Ego Comforting

4 months ago
76 in philosophy

How much courage do we have to honestly face ourselves when we do something wrong?

Can we honestly take responsibility for the actions we do?

Or are we too attached to ourselves to be able to honestly see what we are doing?

Your actions reflect you at the time. You can change and no longer do an action into the future. But when something is done, it's done, and you can't undo it.

When trying to get someone to honestly face what they have done, some people believe there is a need to differentiate between the actions and actor that created them in order to prevent shame, guilt and the negative connotations that come with facing a wrong-action.

The idea is to deceive someone into being able to honestly look at the wrong-actions, by dissociating them from their actions. Convince the ego-self-"I" that everything is safe, no one is "attacking" them or their attachment to false beliefs that they have adopted as part of their identity/self.

If I can get you to accept that your actions are not "you", you will be comfortable in looking at the actions without automatically associating it with yourself. Rather than honestly being able to recognize what you did, you, the actor, want to not recognize what you did in reality, but just look at it as an action without blame, shame, or guilt.

Someone can convince you that your actions are separate from you, as if they don't come from you, in an attempt to get you to listen to them without getting defensive about what you did.

Actions represent a person and who they choose to be at the time. Rather than accept reality as it is, I'll just con you into believing you're not responsible for the actions you did, it's not "you". Then you can honestly deal with yourself by not dealing with yourself?

I don't play these dissociative mind games to bypass getting people to honestly face themselves in the mirror. Enough of trying to prevent people from feeling the bullshit they engage in. Truth is the way out. See and feel the reality of what your actions have done.

Comforting lies about ourselves are more desirable than facing the hard unpleasant truth about what we are doing.


Source


Thank you for your time and attention! I appreciate the knowledge reaching more people. Take care. Peace.


If you appreciate and value the content, please consider:
Upvoting ,    Sharing or   Reblogging below.

Follow me for more content to come!

Looking to contact me? Find me on Discord or send me a message on SteemKURE.


Please consider supporting me as a Steem Witness by voting for me at the bottom of the Witness page; or just click on the upvote button if I am in the top 50:

If you are unsure how to vote for witnesses, you can put my name in the "SET PROXY" section at the bottom of the Witness Voting page which will use my witness votes.


2017-03-24, 11:25am

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, earn $59 of STEEM POWER
Sort Order:  trending
59
  ·  4 months ago

This is a tricky subject.
And you only went down one layer.

Most people have this thought, something like,
if other people knew of all their errors, those other people would stop liking them. So, in order to not be thrown out of society, one must hide those errors.

What people often refer to as ego-investment, is really a fear of being ostracised. And that fear of being abandoned is far worse than facing down a tiger, or anything in the real world.

The notion of attacking the problem and not the person is a good one. It actually gets results. Although, you could get the same results if you could convince the person that no one is going to abandon them. (But that is really difficult to do, as most people have a story of someone they no longer talk to because of X)

Most people would like to go back into the past and correct some action so that some result didn't take place. Unfortunately, the universe doesn't work this way. If they were able to go back into the past, whatever they did would end in the same results. It is not really about the actions, it is about the future you are attracting. The future you are attracting has to do with what you are a vibrational match to.

So, if you really want to change, you need to find what you are attracting now, and change that. To do so, you listen to all of your thoughts. Especially the self doubts. What you are telling yourself in your head is what the future is going to bring to you.

To really change yourself, you need to train yourself to think new thoughts.
So, it is not really about ego-comforting, it is about getting past the defences we put in place to keep us from changing.

·
70
  ·  4 months ago

There is a lot of truth in your words, how sad that so many of us feel so insecure that we have difficulty facing the truth of who we are.

·
59
  ·  4 months ago

https://steemit.com/philosophy/@builderofcastles/re-clayboyn-re-builderofcastles-re-dwinblood-malevolence-and-benevolence-we-are-the-tool-makers-echo-echo-echo-20170308t182040027z

You still have yet to answer for your actions, so these thoughts are mere platitudes based on your past uncorrected actions. It seems you have no reason to change or correct them or admit to your mistakes, because all you have to do is a little positive thinking and focus solely on the future and what you want to attract.

It is not really about the actions, it is about the future you are attracting. The future you are attracting has to do with what you are a vibrational match to.

That is called the Positive Thinking Fallacy and that new age bullshit is prevalent in our society

The future you are attracting has to do with what you are a vibrational match to.

