Ego vs. Spirituality

Do you believe the ego acts as an obstacle to spiritual progress?

Is diminishing the ego a byproduct of spiritual growth, or is reducing the ego a prerequisite for that growth to begin?

Certain teachings focus on the total "dissolution of the ego." Do you think such a feat is actually possible, or perhaps even necessary?

How has your relationship with the ego evolved on your own path? Is it expanding, shrinking, or fading away? Or have you simply shifted your perspective regarding it?

In your view, what is the true definition of the ego from a spiritual standpoint?

mistybison said:Do you believe the ego acts as an obstacle to spiritual progress?

Is diminishing the ego a byproduct of spiritual growth, or is reducing the ego a prerequisite for that growth to begin?

Certain teachings focus on the total "dissolution of the ego." Do you think such a feat is actually possible, or perhaps even necessary?

How has your relationship with the ego evolved on your own path? Is it expanding, shrinking, or fading away? Or have you simply shifted your perspective regarding it?

In your view, what is the true definition of the ego from a spiritual standpoint?

To be honest, I don't really have a clue what "spiritual growth and development" even means. 🕺

mistybison said:Do you believe the ego acts as an obstacle to spiritual progress?

Is diminishing the ego a byproduct of spiritual growth, or is reducing the ego a prerequisite for that growth to begin?

Certain teachings focus on the total "dissolution of the ego." Do you think such a feat is actually possible, or perhaps even necessary?

How has your relationship with the ego evolved on your own path? Is it expanding, shrinking, or fading away? Or have you simply shifted your perspective regarding it?

In your view, what is the true definition of the ego from a spiritual standpoint?

Of course it's possible. If you head out to the Himalayas and rent one of those meditation caves that comes with a private bathroom, while a Sherpa brings you water and chops your firewood. 😁

Walking around the streets without an ego isn't exactly recommended. It's dangerous.

mistybison said:Do you believe the ego acts as an obstacle to spiritual progress?

Is diminishing the ego a byproduct of spiritual growth, or is reducing the ego a prerequisite for that growth to begin?

Certain teachings focus on the total "dissolution of the ego." Do you think such a feat is actually possible, or perhaps even necessary?

How has your relationship with the ego evolved on your own path? Is it expanding, shrinking, or fading away? Or have you simply shifted your perspective regarding it?

In your view, what is the true definition of the ego from a spiritual standpoint?

Nothing. It's still as full of holes as a block of Swiss cheese. At least that's what a psychic told me—right after some clairvoyants at an esoteric fair gave me similar vibes back when they used to set up near the Farmers Market. Honestly, they were talking about holes in my aura, but I think it's the same thing.

mistybison said:Do you believe the ego acts as an obstacle to spiritual progress?

Is diminishing the ego a byproduct of spiritual growth, or is reducing the ego a prerequisite for that growth to begin?

Certain teachings focus on the total "dissolution of the ego." Do you think such a feat is actually possible, or perhaps even necessary?

How has your relationship with the ego evolved on your own path? Is it expanding, shrinking, or fading away? Or have you simply shifted your perspective regarding it?

In your view, what is the true definition of the ego from a spiritual standpoint?

It's that sense of self-importance, that feeling of being separate. Spiritualists often just develop a "spiritualized ego"—they stay just as self-centered, but they learn all the right jargon to repackage their flaws as virtues.

I tend to view the ego as a necessary layer of protection. It is something I require, yet I am loath to let it go. The danger arises only when it usurps control and devolves into pathology.

What would a person even be without an ego? At best, they would be little more than a plant.

Furthermore, one should consider the ego as a fundamental perspective.

Joseph Bailey41, I recall seeing your critiques regarding artists and philosophy, though the specific context escapes me at the moment. As a professor of music working within the theater, about sixty percent of my social circle consists of artists—ranging from applied arts to performing and auteur styles—and I feel compelled to tell you that while you have a point, we truly need this mechanism. For us, it serves as a shield against our own internal fears and insecurities. Believe me, it is the most resilient fortress we possess to protect ourselves from our own nature. 🙂

hiddenhound3 said:I tend to view the ego as a necessary layer of protection. It is something I require, yet I am loath to let it go. The danger arises only when it usurps control and devolves into pathology.

