In our society it is generally accepted that an egoist is a bad person who lives for himself. Can a person of sound mind and good memory really do anything for others? We are not talking about some random or mechanical actions, but about completely conscious actions. Has it ever occurred to you that ultimately, everything we do is for ourselves? Perhaps selfishness is the only reason for our altruism? Perhaps altruism is just another beautiful function in the development program of our ego?
Well, think about it, is it really bad to love yourself and do something good for yourself? Is it better to hate yourself? Hurt yourself? Ruin your body and mind? By truly loving yourself, you help at least one person in this world. And what’s shameful about the fact that this person is you? It's simple, you are the chosen one! Chosen in how you treat yourself, because you are yourself and not someone else. Here, as in everything else, everything is good in moderation. If you live for yourself at the expense of others, these “others” may punish you. That's why a reasonable person chooses moderate, “reasonable egoism”.
The practicality of selfishness
We all know that an adult is supposed to be able to take care of himself - this is ordinary and even socially encouraged independence. It’s good when a person maintains his health, washes his socks, prepares breakfast. That is, acting for yourself is normal. How does such commendable independence differ from selfishness?
It is believed that an egoist cares only and only about himself, putting his own interests above public ones. And when, for example, an adult takes care of a child, it is believed that this time he is taking care of someone else. But surely an adult takes care of a child for a reason? Everything is still practical - just without this concern, he himself will become worse, his own conscience will bite him. And so, in order to avoid pangs of conscience, the function of caring for a child is stitched into the “program” of personal egoism. Thus, while taking care of another person, the egoist continues to take care of himself.
The fact is that it is precisely through caring for others that we gain agreement with ourselves. After all, it is much easier to love and accept yourself, being someone good and worthy of love in your own eyes. This is how our conscience works in tandem with the morality of society. While we take care of others, we continue to take care of ourselves. Mutual assistance is a refined version of reasonable egoism.
Otherwise, it turns out like in the joke about the righteous who pray, serve, strive to go to heaven, but end up in hell, because their righteousness is selfish. Are there other righteous people? I discussed the topic of such sanctimonious spirituality in a separate article on progressman.ru.
Selfishness in its purest form is prudence in gaining personal spiritual comfort. But the fact is that it is precisely this stimulus that dictates absolutely every action we take. All human actions are endless attempts to arrange one’s own life. Even mutual assistance and helping others is just another option for organizing personal spiritual comfort. We never do anything else.
And even an extremely conscious person does not become an idiot. He is still practical and acts based on his own interests. Another thing is that his interests very often turn out to be useful, including for those around him.
And the ruder a person is, the more primitive he acts - he runs from suffering to get a buzz, pushing aside everyone in his path. And in this brutal straightforwardness he acts with some kind of almost animal simplicity. Such practicality is at the level of the primitive system.
A sophisticated personality, in turn, acts subtly, but still selfishly, to achieve his goals. Wisdom, in my understanding, is foresight. An experienced egoist is able to predict the consequences of his own actions, therefore his egoism is expressed in reasonable actions - sometimes in so-called altruism, sacrifice and generosity. It is completely normal and even wise when, for our own well-being, we also think about the well-being of those around us.
The Valor of Selfishness
It would seem, why question and analyze such wonderful needs of people as mutual assistance, sacrifice and generosity? AND I am not at all against charity, even if it is not driven by the creation of beauty, but justselfishness and vanity. But I am for honesty with myself.
It’s just that we are all mired in a neurosis of painful self-hatred, which alternates with painful self-love. How long can you hate yourself? We suppress our own ego by presenting beautiful masks of our supposedly “heroic” personality to everyone. We like to fool ourselves, explaining our actions with good and sometimes highly spiritual intentions. After all, “selfishness is bad!”, as is commonly believed. After all, we must take care of our neighbors!
But what if selfishness is a natural expression of our human nature? Hate yourself? Do you have to help others through gritted teeth?
Everything that does not correspond to artificial public morality is usually stifled and suppressed deeper into the recesses of the unconscious. The tension has been building up for years. And then people wonder why they have such contradictory emotions in their souls, why their insides split into parts between guilty submission and protesting anger. They draw angels and demons on their shoulders in order to somehow explain their own internal conflicts.
Our poor beaten ego is worthy of love, acceptance and understanding. After all, this is exactly what we are trying to prove to others when we expect approval and praise from them! In order for the psyche not to be torn apart and at least relative comfort to remain in the soul, one must be able to recognize the truth and allow oneself to be a reasonable egoist. Not a cunning deceiver and a vain idiot, but a sincere egoist who does not hide behind high morality, valor and nobility, who honestly knows what he wants, and therefore is ready to act for the common good.
It’s just our nature – selfishness is natural. We cannot become better people by covering up our selfishness with a beautiful sign that says “valor.” Convincing themselves and others of their supposedly high motives, they form self-doubt and stall in their development.
Only honest recognition and acceptance of what is here and now allows you to find peace in your soul. By recognizing the existence of self-deception, we move towards the truth. Change is a spontaneous consequence of being honest with yourself. At the same time, it’s as if we are groping for our current step, and we already see the edge of the next one. Taking another step in development becomes simple and natural.
I am an egoist. This is my human nature. This is my way of looking at the world and understanding it. And I don’t think that this is some kind of punishment, or some kind of “trouble.” This is a stage of my development. It’s just that somewhere at a deep level we all realize that the most important thing, at the same time the most difficult and the simplest, is to accept life as it is here and now. Accepting your selfishness is so difficult! And so easy!
