to be focused on other things with less attention on the self, but this must have its limits. For in such cases there is a central subjective experience wherein an individual is focused on things other than itself. Even if a person were to experience everything exactly in the same manner that all other individuals are experiencing (i.e. a shared experience) there are still individual experiencers. Not having individual experiencers would be tantamount to non-existence.

    In my view when people speak about ego death with NDEs or psychedelic experiences, they are not actually experiencing ego death. Rather they are experiencing less attention on the self or greater connectivity (at least in cognitive terms) with other things.
  • Agent Smith
    9.5k
    The ego is an illusion; being so, it can't die because it's not alive. Does a stone die?
  • EnPassant
    667
    I think self and ego are not the same. The self is one's individuality, the ego is self-ish or self-centered. Love looks out and loves what is not self: one loves poetry, art, nature, another being... these are not self. Ego looks inward and loves the self. Love and ego are opposites. Too much inward looking ego becomes pathological; the megalomaniac, the tyrant etc.
  • TerraHalcyon
    42
    How exactly is the ego an illusion? People say that a lot but is there a way to truly know?

    one loves poetry, art, nature, another being... these are not self.EnPassant

    Well they are self though in that they are what one "likes" which is a personal thing. I don't think there is such a thing as being truly selfless as everything is motivated by some level of egoic desire.
  • Tom Storm
    9k
    A person cannot experience ego death if they cease to exist as a separate entity.hopeful

    I think these sorts of terms are poetic understandings and not to be taken literally.
  • Agent Smith
    9.5k
    How exactly is the ego an illusion? People say that a lot but is there a way to truly know?TerraHalcyon

    The ego is an illusion to the extent it can't be zeroed in on. Can you tell me what's your ego? Is it your body? Is it your mind? Quid sit?
  • Raymond
    815
    Can you tell me what's your ego? Is it your body?Agent Smith


    Exactly! It's your body. You walk and talk between the world and your brain.
  • Raymond
    815
    If the ego talks to itself, who does the talking or who does it talk to? Who is it even? The root of identity crisis. Who am I? What's ego? The body. All problems solved. So no illusion at all.
  • Agent Smith
    9.5k
    Exactly! It's your bodyRaymond

    Not all will agree I'm afraid.
  • Raymond
    815
    Not all will agree I'm afraid.Agent Smith

    Thats true.
  • Existential Hope
    789
    The self is certainly an illusion, at least in terms of the perception of separation. We generally believe in ultimate unity.

    Disagreements in an illusory world do not truly matter, so no worries ;)
  • Raymond
    815
    The self is certainly an illusionDA671

    Then who wrote these words, if it wasn't you? Or is "you" equally illusionary? The illusion seems pretty real. I think the ego is called an illusion to counteract the egoism present in our world.
  • Raymond
    815
    The ego is an illusion to the extent it can't be zeroed in onAgent Smith

    This is the root of the identity crisis. Who am I? Every time you think you have found yourself, it slips away. Why can't you zero in in on yourself? Because you stand always one step behind it? There only is one you. Not you and you looking at it.
  • Existential Hope
    789
    It was "I", but it really wasn't anybody in a fundamental sense. However, it's impossible to live one's life not interacting with the world as it appears to us. The illusion is certainly quite real.

    Perhaps we cannot look truly "look" at us from a bird's eye view because there isn't any possibility of a duality in perspective. Advaita: Not two :)
  • Raymond
    815
    It was "I", but it really wasn't anybody in a fundamental senseDA671

    Nobody is fundamental. We are all children of the universe, created by the eternal beings. If you want to make an illusion out of that, no problem. :wink:
  • Existential Hope
    789
    Nobody is fundamental indeed, because the distinction between everybody and nobody isn't as easy to make. For us, eternity is certainly a characteristic of the ultimate reality, though it's also dynamic. ;)
  • Raymond
    815
    Nobody is fundamental indeed, because the distinction between everybody and nobody isn't as easy to makeDA671

    I see what you mean. No one is unique, contrary to what commercials show you. In that sense the ego is illusionary. Only isolated egos are unique.
  • Existential Hope
    789
    Agreed. Unbridled individualism can blind us.
  • Raymond
    815


    Yes, indeed. Just like unbridled collectivism. Attention to the individual might blind us for other people and can lead to nasty behavior towards other people (or lack of contact). Attention to the collective only can lead to nasty behavior towards the individual. So both can lead to nasty behavior. The collective, as well as the individual, are abstractions in the sense that they don't have an independent existence, and any claim on individuality or collectivity is a claim that ignores reality.
  • Existential Hope
    789
    Exactly! People tend to gravitate from one extreme to another these days. I think it's necessary to have a balanced perspective.
  • unenlightened
    9.2k
    I think there is a difference between the sense of self and the self itself.hopeful

    It would be useful to have some context for particularly the notion of ego death. If people talk about in descriptions of NDEs etc, it because it is a term familiar from elsewhere.