What would a person even be without an ego? At best, they would be little more than a plant.

Furthermore, one should consider the ego as a fundamental perspective.

Joseph Bailey41, I recall seeing your critiques regarding artists and philosophy, though the specific context escapes me at the moment. As a professor of music working within the theater, about sixty percent of my social circle consists of artists—ranging from applied arts to performing and auteur styles—and I feel compelled to tell you that while you have a point, we truly need this mechanism. For us, it serves as a shield against our own internal fears and insecurities. Believe me, it is the most resilient fortress we possess to protect ourselves from our own nature. 🙂

I believe you. 🙂

Those critiques were really just reflections of some old disappointments of mine. Back then, I used to hang out with poets and had published a bit of work myself. I remember getting caught up in this haze of resentment toward a certain plagiarism-prone hack because of how many books he'd put out and the awards he'd scooped up. Since I already had a few drinks in me at the time, I gave him this condescending look and told him, "This isn't exactly a sprint." To which he replied, totally deadpan, "You're wrong; this is exactly a sprint."

He was a fool, but he wasn't wrong. Too much posturing for too little pay.

The context here is exactly what we're discussing—measuring the average ego size within certain groups of people. Art and spirituality are essentially the same thing (with the only difference being that art leaves behind something tangible). In those realms, you need a certain level of defense, both from what's inside you and what's outside. I view the ego as a sort of barrier between the two, existing simply to prevent one from spilling too much into the other. Sometimes, though, you have to dissolve it through certain substances just to trigger the necessary reaction. And after that, it rebuilds itself—sometimes it even comes back larger, stronger, more beautiful, and more seasoned than before.

There’s a massive difference between having an ego and having dignity.
An ego just gets in your way...

Quote : Sul The Great

Enchantress As if I haven't heard enough today, someone just had to chime in and say: Do you truly believe that the ego serves as a fundamental obstacle to one's spiritual evolution?

Quote : Sul The Great

Betty Wells16 As stated by: It appears we are once again grappling with the sheer, unadulterated weight of an Egoistic nature.

What exactly is it that keeps us at a standstill?

I find myself suspecting that within those three mere letters...It appears we have reached that inevitable, tiresome stage where the conversation inevitably circles back to the concept of the Ego. One can hardly escape it, can one? It hangs over our modern discourse like a heavy, unwanted fog, demanding attention while offering nothing but vanity in return. I find myself wondering if we aren't all just performing a rather elaborate, exhausting dance to satisfy this insatiable internal critic. Truly, it’s enough to make one want to retreat to the most remote corner of the Himalayas just to find a moment of quietude away from such relentless self-importance.Honestly, people will swallow just about anything these days.

It would be prudent to begin by examining what that specific term actually signifies within the context of our language...
The first interpretation leans heavily into the realm of psychology, whereas the second is far more general in its application.

In the realm of psychoanalysis, one might define the psyche as that intricate structural layer of personality tasked with navigating the messy reality of our existence. It acts as the essential mediator, desperately attempting to strike some semblance of balance between our primal, impulsive drives—the id—and those rigid, morally demanding ethical standards we call the super-ego. It encompasses the cognitive and perceptual facets of consciousness, including everything from memory to the often-flawed process of decision-making; essentially, it is the ego.

The concept of a whole individual—one who is truly cognizant of their own existence and actively asserts that uniqueness when interacting with others, their environment, and even inanimate objects—is essentially the study of the self. We are talking about the intricate tapestry of the ego, the core persona, the distinct personality, and that elusive sense of self-awareness that defines us as human beings.

What exactly is the problem here, and more importantly, why on earth should anyone care?