Continuing the topic.
In our society it is generally accepted that an egoist is a bad person who lives for himself. Can a person of sound mind and good memory really do anything for others? We are not talking about some random or mechanical actions, but about completely conscious actions. Has it ever occurred to you that ultimately, everything we do is for ourselves? Perhaps selfishness is the only reason for our altruism? Perhaps altruism is just another beautiful function in the development program of ours? Well, think about it, is it really bad to love yourself and do something good for yourself? Is it better to hate yourself? Hurt yourself? Ruin your body and mind? By truly loving yourself, you help at least one person in this world. And what’s shameful about the fact that this person is you? It's simple. You are the chosen one! You are the chosen one in how you treat yourself because you are yourself and not someone else. I believe that here, as in everything, everything is good in moderation. If you live for yourself at the expense of other people, these “others” may punish you. That's why a reasonable person chooses moderate, “reasonable egoism”. All this is just the very surface of the “topic” for now.
The practicality of selfishness
We all know that an adult should be able to take care of himself - this is ordinary and even socially encouraged independence. That is, acting for yourself is normal. And it’s great when a person takes care of his health, washes his socks, prepares breakfast. What is the difference between independence and selfishness?
We believe that an egoist cares only and only about himself. And when, say, an adult takes care of a child, we assume that this time he is caring for someone else. But surely an adult takes care of a child for a reason? Everything is practical - just without this concern, he himself will become worse, his own conscience will bite him. And so, in order to avoid pangs of conscience, the “program” of personal egoism includes the function of caring for a child. Thus, while taking care of another person, the egoist continues to take care of himself.
The whole point is that precisely thanks to caring for others, a person loves himself more deeply. It is much easier to love and accept yourself when you are someone good and worthy of love in your own eyes. This is how our conscience works in tandem with the morality of society. By caring for others, a person takes care of himself. Mutual aid is a subtle kind of egoism.
Otherwise, it turns out like in the joke about the righteous who pray, serve, strive to go to heaven and therefore end up in hell, because their righteousness is selfish. Are there other righteous people? Some spiritual masters say that we must dissolve the ego in order to achieve spiritual enlightenment. Are things really that radical? Perhaps such a solution is akin to the guillotine as the best remedy for dandruff?
The ego is an instrument of our psyche. Egoism in its purest form is practicality and prudence. Awakening consciousness does not kill the ego. Awakening allows us to disidentify from the ego. But he doesn't become an idiot. It's still practical. The problem is not the presence of ego. Problems begin when our practicality is colored by pride and vanity. Suffering is not caused by selfishness, but by our ignorance, our ignorance and lack of understanding of our true essence. This ignorance leads to fluctuating self-esteem, which is either lowered to the level of insignificance, or rises to the cloudy skies, only to be shattered again on solid ground.
Ultimately, selfishness is simply an escape from suffering. And the ruder a person is, the more primitive and straightforward this “withdrawal” becomes. A rude person runs from suffering for a thrill, pushing everyone in his path. And in this rudeness he acts with some kind of almost animal simplicity. This is practicality at the level of the primitive system.
A sophisticated personality, in turn, acts subtly, but still selfishly, to achieve his goals. Wisdom, in my understanding, is foresight. An experienced egoist is able to predict the consequences of his own actions, therefore his egoism is clothed in reasonable, plausible actions, and sometimes even in altruism, sacrifice and generosity. A wise person sometimes wants to do good for someone else so that he himself can feel even better.
The Valor of Selfishness
Why should I expose such wonderful egoistic needs of people as mutual assistance, sacrifice, generosity? Maybe we should continue to encourage the self-deception of patrons, patrons, sponsors and simply “good” people and other benefactors? After all, I am not at all against charity, even if this business is managed selfishness and vanity. But I am for honesty with myself. The principle of reality is one of the main rules of progressman.ru.
It’s just that we are all mired in a neurosis of painful self-hatred, which alternates with painful self-love. How long can you hate yourself? We suppress our own ego by presenting beautiful masks of our supposedly “heroic” personality to everyone. We like to deceive ourselves and others, explaining all our actions with good and sometimes highly spiritual intentions. After all, “selfishness is bad”! - we tell ourselves and others. After all, we must take care of our neighbors! “It’s good to be light and fluffy, kind and good!” - We were indoctrinated by our parents and the public from birth. But what if selfishness is an expression of our human nature?
We are forced to stifle and suppress everything that does not correspond to artificial social morality, pushing everything that is most “indecent” deeper into the recesses of our unconscious. The tension has been building up for years. And then people wonder where their neuroses come from, where mental pain, irritation, fear and other “joys” come from.
Our poor beaten ego is worthy of love, acceptance and understanding. After all, this is exactly what we are trying to prove to everyone when we expect approval and praise from others! Perhaps almost everyone should learn to be a little selfish. Not a cunning deceiver, but a sincere egoist who does not hide behind high morality, valor and nobility, who honestly knows what he wants, and therefore is ready to act for the common good.
It's just our nature. It's stupid to suppress her. We are unable to solve the “problem” by covering it with a beautiful sign that says “valor.” Convincing himself and others of his supposedly high motives, a person stalls in his development. The current stage of development has already set the teeth on edge, and a new one will not come. For many seekers on the spiritual path, the stage “between two stools,” when it is no longer “here” but not yet “there,” becomes a protracted illness that turns into a pathological norm.
