What effect does denying social identity in this manner have on society? — Galuchat

If it became at all widespread, it would have a transformative effect, ending division between 'us' and 'them'. I can't begin to imagine how pleasant that would be for everyone.

Is mindfulness then self consciousness (meta self awareness)? And by "fixing identity in thought" does it construct identity independent of social influence?

Any steps to re-balance the ego and re-consider the identity (that which is one's sense of self, or the border between "Self" and "Not-Self") will more than likely yield positive results. It is not an all-or-nothing affair where one is trying to lose, or worse yet "kill", the ego. Some gentle and gradual reducing may help, though. The ego can become inadvertently enlarged, much like an untended lawn, our bodies, or the pile of our possessions can. There seems to be something in the human mind that likes to grab and hold onto things to fill the void. This can be natural and healthy, like eating when hungry. But it quickly can go to extremes, that much seems self-evident. At least it relates to my experiences both past and present in attempting to find the ever-moving balance points. When applied to the body, it can lead to a toxic obesity and ill health. With possessions, it may manifest as extreme hoarding.

But when it is the "self itself" trying to hyper-expand to fill the void and deal with a sense of emptiness, it is harder to deal with because it is not visible. Not visible, but existent nonetheless. A feeling of disconnection and isolation from other humans and the rest of the world is perhaps one of the most common feelings. When one feels as separate, small and powerless as a ping pong ball floating on the ocean, it seems like we are battered about at the mercy of the wind and waves. The first inclination might be to do something like the expression "go big or go home". But if one completely identifies with the Isolation, and believes that they are totally separate from everything else, "going big" might just make the situation worse. Instead of being a "ping pong ball self" floating on the ocean, there is a "beach ball self" floating on the waves.

Well, the "beach ball self" is definitely bigger. Sometimes in certain circumstances bigger is better, but sometimes not. The reflexive habit to expand our identity while keeping the walls of that identity air-tight can lead to a ballooning effect. The more air pumped into a balloon, the larger it becomes. But the air pressure is also increased which may lead to a sense of tightening constriction. The larger an inflated balloon becomes, the thinner its skin is. This makes it more vulnerable to pinpricks and the like. A beach ball on the ocean may have lots of room to bob about. But imagine a room filled with many beach balls, all inflated to the max. They are "feeling" (so to speak) internally pressured from the air, and externally pressured from all the other beach balls pushing against their thin vulnerable surfaces. One can then imagine the sorts of dynamics and conflicts arising from this hypothetical situation. This describes in a very general way many of the interactions around us, imho.

Those who say that this situation is the way things are and is unavoidable, and it boils down to "survival of the fittest" are probably concerned with becoming the largest beach ball on the block, while trying to deflate their competition.

And there are those who know this dynamic exists, but are looking for other ways of existing. Those that look long enough might find something. Like still having an identity with boundaries and walls, but being conscious of the necessity of doors and windows in those mental walls.

by "fixing identity in thought" does it construct identity independent of social influence? — Galuchat

So I am English, male, middle class, and white. These are historical and biological facts, but they also have a social meaning. It would be silly for me to deny either the facts or their social meaning. Other people tend to treat me in certain ways and make certain assumptions about me based on the social meaning, and this is again a fact of life.

Psychologically, since these meanings are congenial, by and large, I am inclined to adopt them; where they are uncongenial, I am inclined to deny them, which is to adopt their negation. So I imagine myself as civilised, intelligent, competent, tolerant, restrained, strong, etc etc. I emphasise 'imagine' because this image is not created by me right now, by looking at myself as I am, rather it is already there in my thoughts as an image built out of my responses to those social influences that come from the social meaning ascribed to historical and biological facts. In short, I develop an image of myself as a jolly fine fellow.

This leads inevitably to an inverse not-identity that I project onto 'them'. Where 'they' are females, foreigners, toffs or peasants.

Is mindfulness then self consciousness (meta self awareness)? — Galuchat

Mindfulness, then is looking at all this that is going on in my mind all the time, looking at what is happening, at the operation of these images, but without operating on them or judging them, and without making a separation of the mindful self looking at the unmindful self, but rather of the unmindful self being mindful for a moment of its own unmindfulness.