The Positive Thinking Fallacy: An immensely popular but deluded modern fallacy of logos, that because we are "thinking positively" that in itself somehow biases external, objective reality in our favor even before we lift a finger to act. See also, Magical Thinking. Note that this particular fallacy is often part of a much wider closed-minded, sometimes cultish ideology where the practitioner is warned against paying attention to to or even acknowledging the existence of "negative" evidence or counter-arguments against his/her standpoints. In the latter case rational discussion, argument or refutation is most often futile.

There is an old and tired saying that is true even so:
You reap what you sow.
Everything you say is counter to that adage of reaping what you sow:

So, if you really want to change, you need to find what you are attracting now, and change that. To do so, you listen to all of your thoughts. Especially the self doubts. What you are telling yourself in your head is what the future is going to bring to you.

To really change yourself, you need to train yourself to think new thoughts.
So, it is not really about ego-comforting, it is about getting past the defences we put in place to keep us from changing.

The noble eight-fold path is

right view, right resolve, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness

There is no right thought, there is no mention of looking at what is attracted by you, or any mention of thoughts at all in it.

I seen you mention in a few remarks about eastern philosophy, and in our exchange even resorted to the golden child, and enlightenment in many other comments, but it seems you don't know about the four noble truths and the eight fold path or the western principle of you reap what you sow.

·
·
59
  ·  4 months ago

I have no idea what you are getting at.
It seems you just want an argument.

You typed "right mindfulness" and then you right after it say there no mention of "right thought".
What do you think mindfulness is? It is being aware of your thoughts.
Do you know the Tibetan or the Sanskrit for the noble eight-fold path?
It loses a lot in the translation to english.

Every single part of it is about the vibration of a certain part of your body.
And one of the best ways to tell what your vibration is, is to look at what you are attracting in your life.

Sorry if I use words that you are not used to, I am in here, discussing things with english speaking who do not have much of a foundation in eastern religion/philosophy.


The "golden child", as I used it before, has nothing to do with anything Tibetan, it is a descriptor used in early works on narcissist induced trauma.
·
·
·
59
  ·  4 months ago

What do you think mindfulness is? It is being aware of your thoughts.

Right Mindfulness: never be absent minded, being conscious of what one is doing; this, states Harvey, encourages the mindfulness about impermanence of body, feeling and mind, as well as to experience the five aggregates (skandhas), the five hindrances, the four True Realities and seven factors of awakening.

What do you think mindfulness is? It is being aware of your thoughts.
Its a lot more than being aware of your thoughts, actually it's got to do with action more than thoughts, it's about being aware of what you are engaging in and where your mind is at, not being absent minded.

More:

https://www.thoughtco.com/right-mindfulness-450070

What Is Mindfulness?

The Pali word for "mindfulness" is sati (in Sanskrit, smriti). Sati can also mean "retention," "recollection," or "alertness." Mindfulness is a whole-body-and-mind awareness of the present moment. To be mindful is to be fully present, not lost in daydreams, anticipation, indulgences, or worry.

Mindfulness also means observing and releasing habits of mind that maintain the illusion of a separate self. This includes dropping the mental habit of judging everything according to whether we like it or not. Being fully mindful means being fully attentive to everything as-it-is, not filtering everything through our subjective opinions.

http://wisdomthroughmindfulness.blogspot.com/2011/06/what-is-right-mindfulness.html
In the small context of thoughts, it's not being aware of your thoughts, that is both simplistic and non active:

According to the generic definitions of mindfulness stated above, you accept every thought that arises with openness, non-judgmentally.

To really change yourself, you need to train yourself to think new thoughts.

Contrary to the wisdom imparted by the Buddha, it's got nothing to do with thinking new thoughts, its about actions, speech and intentions, and most important is that the Buddha never expounded on the metaphysical, and to put it simple, he never expounded on concepts such as think good thoughts and good things will happen, or attuning yourself to the vibration or any new age bullshit about law of attraction, not one time. The same for after death, rebirth, or any other aspect contained in the metaphysical nonsense.

·
·
·
59
  ·  4 months ago

I have no idea what you are getting at.
It seems you just want an argument.

To start, here are some arguments which you didn't retort and in doing so kept with your suppositions,

You:

And most people I talk to who do not believe the lie that "people are inherently good" usually have not taken it to its true conclusion that there are evil people out there plotting evil and destroying people's lives. (including the lives of their own children)

Me:
It's not a true conclusion because there is another option, that there are people out there capable of evil and good, and not necessarily purely evil. Their conclusion could very well be that there aren't purely evil people like there aren't purely good people, but degrees.