Only honest recognition and acceptance of what is here and now allows us to change. By recognizing the existence of a “problem”, we take the most important, first step towards resolving it. Change is a spontaneous consequence of our honesty with ourselves. At the same time, it’s as if we are groping for our current step, and we already see the edge of the next one. Taking another step in development becomes simple and natural.
I am an egoist. This is my human nature. This is my way of looking at the world and learning about it. And I don’t think that this is some kind of punishment, or some kind of “trouble.” This is a stage of my development. It’s just that somewhere at a deep level we all realize that the most important thing, at the same time the most difficult and the simplest, is to accept life as it is here and now. Accepting your selfishness is so difficult! And so easy!
The article has several layers of meaning.
For those with critical thinking, this is food for thought. Users interested in boobs and rape in the toilet will not understand anything here, and they don’t need it. Limited by rudeness - this article is also not for you, look for people like you on LiveJournal for neurotics. However, gifted egoists with a hypertrophied ego (hereinafter referred to as egoists for brevity) will see their portrait here, and the ignorant will find instructions. In short, the article was written to the envy of intellectual impotents and stupid trolls.
People who commit rash acts, as a rule, justify themselves with nonsense: “Well, I didn’t know, it’s not my fault, I’m such a person...” - the ego is intolerant. Man, by the way, is a thinking animal, i.e. endowed with some intelligence. In any case, this is how it positions itself. However, the mind always seeks compromises, and selfishness reduces the mind to justifications.
Justification is a way to protect an egoist. Of course, selfishness is necessary in some doses. Business takes advantage of this, turning the culture of selfishness into an industry. It should be remembered that the culture of selfishness shortens life by offering neuroses, loans, drugs... Reasonable selfishness neutralizes the value of life with momentary euphoria, depriving critical thinking and the understanding that any loan must be repaid. It is a pity for the egoist to return what he has won, and it is not energetically beneficial. So, in order to delay the process of reckoning with life, avoiding responsibility, or unable to answer for stupid things, the egoist deliberately pretends to be a fool. In animals this is called mimicry.
Animals need to survive, and Man needs to live. Do you feel the difference? This means you have critical thinking, understanding that it is easy to pretend - it is difficult to be. It's hard to be a Human. After all, only an egoist, sensing his own shortcomings, tries to attribute them to others: “you yourself are like that.. and who are you...” or, like, “everything.. everything.. is always bad; no one, never.. about anything, nowhere..” Thus, consciously acquiring .
An excuse is a lie that people begin to believe. This means that they are deceiving themselves, first and foremost. Justification is a lace woven by egoism. Justifications consist of primitive techniques: engaging in deliberately confusing reasoning, lying, deviating from the point, in order to demonstrate intellectual superiority or misleading. Actually, this is how sophisms and paralogisms work. You need to understand that these techniques in logic are a mistake.
These types of errors differ in that sophistry is made intentionally, and paralogism is made accidentally. As a rule, the speech of people who lack critical thinking abounds in paralogisms. And there is no place for it, because the mind is occupied with selfish thoughts. Thus, controversial conclusions or the most rational and correct decisions are distorted by paralogisms. They cease to correspond to reality. They form a hypertrophied selfish one. They make a man.
Paralogisms are used unintentionally. This speaks about the work of the subconscious for the overall result of the egoist. As a rule, it is pushed to the back of the mind. Often, without realizing the mistake, the egoist discards any version other than the one that is beneficial for justification and. That is why the version formed during the discussion is selfishly accepted as the truth, because it is not subject to analysis. It is not tested due to the egoist’s lack of critical thinking. Any versions that complicate selfish justification are aggressively rejected, provoking neuroses. Proposed arguments are rigged and distorted to fit a false thesis.
Thus, in the general picture of existence, an egoist is not aware of logical errors, subconsciously considering himself to be right everywhere. And because selfishness will never die. After all, only Consciousness can correct the egoist’s states. Consciousness is the only thing that can always belong to you. Consciousness is the original principle of reality, and not a product of the brain, and not a collection of sensations. It occurs not only due to physiological processes. More precisely, it appears against their background.
Does an egoist need to be aware of the above? Whether it is worth continuing with, swaggering and boasting is up to the egoist to decide, choosing between constant animal neurosis and the rational, thoughtful position of a calm Man.
Unlike paralogisms - involuntary logical errors arising from low logical culture, sophistry is a deliberate violation of logical rules and. Sophisms consciously formed in a dispute have the goal of winning at any cost. Sophistry is a formidable weapon of the intellectual scoundrel against the inattentive disputant. It is used to confuse, throw off the line of thinking, or even drag the opponent into unnecessary analysis that is not relevant to the topic of the debate. Consequently, sophistry is logical meanness. Even having realized the falsity of the position of a selfish sophist, in the absence of such weapons as attention and logic, it is impossible to debate with the sophist. That is why in ancient times disputes were often resolved by a banal fight. It is not for nothing that Pythagoras was the champion among fist fighters, and Plato the champion of pankration. The list is extensive: Demosthenes, Hippocrates, Socrates... Of course, of course, this does not mean that the ancient athletes did not master logic and sophistry. It only means that they had equal opponents. O tempora! Oh more!
Despite all the negativity of sophisms, they introduced rationality - they nurtured logic. To this day, sophistry shows a hidden layer of meaning to an intelligent opponent and suggests the form of evidence. Sophisms allow you to study and understand the personality of your opponent and his model of the world. Help in constructing evidence and refutations. Speaking about the positive influence of sophistry, their role in the development of evidence-based thinking, a whole series should be mentioned. However, as in ancient times, today sophisms are used to deceive.