To be acutely aware of one's own existence? Honestly, why on earth would anyone consider that "cliché"?
Possessing a distinct personality? Honestly, why on earth would anyone consider that a disadvantage?

Or perhaps we should frame it in psychological terms: the constant, exhausting struggle to strike a balance between our primal, impulsive drives and our higher moral aspirations and ethical values? And if that is the case, I find myself wondering why anyone would suggest such an endeavor is inherently flawed.

Who, exactly, is devoid of an ego? If we are being honest, the only candidates would be small children who haven't quite grasped the concept of selfhood yet, or perhaps those certain adults whose intellectual and cognitive development seems to have hit a permanent standstill before they ever achieved true self-awareness.

The concept of being Egoistic is by no means inherently negative or indicative of some deep-seated character flaw; in fact, I find it hard to imagine anyone actually desiring for their child to lack an ego entirely. After all, who would want to raise a kid without any sense of self-awareness, a distinct personality, or basic cognitive function? To deny someone an ego is essentially to wish for them to be mentally incapacitated.

It seems that certain individuals, those lacking even a modicum of intellectual depth, frequently fall into the trap of conflating the concept of the "ego" with terms like "egocentric" or "egomaniac"—labels which, as any reasonable person understands, carry a decidedly negative connotation.

The distinction between possessing a healthy, functional ego and descending into full-blown egomania is quite much like the difference between enjoying a decent meal and losing all self-control to a massive binge.

mistybison said:Do you believe the ego acts as an obstacle to spiritual progress?

Is diminishing the ego a byproduct of spiritual growth, or is reducing the ego a prerequisite for that growth to begin?

Certain teachings focus on the total "dissolution of the ego." Do you think such a feat is actually possible, or perhaps even necessary?

How has your relationship with the ego evolved on your own path? Is it expanding, shrinking, or fading away? Or have you simply shifted your perspective regarding it?

In your view, what is the true definition of the ego from a spiritual standpoint?

The word "ego" actually comes from Latin, meaning "I." It was popularized by Freud to represent things like self-confidence or self-esteem.
There is nothing inherently wrong with having an ego—after all, if you don't love yourself, how can you possibly love anyone else?
The real obstacle is when someone becomes overly inflated—you know, those people who are just "full of themselves." They’re the ones constantly shouting "me, me, me!" Honestly, you just have to tell them to get lost.

Is shrinking the ego a result of spiritual growth, or do you actually have to diminish the ego first to allow that growth to happen?

Well, you hit the nail on the head there! (And I say that because I certainly know where I stand.)
People who practice lowering their self-importance are usually the ones who truly understand who they are. They realize the world doesn't revolve around their every whim; instead, they work to act in harmony with others who share similar values. No one is truly an island—there is always a whole network of people who helped shape who you've become.

Certain teachings talk about the "elimination of the ego." Do you think that's actually possible? Or even necessary?

Those are those Eastern philosophies that have become quite popular here in the States, though they haven't exactly gone mainstream. You could technically shut out the self entirely, but then... where would you be? Personally, that concept never quite sat right with me when I was studying it back in my younger days.

What happens to the ego on your spiritual journey? Does it grow? Shrink? Vanish? Or do you simply change your perspective on it?

Well, that really depends on how each person defines their "self," doesn't it?
Some things lift my soul up, while others pull it down. I use the word "soul" because when I say "I am me," I am talking about my soul—that core essence that makes me a unique individual in this life.
After all, every single person is unique; no one else is exactly like you.
Because of that, any transformation—whether we become better or worse versions of ourselves—starts as an individual process. Eventually, others define us based on their own perspectives, so we end up being a product of both forces.
How do we remember other people? By how they relate to us—basically, by the impact they have on our own selves.
That’s the primary cut; everything after that is just the complex web of interpersonal relationships.

In your opinion, what actually *is* the ego in a spiritual sense?

[

I believe I've answered that quite thoroughly enough.

