Why do humans have ego ?

[Soandso]

That's good to know because it seems to me that ego is a bad thing but then this leads to another question how can an ego be managed and brought under control ?

I'm not sure the ego itself is necessarily a bad thing. People use it to interface with the world around them, and without an ego it seems to me like that would be an exceedingly difficult thing to do - especially when we interact with other people. Sense of self is an important thing if we want to get anything done

The problem with the ego is that it only produces one side of the story in the narrative of life - your own. I find that in questioning your assumptions from time to time, exercising empathy, and pursuing an attitude of learning does much to counteract the one sidedness that the ego presents

I think one of the more useful things that helped me parse through my own ego was with epistemology, as bias can also color the way we see things. Understanding why that bias is there does much to dispel the illusions the ego presents

 

[Eddi]

I think ego is a good thing......

In moderation!

 

[Massimo2002]

I'm not sure the ego itself is necessarily a bad thing. People use it to interface with the world around them, and without an ego it seems to me like that would be an exceedingly difficult thing to do - especially when we interact with other people. Sense of self is an important thing if we want to get anything done

The problem with the ego is that it only produces one side of the story in the narrative of life - your own. I find that in questioning your assumptions from time to time, exercising empathy, and pursuing an attitude of learning does much to counteract the one sidedness that the ego presents

I think one of the more useful things that helped me parse through my own ego was with epistemology, as bias can also color the way we see things. Understanding why that bias is there does much to dispel the illusions the ego presents

If someone didn't have a sense of self could they still get things done ?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Insufficient volition harms nobody.

Disagree. Laziness is destructive. The lack of the strength and will to leave a toxic relationship is destructive.

Excessive courage is destroying the world.

Disagree again. As I said, courage is a virtue when combined with wisdom. A relative lack of empathy combined with increasing power is man's greatest problem today. If it's to be staved off, it will take wisdom, courage, and sufficient volition to make changes.

The fact that there are wicked unsympathetic people doesn't mean that it's Milton's fault.

Agreed, but I wasn't discussing fault. I was demonstrating that meekness is a character defect, not a virtue and not blessed.

I wish you had addressed the distinction I made between meekness and other qualities of people that prevent them from asserting themselves such as politeness, humility, and a willingness to compromise, which unlike meekness are virtues.

Ego can be summed up with a sentence:
I am I, I can do anything, and you guys are nothing.

It can be summed up in a one-letter word: "I" The ego is the subject, the conscious content and what it represents are its object. The ego is the self, known directly (self-consciousness) and indirectly (memories understood as a single agent having experienced consciousness over time).

I think that many here are calling Freud's id - our reptilian and mammalian heritage - the ego here. Yes, the id needs to be tamed. Do that, develop the superego, and will, sense of self, and courage all become assets that can change one's own life and the world for the better.

 

[Estro Felino]

Disagree. Laziness is destructive.

If people had been more contemplative and less sexually active, we wouldn't be an overpopulated world.
Too many births.

 

[Estro Felino]

It can be summed up in a one-letter word: "I" The ego is the subject, the conscious content and what it represents are its object. The ego is the self, known directly (self-consciousness) and indirectly (memories understood as a single agent having experienced consciousness over time).

I think that many here are calling Freud's id - our reptilian and mammalian heritage - the ego here. Yes, the id needs to be tamed. Do that, develop the superego, and will, sense of self, and courage all become assets that can change one's own life and the world for the better.

Do you mind me asking you if you have ever read Schopenhauer?

 

[Eddi]

And is it possible for a human to get rid of their ego ?

Can you imagine a human with no ego?

They would be a pathetic and wretched subservient creature

Ego is necessary although too much is definitely a bad thing!

 

[RestlessSoul]

If someone didn't have a sense of self could they still get things done ?

That’s a very interesting question, one which goes straight to the heart of philosophy of mind, and prompts many other related questions (as all the best questions do).

Do we need self awareness in order to respond to sensory stimuli and navigate our environment? Why are we having this conscious experience, and what do we even mean by consciousness? Why are we not only participating in, but also observing, the movie of our lives? If I can observe the pattern of my thoughts, who or what is the observer, and who the thinker? Etc…

 

[Estro Felino]

Can you imagine a human with no ego?

They would be a pathetic and wretched subservient creature

Ego is necessary although too much is definitely a bad thing!

Too many people have too much ego, that's the issue.

 

[Soandso]

If someone didn't have a sense of self could they still get things done ?

Maybe, but if one has no sense of self then what is the purpose to get anything done? Purpose requires attachment, and attachment requires an ego. There are healthy attachments, and there are unhealthy attachments. Understanding which is which will allow you to make better decisions while working with your ego rather than in spite of it

 

[crossfire]

And is it possible for a human to get rid of their ego ?

Since this is the psychology forum, I will post the entry for ego from the Jung Lexicon:

Ego. The central complex in the field of consciousness. (See also self.)

The ego, the subject of consciousness, comes into existence as a complex quantity which is constituted partly by the inherited disposition (character constituents) and partly by unconsciously acquired impressions and their attendant phenomena ["Analytical Psychology and Education," CW 17, par. 169.]

Jung pointed out that knowledge of the ego-personality is often confused with self-understanding.

Anyone who has any ego-consciousness at all takes it for granted that he knows himself. But the ego knows only its own contents, not the unconscious and its contents. People measure their self-knowledge by what the average person in their social environment knows of himself, but not by the real psychic facts which are for the most part hidden from them. In this respect the psyche behaves like the body, of whose physiological and anatomical structure the average person knows very little too. ["The Undiscovered Self," CW 10, par. 491.]