Alternatively, people use sophistry to make up for a lack of confidence or self-criticism. It happens that sophism also manifests itself as a defensive reaction... but this is another topic of long-term interest, and in conclusion I will say: although sophistry interferes with dialogue, such an obstacle is insignificant for an attentive and calm person. After all, attention is... And calmness is a sign of a confident consciousness, not clouded by lies. In such a state it is easy to detect or refute sophistry. Resist the onslaught of lies. Use your mind
Captured by egocentrism: Egocentric zombified personality.
The reason for the zombification of consciousness is the ignorance and personal immaturity of the individual. The man has completely forgotten who he really is. And he lives, interacting with the world being who he really is not. People have almost lost touch with their souls. But going to church, even observing church rituals, does not at all mean remembering the soul. How many people go to church, how many people pray, how many people fast... And most of them continue to carry within themselves all the negative energies, multiplied by each other: hatred, despondency, distrust of the world and other people, embitterment... etc. A person produces his negativism into the world, but he forgets that by cultivating the grain of his seedling, he subsequently collects its fruits: nothing in the world happens by chance, even natural anomalies and the entire plight of the environment are the result of human life. Unfortunately, modern man has become a malicious consumer of natural resources, and all the wretchedness of thinking lies in the thoughts: “It’s enough for my lifetime, and then I don’t care.” It is difficult to observe how people, being in the world of duality and forgetting about their particle of the Divine (the soul), make a choice of the direction of their thinking, life positions, aspirations and values in the completely wrong direction.
Our theme is about the zombification of consciousness. The reason for such zombification is a certain false intellect, that false personality that can be generalized by the concept of the lower Ego.
Let us immediately make a reservation that “Ego” is too broad and abstract a concept, including a whole hierarchy of terms from the science of psychology and theosophy, but now we will generalize under “Ego” egocentrism, as the direction of individual consciousness.
So, egoism in its manifestation is that beast of consciousness that forces a person to think and interact with the environment and the world according to a very consumerist principle: “What is the world for Me.” From this level of understanding, it is possible to track all the psychological and emotional reactions of an individual, when suddenly something does not work out the way a person wanted or planned, when plans for his profitability collapse, or when something does not correspond, or happens contrary to his desires and his the desire for a “life of pleasure.” A person’s ego (egocentrism) sets the individual up to the worldview: “What benefits will I get if I do this and that..”? Or: “This won’t bring me anything...” etc. In many actions one can see an analogue of commercial transactions. In other words, a person captivated by egocentrism does not want, does not want, or is afraid to give something away from himself; on the contrary, he practically demonstrates obvious acquisitiveness “for himself”, in interpersonal social relationships, interacting in large and small groups. Even when “sincerely” helping someone, a person is very often controlled by thoughts or narcissism, or a rather selfish miscalculation that he is helping in something, in some matter, a very necessary person, who will subsequently be able to help him too . It will not be a revelation that most people try to make and maintain contacts that are beneficial and necessary for them.
In addition, the shadow part of the Ego (iceberg Ego) makes a person embittered, forces him to take revenge, highlights false ideals, gathers people into destructive communities, and thus causes moral, physical and energetic damage to other people and the entire planet as a whole, forcing the entire planetary scale to be in low and heavy vibrations, at levels of various energy imbalances.
The human Ego has a so-called inner voice, which always acts from the position of “I” or “for me”. This inner voice is not true, rather it is zombie-like and leads away from a person’s spiritual development. We will dwell on this point in a little more detail, since this issue concerns the inclusion of various protective mechanisms that protect the human ego.
I. The most important voice of egoism is the so-called “inner advocate of the individual.” This term is common in psychology adapted for a wide range of readers. This is the main component of the entire multidimensional structure, which is a safety and stabilizing mechanism for human consciousness. The purpose of this component is to extinguish, remove, reduce to “no” the voice of conscience. The main task: to justify a person’s self-centered behavior. The Inner Advocate encourages pleasure principles and all primary (instinctive) thought processes. It is interesting that for most people, the internal lawyer is much stronger than the voice of the internal prosecutor (that is, conscience), and it acts as a protective factor in the case of a person’s negative, beneficial and aggressive thoughts, actions and deeds. What does this mysterious inner advocate sound like through thoughts:
“Well... I couldn’t do anything differently, this man himself is to blame: he drove me to the extreme, so I lost my temper... So I’m very kind and good...”
Or: “I had a difficult childhood, I didn’t know love and support, and that’s why I became like this......”, ...etc. An immature person exhibits immature behavior.
There can be infinitely many examples of the voice of the inner advocate; it is important to track its instant inclusion, which justifies and protects the voice of the human self. You must understand that the internal lawyer will justify any inaccurate and incorrect behavior and will come up with a lot of good reasons why the act was committed.
II. The inner advocate, as a basic part of the personal Ego, leads a person to the concept of “I-concept”:
The concept, or established idea of one’s “I”, is called the “I-concept” of a person. It includes such components as:
1. “I”-real: this is what a person really is, that is, an objective assessment of the level of personality development, based on an analysis of the facts of the manifestation of this personality in external relationships. “I-real” is not an individual’s judgment , these are its manifestations in the outside world. A person is not his images, masks, images...etc, but his manifested actions.