John Robinson9 said:The word "ego" actually comes from Latin, meaning "I." It was popularized by Freud to represent things like self-confidence or self-esteem.
There is nothing inherently wrong with having an ego—after all, if you don't love yourself, how can you possibly love anyone else?
The real obstacle is when someone becomes overly inflated—you know, those people who are just "full of themselves." They’re the ones constantly shouting "me, me, me!" Honestly, you just have to tell them to get lost.

Is shrinking the ego a result of spiritual growth, or do you actually have to diminish the ego first to allow that growth to happen?

Well, you hit the nail on the head there! (And I say that because I certainly know where I stand.)
People who practice lowering their self-importance are usually the ones who truly understand who they are. They realize the world doesn't revolve around their every whim; instead, they work to act in harmony with others who share similar values. No one is truly an island—there is always a whole network of people who helped shape who you've become.

Certain teachings talk about the "elimination of the ego." Do you think that's actually possible? Or even necessary?

Those are those Eastern philosophies that have become quite popular here in the States, though they haven't exactly gone mainstream. You could technically shut out the self entirely, but then... where would you be? Personally, that concept never quite sat right with me when I was studying it back in my younger days.

What happens to the ego on your spiritual journey? Does it grow? Shrink? Vanish? Or do you simply change your perspective on it?

Well, that really depends on how each person defines their "self," doesn't it?
Some things lift my soul up, while others pull it down. I use the word "soul" because when I say "I am me," I am talking about my soul—that core essence that makes me a unique individual in this life.
After all, every single person is unique; no one else is exactly like you.
Because of that, any transformation—whether we become better or worse versions of ourselves—starts as an individual process. Eventually, others define us based on their own perspectives, so we end up being a product of both forces.
How do we remember other people? By how they relate to us—basically, by the impact they have on our own selves.
That’s the primary cut; everything after that is just the complex web of interpersonal relationships.

In your opinion, what actually *is* the ego in a spiritual sense?

[

I believe I've answered that quite thoroughly enough.

The thing is, those philosophies emerged from communities that operated quite differently than modern American society. In our culture, individualism and isolation are relatively recent developments. Honestly, living without an ego only works if everyone around you is also operating without one—otherwise, it’s nearly impossible. Even those brief moments where you lower your guard can be risky; someone will almost certainly take the opportunity to invade your space and cause chaos. People tend to act quite predatorily; they target anyone they perceive as weak, or even those who suggest there might be a different way to live.

Living without an ego is actually a very peaceful experience. Most people have felt it at least once—that moment when you lose track of yourself and the boundaries between you and your surroundings just melt away. You simply exist alongside other living things—not just people, but animals and plants too—without trying to change them, control them, or use them to satisfy your own desires. It’s like looking at wildflowers in a meadow; you don't feel the urge to pick them because you know that by doing so, they cease to be what they truly are. They are beautiful precisely because they exist right where they are, part of the landscape and part of that specific moment, requiring nothing more than your witness. That’s how love feels before jealousy and possessiveness creep in. The ego starts whispering "me, mine, myself," and the second it speaks, the magic disappears.

Joseph Bailey41 said:The thing is, those philosophies emerged from communities that operated quite differently than modern American society. In our culture, individualism and isolation are relatively recent developments. Honestly, living without an ego only works if everyone around you is also operating without one—otherwise, it’s nearly impossible. Even those brief moments where you lower your guard can be risky; someone will almost certainly take the opportunity to invade your space and cause chaos. People tend to act quite predatorily; they target anyone they perceive as weak, or even those who suggest there might be a different way to live.

Living without an ego is actually a very peaceful experience. Most people have felt it at least once—that moment when you lose track of yourself and the boundaries between you and your surroundings just melt away. You simply exist alongside other living things—not just people, but animals and plants too—without trying to change them, control them, or use them to satisfy your own desires. It’s like looking at wildflowers in a meadow; you don't feel the urge to pick them because you know that by doing so, they cease to be what they truly are. They are beautiful precisely because they exist right where they are, part of the landscape and part of that specific moment, requiring nothing more than your witness. That’s how love feels before jealousy and possessiveness creep in. The ego starts whispering "me, mine, myself," and the second it speaks, the magic disappears.