In the process of individuation, one of the initial tasks is to differentiate the ego from the complexes in the personal unconscious, particularly the persona, the shadow and anima/animus. A strong ego can relate objectively to these and other contents of the unconscious without identifying with them.
Because the ego experiences itself as the center of the psyche, it is especially difficult to resist identification with the self, to which it owes its existence and to which, in the hierarchy of the psyche, it is subordinate.

The ego stands to the self as the moved to the mover, or as object to subject, because the determining factors which radiate out from the self surround the ego on all sides and are therefore supraordinate to it. The self, like the unconscious, is an a priori existent out of which the ego evolves.["Transformation Symbolism in the Mass," CW 11, par. 391.]

Identification with the self can manifest in two ways: the assimilation of the ego by the self, in which case the ego falls under the control of the unconscious; or the assimilation of the self to the ego, where the ego becomes overaccentuated. In both cases the result is inflation, with disturbances in adaptation.

In the first case, reality has to be protected against an archaic . . . dream-state; in the second, room must be made for the dream at the expense of the world of consciousness. In the first case, mobilization of all the virtues is indicated; in the second, the presumption of the ego can only be damped down by moral defeat.[The Self," CW 9ii, par. 47.]

 

[crossfire]

Since this is the psychology forum, I will post the entry for ego from the Jung Lexicon:

Ego. The central complex in the field of consciousness. (See also self.)


Jung pointed out that knowledge of the ego-personality is often confused with self-understanding.

In the process of individuation, one of the initial tasks is to differentiate the ego from the complexes in the personal unconscious, particularly the persona, the shadow and anima/animus. A strong ego can relate objectively to these and other contents of the unconscious without identifying with them.
Because the ego experiences itself as the center of the psyche, it is especially difficult to resist identification with the self, to which it owes its existence and to which, in the hierarchy of the psyche, it is subordinate.


Identification with the self can manifest in two ways: the assimilation of the ego by the self, in which case the ego falls under the control of the unconscious; or the assimilation of the self to the ego, where the ego becomes overaccentuated. In both cases the result is inflation, with disturbances in adaptation.

So basically, the ego represents the central complex of the conscious mind, {as contrasted with the unconscious mind.}
It is the interface with objective reality.

Freud summed it up thus:
Superego = perfecting principle
Ego = reality principle
Id = pleasure principle

Why would anyone want to get rid of their reality principle?

 

[Massimo2002]

Maybe, but if one has no sense of self then what is the purpose to get anything done? Purpose requires attachment, and attachment requires an ego. There are healthy attachments, and there are unhealthy attachments. Understanding which is which will allow you to make better decisions while working with your ego rather than in spite of it

What is attachment ?

 

[Massimo2002]

So basically, the ego represents the central complex of the conscious mind, {as contrasted with the unconscious mind.}
It is the interface with objective reality.

Freud summed it up thus:
Superego = perfecting principle
Ego = reality principle
Id = pleasure principle

Why would anyone want to get rid of their reality principle?

What is a reality principal ?

 

[Soandso]

What is attachment ?

As far as I understand, it's the things we deem important. They can be something as simple as daily hygiene to something as complex as our future goals and dreams that we plan over the course of years. Sometimes those attachments can be unhealthy, like addiction or impulsive and thoughtless desire, but we find motivation from the importance we place on these things

Without ego there is no sense of importance. The ego is needed when answering the question "What do I want to happen?"

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

If people had been more contemplative and less sexually active, we wouldn't be an overpopulated world. Too many births.

I don't see the relevance of that comment to mine. I wrote, "Disagree. Laziness is destructive. The lack of the strength and will to leave a toxic relationship is destructive" in response to, "Insufficient volition harms nobody." Now you seem to be saying that people should think more and reproduce less. I agree, but that doesn't speak to the ways that "insufficient volition" can be harmful as in the example I gave. People frequently suffer for their lack of initiative or industry. Their insufficient volition can cause them to dropout of school or fail to save for old age.

Do you mind me asking you if you have ever read Schopenhauer?

No, I have not, but I have read about him as is the case with most philosophers. I learned philosophy from books about philosophers, not original works. One such book was about the German philosophers, which summarized the main ideas of Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche, Leibniz, and Schopenhauer. I only found Kant and to a lesser extent Leibniz interesting. The others all seemed to have ideas that didn't resonate with me.

 

[Estro Felino]

So basically, the ego represents the central complex of the conscious mind, {as contrasted with the unconscious mind.}
It is the interface with objective reality.

Freud summed it up thus:
Superego = perfecting principle
Ego = reality principle
Id = pleasure principle

Why would anyone want to get rid of their reality ego?

The Super-Ego must prevail over the Ego.
That is, the highest moral and ethical principles must prevail over selfishness.

So getting rid of the reality ego is a necessity.

 

[sun rise]

The word "ego" has many different definitions. Mine is spiritually related: an ego is a structure of life that forms when a child matures. It's purpose for most is to provide a structure to interact with the world and learn lessons. For those on the spiritual path the ego starts to disappear offering an expanded view of reality. Such people's sense of self as separate from the world and separate from other people dissipates leaving a sense of oneness.

 

[Estro Felino]

The word "ego" has many different definitions. Mine is spiritually related: an ego is a structure of life that forms when a child matures. It's purpose for most is to provide a structure to interact with the world and learn lessons. For those on the spiritual path the ego starts to disappear offering an expanded view of reality. Such people's sense of self as separate from the world and separate from other people dissipates leaving a sense of oneness.

Standing ovation.

 

[Soandso]

The Super-Ego must prevail over the Ego.
That is, the highest moral and ethical principles must prevail over selfishness.

So getting rid of the reality ego is a necessity.

Hmmm... I'm confused. Are you equating ego with selfishness? An overinflated ego can certainly tend towards selfishness, but the ego by itself is the sense of self; it's our point of reference, as far as I'm aware