2. “I am subjective,” or “Idealized Self”: this is the subjective image of oneself that the individual himself has maintained in his mind, and this image, as a rule, is inadequate to the real one, since often the subjective assessment of the personality of the self-image is greatly inflated (distorted) .
3. “I am a playing person,” or “I am a passing person”: these are role-playing social games, masks, and also image predilections, which are an integral part of a person’s ego. The “playing self” is a kind of false personality, for it is the husk that hides the core.
4. “I am aspiring”: this is the image of oneself as the best, which is the motivation for the movement of one’s subjective “Ideal of Self.” The criteria for the quality of the ideal “I” are individual for each person.
5. “I am the subconscious” - this is that layer of a person’s individuality that could be called shadow: the subconscious plays a huge role in the life of the individual, because in this zone are hidden the origins of all those mental factors that one would not want to open and bring to the surface in one’s consciousness Human. The subconscious zone is a repository of memories of the past, but actively influences options for building the future. The root causes of complexes, fears, insecurities are also hidden in the subconscious zone....etc.
6. “I am energetic” - this is the energetic individuality of a person: his entire system of energetic structure and energetic individuality. It is extremely difficult for an “ordinary” person to realize one’s energetic “I”, because such a level of awareness requires special preparation and sensory attunement.
7. "The Higher Self" is that Divine spiritual sphere, the Divine Monad, which is the true teacher for every person, provided that the person himself has the desire to seek communication with his "Higher Self", to distinguish his voice and live according to his spiritual aspects . With the help of his Higher Self, a person connects with the energy-informational layers of vibration densities of the Matrix, or according to Z. Freud, with the levels of the Collective Unconscious.
III. Conscience. In Vedic culture it is read as conscience. This voice is perhaps the most truthful, and therefore strict, because it comes from those densities of vibrations of space that are higher than the current level of human consciousness. This is the voice of the Higher Self, which is the internal censor and teacher of the individual. Why does a person so often dismiss this voice? Everything is very simple: there is a tireless struggle between conscience and the inner lawyer, and, as a rule, the individual himself prefers in his conscious choice everything that justifies him. There are people about whom you can say: “You stepped on the throat of your conscience.” And this is true, and unfortunately, there are very, very many such people.
As a person develops, as his level of awareness of the “I” increases, the concept changes. A person’s ideas about the values of life also change, the criteria for assessing current situations change, the attitude towards oneself changes, the nature of interpersonal relationships changes... etc., which leaves an imprint on the entire “I” concept as a whole.
What other behavioral defense mechanisms are activated in a person’s mind, under the influence of an internal lawyer, in order to strengthen the zombification of egocentrism and close an adequate, sober view of oneself:
1. The repression mechanism is the process of removing thoughts, feelings and emotions from consciousness into the subconscious area that bring deep suffering to a person. But! Often the voice of Conscience is repressed into the area of the subconscious.
2. Projection mechanism: a person transfers his thoughts and feelings to another, as well as the failures of any of his actions. Example: “This happened because of you, it’s your fault, and I gave in...”, etc. That is, we see the individual removing both guilt and responsibility for what is happening.
3. Substitution reaction mechanism: Example: parents punish a child, but he remembers this punishment, and he is oppressed by a feeling of resentment... and with all the accumulated anger he kicks his younger brother, an animal, or, at worst, a toy. Here there is a clear transfer of negative actions to a weaker object. This behavior is very common in many adults.
4. False rationalization is false argumentation or explanation in order to justify one's behavior and actions so as not to expose oneself in a bad unfavorable light. For example, a person, realizing that he has made a mistake, instead of immediately correcting it, begins to actively defend his line of behavior, trying to put a “good face” on a bad game.
5. Reactive formations are manifestations in a person’s thoughts and actions of false motives based on emotionality or chaotic thinking that justify the uselessness or stupidity of human actions.
6. Regression is a mechanism for a person to return to childhood behavior. Here: removal of responsibility for one’s actions, the need for encouragement, as well as punishment: it is no secret that in marital relationships, many adults simply need either a nanny mother or a strict father as a life partner. Many people choose a mate based on the principle: “She replaced my mother,” (if a man says this about his wife), or: “He replaced my father,” if this is a woman talking about the principle by which she chose her husband.
7. The denial mechanism is a very powerful mechanism: A person refuses to admit what happened to him: Refusal to believe that one of his relatives has died (“I feel that he is alive and is next to me”), as well as: refusal admitting oneself is ignorant of something, refusal to admit one’s pain or illness, refusal to admit and understand that everything is not so smooth in the family, and that there has long been a crack in interpersonal marital relationships... etc.
8. Pronounced aggressiveness as a remedy for fear: there is a wonderful folk saying: The best defense is an attack. This long-proven fact is often demonstrated by people who are insecure. The reasons for such uncertainty are fears, complexes, lack of fulfillment, lack of demand and deep inner loneliness.
Thus, we close the ring of stereotypical behavioral reactions, and from point eight we return again to point one, to the depths of the subconscious: to the reactions of repressing the root causes, where everything hidden should be sought precisely in these labyrinths.
These mechanisms will be discussed in more detail in another article about stereotypical human behavioral reactions in non-standard and unfavorable situations.
In conclusion: very often a person shows himself to be an absolutely immature person with a low level of awareness, while having an excess of emotionality, ambition and rather inflated self-esteem, which only emphasizes his blindness in his view of himself and the surrounding reality.