More

You:

Emotional abuse that almost everyone I talk to about it does their best to change the subject and continue to ignore the possibility that it exists.

Me:
Why are they ignoring the possibility that it exist simply because they don't engage the discussion in that direction, have they expressed that outright to you, because I doubt that very much otherwise you would have not implied it and instead said, simply, that they don't believe that it's possible, that it doesn't exist.

Those are two suppositions you have not challenged or retorted to, and so they are wholly accepted as your truth when in fact they seem like suppositions and rightly so.

Something else arguing that the mass/society is problematic or and impediment to change:

You:

And those that believe in evil people usually haven't gone far enough and seen that it is the collective responses that actually shape our govern-cement and our lives.

Me:
The collective response shaping our govern-cement and our lives is another fallacy because you argue that the mass is responsible for the actions of the few elected, and the actions of the individual when it's the individuals themselves that are responsible for their own actions while the mass is to blame, it shifts the blame from the individual to the collective which is unaccountable, faceless and unchangeable.

Another fallacy, this time it's shifting blame and responsibility to a faceless mass and not the individuals themselves and their choices.

And related to that is this fallacy of blaming again the "government" for the actions and character of the individuals:
You:

What we have is a set of catch 22s that make good people into sheep easy to fleece.

Me:
Saying that they make good people easy to fleece is itself a fallacy. First it starts by impressing onto oneself that they are only good and inherently not bad which leaves them deluded into thinking that they can only do good, think good and be good. A deluded individual is not a good individual, good people are easy or easier to fleece than an individual that realizes their capacity to be indifferent as much as their capacity for altruism, it's deluded people that are easy to fleece because their behavior and the thinking which drives their actions is one dimensional and easy to predict. After you have deluded individuals into this "one dimensional cannot err belief" then you only need to con-vince them that what they need to do is good.

Obviously in all scenarios I have argued that either you suppose things instead of critically thinking and questioning or seek to shift the responsibility onto the times and society instead onto the individuals, which makes individuals and their choices bound to the collective and helpless to change, it's circular logic, the collective cannot change without the individuals and the individuals cannot change without the collective.

·
59
  ·  4 months ago

I disagree about the fear of being abandoned being far worse than facing a tiger, because plenty of people are doing just that, the biggest fear and the fear you are under is the fear of embarrassment, it is embarrassment that makes one not admit their wrongs, not being ostracized, it is looking like a fool, it is the pain embarrassment brings, which is what krnel was talking about, shame is embarrassment and he was completely right in that regard, it is the most potent of fears.

·
59
  ·  4 months ago

It is shame/embarrassment that controlled you and made you exit the discussion and treated me as if I don't exist, you were embarrassed of admitting to your wrong speech.

·
·
59
  ·  4 months ago

Please do not use shame and embarrassment in a way that indicates they are similar. They are not even in the same category of emotions. Dealing with the trauma from each requires a completely different tool set.


I write as well as can to deliver information to the people who have posted. These are wisdoms from my own path. They are the accumulation of many experiences. I will not change my mind on any of them. There is no mind to change. They are my experiences.

I may change how I describe something when I find a better analogy. So, of course I like to engage in discussion, it helps me learn to articulate my experiences better. And I love hearing about other people's experiences.

If you wish to have a discussion, type away. If all you wish to do is attack me, I am not your punching bag.

·
·
·
59
  ·  4 months ago

Please do not use shame and embarrassment in a way that indicates they are similar.

Explain how they are not similar then:

noun: shame
1.

a painful feeling of humiliation or distress caused by the consciousness of wrong or foolish behavior.
"she was hot with shame"
synonyms: humiliation, mortification, chagrin, ignominy, embarrassment, indignity, discomfort

noun: synonym; plural noun: synonyms
a word or phrase that means exactly or nearly the same as another word or phrase in the same language, for example shut is a synonym of close.
synonyms: alternate, substitute, alternative, equivalent, euphemism

noun: embarrassment
a feeling of self-consciousness, shame, or awkwardness.
"I turned red with embarrassment"
synonyms: mortification, humiliation, shame, shamefacedness, chagrin, awkwardness, self-consciousness, sheepishness, discomfort, discomfiture, discomposure, agitation, distress

They are not even in the same category of emotions.