Frankly, I cannot name a single person who lives without an ego. The ego—that essential cocktail of self-awareness, personality, and the very memories that weave together our identity—is present in every healthy individual. It is absent in small children who haven't yet developed a sense of self, and it is absent in those with severe cognitive impairments. One also loses the ego during the advanced stages of Alzheimer's or in states of extreme intoxication... though in the earlier stages, it certainly knows how to run wild...

Furthermore, I have observed a peculiar pattern: those failed "teachers" or "preachers" who rail against the ego—which, let’s be honest, is perfectly normal and human—are often nothing more than massive egomaniacs themselves. It follows a certain twisted logic, really; in order for someone to impose their own megalomaniacal whims upon others, they find it quite convenient to dismantle the perfectly healthy egos of everyone else, thereby clearing a path to spread their own egocentrism.

Even here on the forums, many of these self-proclaimed "spiritualists" and "gurus" turn out to be blatant egomaniacs—persecutors of the ego (the normal kind, belonging to others) while remaining blissfully, perhaps even willfully, unaware of their own narcissism.

feralranger said:Frankly, I cannot name a single person who lives without an ego. The ego—that essential cocktail of self-awareness, personality, and the very memories that weave together our identity—is present in every healthy individual. It is absent in small children who haven't yet developed a sense of self, and it is absent in those with severe cognitive impairments. One also loses the ego during the advanced stages of Alzheimer's or in states of extreme intoxication... though in the earlier stages, it certainly knows how to run wild...

Furthermore, I have observed a peculiar pattern: those failed "teachers" or "preachers" who rail against the ego—which, let’s be honest, is perfectly normal and human—are often nothing more than massive egomaniacs themselves. It follows a certain twisted logic, really; in order for someone to impose their own megalomaniacal whims upon others, they find it quite convenient to dismantle the perfectly healthy egos of everyone else, thereby clearing a path to spread their own egocentrism.

Even here on the forums, many of these self-proclaimed "spiritualists" and "gurus" turn out to be blatant egomaniacs—persecutors of the ego (the normal kind, belonging to others) while remaining blissfully, perhaps even willfully, unaware of their own narcissism.

Signed!👍

feralranger said:Frankly, I cannot name a single person who lives without an ego. The ego—that essential cocktail of self-awareness, personality, and the very memories that weave together our identity—is present in every healthy individual. It is absent in small children who haven't yet developed a sense of self, and it is absent in those with severe cognitive impairments. One also loses the ego during the advanced stages of Alzheimer's or in states of extreme intoxication... though in the earlier stages, it certainly knows how to run wild...

Furthermore, I have observed a peculiar pattern: those failed "teachers" or "preachers" who rail against the ego—which, let’s be honest, is perfectly normal and human—are often nothing more than massive egomaniacs themselves. It follows a certain twisted logic, really; in order for someone to impose their own megalomaniacal whims upon others, they find it quite convenient to dismantle the perfectly healthy egos of everyone else, thereby clearing a path to spread their own egocentrism.

Even here on the forums, many of these self-proclaimed "spiritualists" and "gurus" turn out to be blatant egomaniacs—persecutors of the ego (the normal kind, belonging to others) while remaining blissfully, perhaps even willfully, unaware of their own narcissism.