The human Ego is a huge, overwhelming awareness, which has its own hidden strength and power, and is firmly ingrained in the human consciousness, an artificial intelligence machine.
At this point it would be right to stop and cite the words of Sigmund Freud as an example:
“Having lost hope of ever returning to the source of everything, first of all to the source of himself, man began to seek solace in his personality. By doing this, he succeeded in fixing his assemblage point in a strictly defined position, thereby perpetuating the image of himself and his Ego, initially some kind of artificial substance, but which over time became so tightly ingrained into the human Consciousness that it became an integral part of it. That is why the fight against the Ego, the escape from the Ego, is so difficult - precisely because a person perceives it as “I”
(Sigmund Freud).
The trick of this artificial intelligence is that during its life, a person’s consciousness completely merges with his Ego, accepts it and becomes an integral part of it. Ego manifests itself in a person from the first years of his life. Even in young children. It is when they begin to separate themselves from the world as some kind of integral unit. Sometimes the parents themselves encourage the child’s growing egocentrism. It is no coincidence that after the first word “mother” the words “give”, “me”, “mine” come into active use, and then “I want” and “buy”! So while the little man is still learning to be an active consumer in life.
So gradually the Ego grows into the Consciousness of its owner: the person, and then there is an exchange of roles: imperceptibly the Ego becomes the master over the personality. That is why the Ego is firmly included in the structure of Consciousness. Although initially it was not like that...
The ego controls a person through a web of fears, emotions, complexes, beliefs, false beliefs, as well as stereotypes, superstitions and an endless series of desires. A person often becomes a slave to his desires.
First of all, in order to see and track your Ego, you need to understand that its power lies in the uncontrolled work of the human mind.
As long as we identify ourselves with our Ego, we remain blind and cannot see reality as it really is. Being in the Present moment and in a state of a clear and calm mind is a kind of death for the Ego, so this false essence does everything possible to just escape from the awareness that there is only one reality: “here and now” and from the awareness of the Present. (who I am and what I am) in this reality. The ego forces a person to live in the past (for example, dragging along a complex of past grievances), or vice versa: to live in the future: to dwell in all kinds of illusions...etc, thereby plunging a person’s awareness into endless hibernation.
Quote:
“In those moments when our mind is silent, when we are in the present moment, our Ego dissolves, in this moment we are who we really are - the higher “I”, “soul”, “higher mind”, “ God”, “truth”, etc.”
Self-awareness, getting out of the veil of oblivion is the only method for the current situation.
In conclusion: Change is the fundamental law of Evolution. Everything in the world is endless movement. The same thing happens with human consciousness, since man is a microcosm, as an integral part of the Macrocosm. As above, so below, and vice versa.
The duality of this world involves obstacles and problems that we all have. In the social world, when interacting with people, we constantly express ourselves: we solve these problems, find ways out of unfavorable situations, thereby getting to know ourselves, our reactions and the fruits of our choices, we make decisions, gain experience and draw conclusions from this experience, thus gaining wisdom. Evolving consciousness is the main essence of evolution. It should be noted that life’s problems and troubles were, are and will be, and that most of them are caused by the karmic developments of the individual, and some problems and obstacles a person creates for himself, due to his insolvency, personal immaturity, as an indicator of the level of awareness.
But in any case: no matter what happens, you must not forget your true, Divine “I” and lose your human face.
About loving yourself and others (selfishness, altruism, normal behavior)
Moralists, as a rule, are against egoism and for altruism. How correct is this and is it correct at all? It all depends on what we mean by egoism and altruism. It seems to me that there is a lot of confusion on this issue. Selfishness often means greater concern for oneself and greater love for oneself compared to care and love for other people. And altruism is simply caring (“thinking”) about other people. In both cases, there is a shift in emphasis that distorts the moral assessment of egoism and altruism.
Selfishness
Let's take egoism. It cannot be understood as O
greater care and love for oneself compared to care and love for others. Otherwise, we will declare all people without exception selfish. After all, it is absolutely natural to prioritize care and love for oneself over care and love for others. Let's calculate how much time we spend on ourselves and how much on others. And we find out that in almost all cases we spend more time on ourselves than on others. This includes sleep, nutrition, toilet, body care, dressing and undressing, organizing your home, studying, relaxation, and hobbies. Let's take a day. We devote one third to sleep, i.e. to yourself. We again, as a rule, devote the other third to ourselves: to all sorts of procedures (washing, dressing and undressing, cleaning, cleanliness, food, rest, etc.) One third remains... Let's not prevaricate and honestly admit: we think more about yourself than about others; we love ourselves more than others; We care more about ourselves than about others. And stop reproaching yourself and others for selfishness just because you or someone else took care of yourself, spent time on yourself.
In support of what has been said, I will cite the heartfelt words of the famous psychologist V. L. Levi about self-love and its difference from self-love and complacency:
« Love yourself as your neighbor. The poet called for this ironically, the philosopher - seriously, but self-love is really the first duty of a person. Nobody, of course, likes self-righteous people, and many wonderful people suffer from dissatisfaction with themselves. But a person who doesn’t love himself at all is terrible. Only those who confidently, without hesitation, love themselves are able to love others - look at the most charming, kind and open people and you will be convinced that this is so: they love themselves so calmly that they do not have to support this love with any self-affirmation, they do not You have to hide your shortcomings too much and be afraid of ridicule and condemnation. This love is natural, and therefore invisible, there is nothing forced in it. Such people are always favorites, and show that self-love has nothing to do with self-satisfaction and is not at all what is called self-love, egocentrism.