I don't know if this is at all answering your questions, and it is said without authority, as my own best understanding. Most of it is stolen from here.

Thanks to all for the excellent discussion.

Like still having an identity with boundaries and walls, but being conscious of the necessity of doors and windows in those mental walls. — 0 thru 9

I think this is very much in the spirit of what I am proposing - being conscious of identity and how it formed; knowing what comprises the mostly immovable foundation, and moving along the spectrum of need versus choice, to what lies in the realm of completely flexible options; being open to new information and reconsideration of what we believe to be true; and making choices that truly benefit self and others.

I don't know if this is at all answering your questions, and it is said without authority, as my own best understanding. Most of it is stolen from here. — unenlightened

That's great. Thanks very much. I will need to work on the psychology of mindfulness. Perhaps Krishnamurti and Bohm will be of assistance.

Most of it is stolen from here. — unenlightened

Very interesting interview. What I get from it is that instead of just 'being', the brain gets caught up in 'becoming' something more, and protecting what we have 'become' so far. Our basic survival instinct mistakenly applies itself to our created identity, which we are constantly trying to improve, never being totally satisfied with where we are at any point in time. The constant wanting for material things that many of us experience is reflected inward, by always wanting to 'be' more.

There is a tension between specialization and adaptability. Specialization is an inevitable death sentence. As the specialist becomes more and more dependent on their environment and circumstances, which they then must work steadily to maintain. Muscle memory, form and function. If one does the same thing over and over again at the same tempo, same time of day, same temperature and all that the better and better and better theyll get at it, but the less and less theyll be able to deal with change. This is why when we get all comfy, we start to rationalize and justify the way things and our lives are. Only the uncomfortable want change.

Aristotle and the buddha may seem like theyre saying similar things, but theyre proponents of very different things.

Mindfulness, then is looking at all this that is going on in my mind all the time, looking at what is happening, at the operation of these images, but without operating on them or judging them, and without making a separation of the mindful self looking at the unmindful self, but rather of the unmindful self being mindful for a moment of its own unmindfulness. — unenlightened

(Y)

Plus, no one in this thread is claiming to be an enlightened master or an expert in this somewhat murky subject. Looking for the questions first. If any answers turn up, then that's a bonus. — 0 thru 9

Yes, just trying to 'Solve for Happy' (Mo Gawdat), without relying on a belief in grand purpose, or any sort of afterlife. It continues to amaze me that despite the astounding advances in technology, no one has figured out a sure-fire way to achieve lasting peace of mind. I've learned a lot of skills that have at least minimized the mental suffering, but I would pay almost every last cent I have to be rid of the last traces of depressed thinking and feeling.

Yes, just trying to 'Solve for Happy' (Mo Gawdat), without relying on a belief in grand purpose, or any sort of afterlife. It continues to amaze me that despite the astounding advances in technology, no one has figured out a sure-fire way to achieve lasting peace of mind. I've learned a lot of skills that have at least minimized the mental suffering, but I would pay almost every last cent I have to be rid of the last traces of depressed thinking and feeling. — CasKev

Then maybe what you need is a worldview instead of a bag of mind tricks.

Then maybe what you need is a worldview instead of a bag of mind tricks. — Galuchat

My mind seems to have trouble finding satisfaction in a worldview, when part of me can't seem to find the value in a finite existence. However, having decided to continue living (mostly to avoid causing suffering to the people who care about me), I'm trying to do the things that keep the major depression at bay, and I think the mind tricks do more good than harm.

The ability to lose and forget yourself periodically in some activity or hobby seems to do wonders for overall peace of mind. It is like a little nap, in terms of stress relief. I think that is why we love books and movies so much. "The world is too much with us"? Maybe our self is too much with us. Lose yourself, lose your problem.

I don't think you are talking of the freudian ego. — Pollywalls

The ego I speak of is the sense of identity a person develops throughout life, to which he/she can become desperately attached, affecting them via negative self-judgment and poor life choices.

If we are taking about functioning better, that is one thing.

But if we are talking about trauma, pain, etc. then what I believe David Smail said (from a clinical psychology perspective, not a religion/mysticism/spiritual perspective) is what I would say: the damage is done and all we can do is learn to live with it.