You forgot to mention psychedelics. If you experience it once, you can carry that sensation with you and revisit it whenever you want while fully conscious. It isn't really about trying too hard; it's more about the absence of things that usually happen automatically—specifically that internal monologue centered on "me, myself, and I." Of course, I'm not suggesting everyone should go out and get high or drink themselves under the table, since you can reach similar states through various spiritual practices. Historically, people have leaned heavily on entheogens (plants) or specific sounds and rhythms, like drumming or bells. So, I wouldn't be surprised if our friend hiddenhound3 loses her ego from time to time, even if she's never gone to meditate in the Himalayas.😁

Joseph Bailey41 said:You forgot to mention psychedelics. If you experience it once, you can carry that sensation with you and revisit it whenever you want while fully conscious. It isn't really about trying too hard; it's more about the absence of things that usually happen automatically—specifically that internal monologue centered on "me, myself, and I." Of course, I'm not suggesting everyone should go out and get high or drink themselves under the table, since you can reach similar states through various spiritual practices. Historically, people have leaned heavily on entheogens (plants) or specific sounds and rhythms, like drumming or bells. So, I wouldn't be surprised if our friend hiddenhound3 loses her ego from time to time, even if she's never gone to meditate in the Himalayas.😁

Well, I don't know... for instance, I have never once lost control to alcohol in my entire life, despite the fact that back in my high school days, I could easily win bets regarding how many drinks someone else could consume. My tolerance is quite high, yet I learned my limits early on; I had no desire to cross that line, get hammered like a pig, and make a fool out of others or myself... is that 'ego'? Most likely. But is it inherently bad?

I have had some rather peculiar experiences with rare herbal 'preparations'—they aren't even illegal, though that is beside the point—but I don't believe they fall under that category...

As for that feeling of being entirely immersed, of merging with the moment and ceasing all cognitive processing... I recognize that as a positive state only through music (primarily when playing actively) and through intimate romantic connections (something that simply cannot be achieved through mere physical mechanics).

I suppose I am quite 'unconventional' in all of this...

Ultimately, even those transcendent, "heavenly" experiences become just more memories of everything a person has lived through up to a certain point in time; they are part of the very fabric from which a person's identity is woven...

mistybison said:Do you believe the ego acts as an obstacle to spiritual progress?

Is diminishing the ego a byproduct of spiritual growth, or is reducing the ego a prerequisite for that growth to begin?

Certain teachings focus on the total "dissolution of the ego." Do you think such a feat is actually possible, or perhaps even necessary?

How has your relationship with the ego evolved on your own path? Is it expanding, shrinking, or fading away? Or have you simply shifted your perspective regarding it?

In your view, what is the true definition of the ego from a spiritual standpoint?

Obviously it's an obstacle. An Egoistic person is just full of themselves—you know the type. To me, that’s easily the worst spiritual state you can be in, right behind being arrogant or refusing to be humble. Egoism and pride go hand in hand; they're basically two sides of the same coin. I feel for people stuck like that, and I feel even worse for those who actually think it's a good way to live. Honestly, I just try to stay far away from people like that—it's a major character red flag for me.

Gregory Carter67 said:Obviously it's an obstacle. An Egoistic person is just full of themselves—you know the type. To me, that’s easily the worst spiritual state you can be in, right behind being arrogant or refusing to be humble. Egoism and pride go hand in hand; they're basically two sides of the same coin. I feel for people stuck like that, and I feel even worse for those who actually think it's a good way to live. Honestly, I just try to stay far away from people like that—it's a major character red flag for me.

I suspect you are conflating terms you haven't quite mastered, specifically because the concept of the ego is fundamentally distinct from being an egoist. It is a matter of
definition.

Any psychologically sound individual possesses an ego—think of it as one's self-awareness, personality, or that essential cognitive and perceptual layer of consciousness. Only those suffering from severe mental impairments (or perhaps very young children before their intellect and self-consciousness have properly matured) lack such a thing.

An egoist, however, is defined as: a person who prioritizes their own interests above all else, acting solely for their own benefit at the expense of others; essentially, an egotist or a selfish person.

Gregory Carter67 said:Obviously it's an obstacle. An Egoistic person is just full of themselves—you know the type. To me, that’s easily the worst spiritual state you can be in, right behind being arrogant or refusing to be humble. Egoism and pride go hand in hand; they're basically two sides of the same coin. I feel for people stuck like that, and I feel even worse for those who actually think it's a good way to live. Honestly, I just try to stay far away from people like that—it's a major character red flag for me.