This is the closest thing to how you feel about yourself as a child: this is the wise and fearless dignity of a living being, an instinctive sense of your own value without any encroachment on the value of others. At that time, you still unconsciously loved the whole world and the unique originality of the unique person that you really are. This pattern of genes, this library of memory, this living, feeling, strange, familiar, changing - such, exactly such a being has never existed before and will never exist again - and that is you. Each of your properties and qualities can and can be found separately in someone, or something close, but their combination is only one among imaginable life.” (“The art of being yourself”)
No less remarkable words were said by Louise Hay: “So, what do you want to hear from me? I know that I repeat these words endlessly, but I’m not afraid to get bored: “Loving yourself is the most important thing you can do, because if you love yourself , you will not harm yourself or anyone else." This is a recipe for world peace. If I cannot harm myself or others, how can war begin? The more people come to this idea, the better life will become in our planet." (The Complete Encyclopedia of Health by Louise Hay. M., 2001. P. 72.)
Selfishness is when a person cares about himself to the detriment, to the detriment others, due to others, when in a conflict situation “either-or” (a clash of personal interests and the interests of others: or That or other, there is no third option) a person makes a choice in his favor and to the detriment to others.
Selfishness is when a person views himself as an end and others only as a means. V.S. Solovyov wrote about this:
“The lie and evil of egoism do not consist at all in the fact that this person values himself too highly, gives himself unconditional importance and infinite dignity: in this he is right, because every human subject is as an independent center of living forces, as the potential (possibility) of infinite perfection , as a being who can contain absolute truth in his consciousness and in his life - every person in this capacity has irrespective significance and dignity, is something absolutely irreplaceable and cannot value himself too highly (...) Failure to recognize this unconditional significance for oneself is tantamount to renunciation of human dignity; this is the main delusion and the beginning of all unbelief: he is so cowardly that he cannot even believe in himself - how can he believe in anything else? The main lie and evil of egoism is not in this absolute self-consciousness and self-esteem of the subject, but in the fact that, rightfully attributing unconditional significance to himself, he unfairly denies others this significance; recognizing himself as the center of life, which he really is, he relates others to the circle of his being, leaving behind them only external and relative value." ("The Meaning of Love" 2, III - Soloviev V.S. Works in 2 t.t., t.2, M., 1990. P. 505-506).
Unfortunately, another understanding of selfishness is very common - as caring more about oneself than about others. Aristotle, for example, wrote:
“Apart from everything else, it is difficult to express in words how much pleasure there is in the consciousness that something belongs to you, because the feeling of self-love inherent in everyone is not accidental, but is implanted in us by nature itself. True, selfishness is rightly condemned, but it does not consist in self-love, but in a greater than proper degree of this love; the same applies to self-interest; All people, so to speak, are susceptible to both feelings.” ("Politics" (1263 a-b))
Look, as he said: selfishness “does not consist in loving oneself, but in a greater degree of this love than it should.” This is too broad and vague a formulation that allows egoism to be interpreted as any kind of self-love. In fact, what is the expression “loving yourself more than you should”? Everyone can interpret it as they want. After all, by what should be, some may understand life for others, self-denial. Aristotle does not provide here a criterion for determining what should be. On the contrary, referring to egoism as “b O
greater self-love” seems understandable and convincing.
To be fair, it should be said that if you read Aristotle more carefully, you can find statements from him that can be interpreted as limiting the negative assessment of “greater self-love.” In the same “Politics” a little earlier, he puts forward as an argument against common property the thesis that “ people care most about what belongs to them personally; care less about what is common, or care to the extent that it concerns everyone” (1261 a33).
In fact, a negative assessment of “greater self-love” (as selfishness) means, according to the law of opposition, a moral prohibition on self-love in general, since it is not defined due the amount of self-love and any, including deceptive, feeling of supposedly greater self-love can be interpreted as selfishness, that is, as something bad.
(Poirot, in the famous television series based on the works of Agatha Christie, says: “Most of us are selfish, but not everyone admits it.” - This is how they often characterize the behavior of themselves and others.
Vera Sotnikova, an actress, stated in the TVC morning program (07/19/05): “Egoism is good; you have to be selfish, you have to love yourself.” A magazine has appeared that, by its very name (“Egoist”), tries to rehabilitate and justify this negative moral phenomenon.
In this characteristic, among many different meanings [expressions of an unhappy or criminal consciousness, cynicism, etc.] one can find this one: a statement of the fact that people love and care more about themselves than about others. Since “selfishness” in ordinary usage means negative moral characteristic - tension arises - self-incrimination or slander of others, in fact, a paradoxical attitude towards ourselves and others: we love and care about ourselves more than about others and this is bad. There is a logical contradiction here: we do something and it is good for us; and at the same time it is not good for us in a moral sense.)
By and large, the moral prohibition against O Greater self-love is unnatural. It means that a person cannot improve this feeling for himself, develop it, cultivate it, strengthen it, etc., etc. He can only constantly restrain himself in this feeling or be a hypocrite. Love, any love, is a “thing” that within itself has a spring of expansion, strengthening, development, improvement, and constant restraint of it can lead to self-destruction or an explosion of behavior, to unpredictable chaotic actions.
The unreasonableness of philosophers on the issue of so-called rational egoism
Philosophers sometimes bring confusion and confusion into human minds. For example, they came up with the theory of reasonable egoism.