    Ego death is a "complete loss of subjective self-identity" — Wiki
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ego_death

    This fragment allows me to rephrase your opening remark: there is a difference between the self and the self-identity/ego.

    Now identification is a familiar process that has great importance, for example, to mushroom gatherers. They need to reliably identify the edible and poisonous mushrooms and ensure that they only pick the edible ones. Note that it is a process of thinking that humans go through. The mushrooms are passive, and oblivious.

    So self-identification is a thought process humans go through to distinguish self from non-self. for example:

    These are my thoughts, which I give to you and the world to read, typed by my fingers on my laptop inmy living-room, as a member in good standing of The Philosophy Forum

    Thus it can be seen that self-identification includes the mind and body and material objects, places and associations - to greater or lessor extents. There're core and peripheral aspects. It hurts when I lose my laptop, and it hurts more when I lose my finger. But these thoughts are immediately replaced in the same way that lunch follows dinner.

    And all of this (as I identify myself) is ego. And it is all an ongoing habitual way of thinking, which might cease, but probably won't. The permanent cessation of this process of identification is what constitutes ego death. There is a body still and thoughts and a computer, but I am no longer attached to them, they are just part of the local scene. whether or not such a complete cessation occurs in any individual case, is a matter of speculation, but it is "philosophically possible" in that it is not, ahem "self-contradictory".
    It would be self-contradictory though to to claim ego death as an identity; hence "Those who speak do not know, Those who know, do not speak."
  • Raymond
    815


    High ten, Dasixsevenone! Let's call the ego real as well as illusionary. Real in the sense it interacts with other egos, creating a sense of community, illusionary in the sense it stands apart. And a similar for the community, and it's relation to other communities. More balanced we can't get! A dynamical balance.
  • Existential Hope
    789
    "A dynamical balance"

    Excuse me, but when did I share my personal diary with you? ;)
  • Raymond
    815


    Haha! Guess we share a secret diary... Like all of us. :smile:
  • Existential Hope
    789
    Maybe it is not so "personal" after all :D
  • Agent Smith
    9.5k
    Ego-death! From a cursory reading of the Wikipedia entry, is simply the loss of self-identity; happens all the time, doesn't it? In fact ego-life (gain of self-identity) is rare, occasions when one is self-aware are few and far in between. Either live life as a zombie or as a narcissist. Tough choice! Both are deadly.
  • baker
    5.6k
    I think there is a difference between the sense of self and the self itself. Perhaps a person can lose the sense of the self but the sense continues to exist.hopeful

    One's self-concept (also called self-construction, self-identity, self-perspective or self-structure) is a collection of beliefs about oneself.[1][2] Generally, self-concept embodies the answer to the question "Who am I?"[3]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-concept


    Self-as-context, one of the core principles in acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), is the concept that people are not the content of their thoughts or feelings, but rather the consciousness experiencing said thoughts and feelings.[1][2] Self-as-context is distinguished from self-as-content, defined in ACT as the social scripts people maintain about who they are and how they operate in the world.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-as-context
  • Raymond
    815
    Either live life as a zombie or as a narcissist. Tough choice! Both are deadly.Agent Smith

    Damn you Agent! How come you make me laugh every time? :razz:
  • Deletedmemberzc
    2.5k
    psychedelic experienceshopeful

    But first, are you experienced? — Jimi
  • Raymond
    815


    Living without an image of yourself how you should be leads to ego death. Living like you feel makes the mental image of yourself disappear and you are as you are. You're your body then, fully alive between the outer physical world and the inner mental world, without a second you disturbing.
  • TerraHalcyon
    42
    The ego is an illusion to the extent it can't be zeroed in on. Can you tell me what's your ego? Is it your body? Is it your mind? Quid sit?Agent Smith

    Just because you can't zero in on it doesn't mean it doesn't exist or is an illusion. There are lots of phenomenon like that.

    Living without an image of yourself how you should be leads to ego death. Living like you feel makes the mental image of yourself disappear and you are as you are. You're your body then, fully alive between the outer physical world and the inner mental world, without a second you disturbing.Raymond

    From what I read about Buddhism and the ego the goal isn't ego death, because then there wouldn't be anything to keep you alive. They would also strongly argue that you aren't the body, for a lot of reasons.

    I also find it odd you're positing an external reality when in my thread you tried defending solipsism, just a side note.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.