Explain how they are not even in the same category of emotions.

If all you wish to do is attack me, I am not your punching bag.
I have never attacked you, so don't try to insinuate that.
I have pointed out how you speak about philosophy but have not any knowledge or experience of the noble eight fold path.

You didn't address why OR how your logic doesn't fall squarely in the Positive Thinking fallacy, and resorted to making assertions without evidence or explanation to garner wisdom or understanding. Assertions without explanation or critical thought fall in the category of nonsense.

·
·
·
·
59
  ·  4 months ago

I state that shame and embarrassment are two different emotions and require completely different tools to work with their traumas.

And you quote an english dictionary to me.
English, the worst language for discussing emotions in the world.

From my experience, with working with these traumas in people, I have a very strong understanding of their difference.
And your response is to say they are synonyms.

You also say that the 8 fold path is more about actions and not thoughts.
Then why is the typical view of a buddhist monk someone who meditates, and not someone who practices Tai chi?

Is it better to try to fix the shadow, or the thing that casts the shadow?

Your responses are not, these are your views, these are my views, why do you feel differently then me.
Your responses are, how dare you not think like me. Here is all this information written in english by western world oriented sources. How dare you not agree with them.

I have never had a discussion like yours with a rinpoche. Even when I used to be seriously western minded. If you have had any buddhist training, your actions are very confusing.

·
·
·
·
·
59
  ·  4 months ago

I state that shame and embarrassment are two different emotions and require completely different tools to work with their traumas.

And you quote an english dictionary to me.
English, the worst language for discussing emotions in the world.

So you haven't explained or argued how or why they are different and resorted to baseless assertions, as in all instances so far.
You then devalue a whole language as being the worst to discussing emotions, incredible!
You then go to argue that all i have done is not dissagre with you and offer reason and logic for such, but I've irrately said how dare you think differently, because here's the information in the language you and I are discoursing in, what a load of nonsense! You resorted to attacking language itself and information with your baseless assertions/nonsense, and you've resorted to that before from what I remember.

Then you say that the noble eight fold path is all about thoughts and not actions, because you agree with all the Buddhist and Taoist monks, who turned the teachings into a way of life, ABSURDITY at its best, the people who turned to rituals and chanting nonsense to the contrary of the teachings themselves.

70
  ·  4 months ago

70
  ·  4 months ago

I think taking a hard look at yourself and being honest with yourself is something you can learn and improve upon. There are ups and downs because somethings are harder to look at than others. But once you've started, once you've learned that it's not the end of the world to find you are flawed, it can get a little easier. I have massive flaws which i try to minimise and resolve but I can still have self-esteem. The biggest support is love. If you love anyone, anything.....that love can help you want to be better and you can't get better and honour love without truth.

64
  ·  4 months ago

knowing what we have done wrong can prevent us from doing the same mistakes again, by not feeling guilt merely you will even think about your actions and its consequences.

68
  ·  4 months ago

I agree 100% with benjojo. One of the key principles of AA is "when we were wrong, we promptly admitted it." Also "things that used to baffle us become second nature." You'd be surprised (or maybe not) at how good it feels to get stuff you've done wrong off your chest and amends made for them. I can attest that it does become second nature. Funny, I looked and looked for God in church and found Him in AA!

68
  ·  4 months ago

Good Post/Article, nice read over a cup of green tea. Keep up the great work. 100% upvote

65
  ·  4 months ago

I agree! Thank you for sharing!

51
  ·  4 months ago

i dont get how your posts generate so much revenue in only an hour. how do you do it!?

·
76
  ·  4 months ago

https://steemit.com/identity/@krnel/boys-have-more-diverse-friends-when-racial-identity-is-secure

That post was at $2 after an hour. I don't do anything. I'm not the one upvoting.

·
·
51
  ·  4 months ago

everyone must love you krnel! they llloooooovvvveee you...

·
59
  ·  4 months ago

I think it's because people see the value of truth. Not only that he is a decent writer, and has polished his skills so that he can craft such splendid works, which people value ;)

67
  ·  4 months ago

you can also manage to make a lie actually come true, if you can handle the consequences of it ;)

52
  ·  4 months ago

so true :) thanks for sharing its a really good article

44
  ·  4 months ago

True story.

62
  ·  4 months ago

"when something is done, its done"... very true words and all the reasoning doesn't undo it. Well thought out post. I like it.