I see the ego primarily as a construct. If you perceive it that way, you don't even have to fight it because the whole concept feels unreal to you.
Looking at this thread, it seems a few users have teamed up to wage war against the very idea of humility.
They claim humility is twisted and perverse, arguing that we should always walk with our heads held high.
But since everything in life is dialectical and moves through opposites, it's possible to be truly proud only if you are also humble... otherwise, you're just left with egoism—nothing but empty noise and shouting.

Joseph Bailey41 said:I believe you. 🙂

Those critiques were really just reflections of some old disappointments of mine. Back then, I used to hang out with poets and had published a bit of work myself. I remember getting caught up in this haze of resentment toward a certain plagiarism-prone hack because of how many books he'd put out and the awards he'd scooped up. Since I already had a few drinks in me at the time, I gave him this condescending look and told him, "This isn't exactly a sprint." To which he replied, totally deadpan, "You're wrong; this is exactly a sprint."

He was a fool, but he wasn't wrong. Too much posturing for too little pay.

The context here is exactly what we're discussing—measuring the average ego size within certain groups of people. Art and spirituality are essentially the same thing (with the only difference being that art leaves behind something tangible). In those realms, you need a certain level of defense, both from what's inside you and what's outside. I view the ego as a sort of barrier between the two, existing simply to prevent one from spilling too much into the other. Sometimes, though, you have to dissolve it through certain substances just to trigger the necessary reaction. And after that, it rebuilds itself—sometimes it even comes back larger, stronger, more beautiful, and more seasoned than before.

The ego requires nurturing through the discipline of self-criticism 😁

This is simply a component of the spiritual journey—the process of questioning, weighing options, and maintaining balance. After all, what is the ultimate goal of spirituality? I cannot say I have lost my way, but rather that I have come to realize that the journey itself is the destination. Our ego can certainly throw us off course or create obstacles, yet it remains an integral part of our being that we must accept. There are countless reasons why our egos manifest in various ways. We are often misinformed or taught from a young age to focus too heavily on our uniqueness and individuality. One must truly understand oneself to recognize the traps the ego sets along the way.

Melissa Stewart6 said:I see the ego primarily as a construct. If you perceive it that way, you don't even have to fight it because the whole concept feels unreal to you.
Looking at this thread, it seems a few users have teamed up to wage war against the very idea of humility.
They claim humility is twisted and perverse, arguing that we should always walk with our heads held high.
But since everything in life is dialectical and moves through opposites, it's possible to be truly proud only if you are also humble... otherwise, you're just left with egoism—nothing but empty noise and shouting.

You definitely caught onto the fact that it was mostly women making those comments. Have you ever stopped to wonder why that might be?

Joseph Bailey41 said:You definitely caught onto the fact that it was mostly women making those comments. Have you ever stopped to wonder why that might be?

Not really. Maybe just a reaction to what people call mansplaining?

Melissa Stewart6 said:Not really. Maybe just a reaction to what people call mansplaining?

Exactly. It’s like the response to thousands of years of women being conditioned to be submissive. We’ve just reached our limit, honestly. If you care so much about preserving that "virtue," maybe try being the humble ones for a change. ☕

It isn't about being Egoistic; it’s just pure burnout. We are done with the mansplaining, done with being treated as second-class citizens, and done with these gods who are really just projections of individual and collective egos. It's over. That's it.

Joseph Bailey41 said:Exactly. It’s like the response to thousands of years of women being conditioned to be submissive. We’ve just reached our limit, honestly. If you care so much about preserving that "virtue," maybe try being the humble ones for a change. ☕

It isn't about being Egoistic; it’s just pure burnout. We are done with the mansplaining, done with being treated as second-class citizens, and done with these gods who are really just projections of individual and collective egos. It's over. That's it.

You doing okay there?
I’m no official spokesperson for Omen, but I didn't get the impression he said, "Women have to be submissive while men don't."