L. Feuerbach writes: “To the horror of hypocritical theologians and science fiction philosophers, I use the word “egoism” to designate the basis and essence of religion. Uncritical critics, clinging to words, have wisely sucked out of my philosophy that its result is egoism, and that this is why I have not penetrated into the essence of religion. But if I use the word “egoism” - note - in the sense of a philosophical or universal principle, then I do not mean by it egoism in the ordinary sense of the word (emphasis mine - L.B.), as anyone can see, even a little capable of criticism, from those combinations, from that connection, from that opposition in which I use the word “egoism”; I use it in contrast to theology or faith in God, in the understanding of which, if this faith is strict and consistent, every love, since it does not have God as its goal and object, even love for other people, is egoism; I therefore understand by this word not the egoism of man in relation to man, moral egoism, not the egoism that in everything he does, even as if for others, observes only his own benefit, not the egoism that is a characteristic feature of the philistine and bourgeois and is the direct opposite of all daring in thinking and action, all inspiration, all genius and love. I understand by a person’s egoism that it corresponds to his nature, and therefore to his reason - for the reason of a person is nothing other than his conscious nature - his self-recognition, self-affirmation in relation to all the unnatural and inhuman demands that theological hypocrisy places on him , religious and speculative fiction, political brutality and despotism. By egoism I understand necessary, inevitable egoism, not moral, as I have already said, but metaphysical, that is, egoism based on the being of a person without his knowledge and will, that egoism without which a person cannot live: for in order to live , I must constantly appropriate to myself that which is useful to me, and put aside that which is hostile and harmful to me, that egoism, therefore, which is rooted in the body itself, in the assimilation of assimilated matter and in the throwing away of indigestible matter. By egoism I understand a person’s love for himself, that is, love for a human being, that love that is the impulse for the satisfaction and development of all those drives and inclinations, without the satisfaction and development of which a person is not a real, perfect person and cannot be one ; I understand by egoism the love of an individual for individuals similar to himself - for what am I without them, what am I without love for creatures similar to me? - an individual’s love for himself only insofar as any love for an object, for a being, is indirectly love for himself, because I can only love what corresponds to my ideal, my feeling, my being. In short, I understand by egoism that instinct of self-preservation, by virtue of which a person does not sacrifice himself, his mind, his feelings, his body to the spiritual - to take examples from the cult of animals most familiar to us - spiritual donkeys and rams, political wolves and tigers, philosophical crickets and owls, that instinct of reason that tells a person that it is stupid, senseless, out of religious self-denial, to allow lice, fleas and bedbugs to suck the blood from the body and the mind from the head, to allow vipers and snakes to poison oneself, to be eaten by tigers and wolves ..." (L. Feuerbach. Lectures on the essence of religion. Lecture 7.)
L. Feuerbach treats the word “egoism” in the same way as Humpty Dumpty from L. Carroll’s fairy tale treats the word “fame.” This is the problem with many philosophers. There is so much confusion about this! Why did L. Feuerbach need to use the word “egoism” not in its generally accepted meaning? What was he trying to achieve?
According to all the canons of natural language and thinking, egoism is negative moral characteristics of the behavior of certain people. And philosophers in most cases do not argue with this understanding of egoism. Thus, Aristotle also spoke about egoism in a negative sense (“egoism is rightly condemned”: see Politics, 1263 b). The theory of reasonable egoism allows for the existence of egoism with a plus sign, the so-called reasonable egoism, i.e. egoism, consistent with reason, based on reason. Moreover, there are philosophers who argue that reasonable egoism not only does not exclude self-sacrifice and selflessness, but even presupposes them. N. G. Chernyshevsky, a supporter of the theory of reasonable egoism, wrote in the novel “What is to be done?” image of Lopukhov. This hero, making sacrifices for the sake of others, says: “I’m not the kind of person to make sacrifices. Yes, they don’t exist, no one makes them, this is a false concept: sacrifice is soft-boiled boots. Whatever is more pleasant, that’s what you do.” Like this: the victim turns out to be no longer a victim, but something pleasant. Indeed, the boots are soft-boiled! When a person sacrifices himself (in extreme cases, his life) for the sake of others, it is always a drama and a tragedy. A person who sacrifices himself for others acts against myself, against your “I”, “ego” in Latin. Yes, of course, he can be morally satisfied with his selfless act. But moral satisfaction is not the same as satisfaction with life in general.
The theory of rational egoism implicitly relies on the idea of identifying “I” and “we”, more precisely, the dissolution of “I” into “we”, “I” into “other (others)”. This is a no good idea. In it, egoism, selfishness is actually identified with altruism, selflessness - soft-boiled boots! In fact, “I” under no circumstances can be reduced to “we” or between “I” and “we”, “I” and “other” there is not and cannot be complete identity. Unity - yes, it is possible and most of the time it happens. But unity is not identity. Unity always presupposes difference and even opposition. For example, the unity of a man and a woman, expressed in love, marriage, family, is based on their gender opposites and different social roles.
Altruism, self-sacrifice, dedication
Unfortunately, for some people, altruism and self-sacrifice have become consciously accepted attitudes and principles of behavior. This, in particular, was facilitated by the Christian religion. The main character of the religion, Jesus Christ, sent to Calvary, is glorified in it as a man who sacrificed himself for the sake of others.
In full accordance with this attitude of Christianity, F. M. Dostoevsky wrote: “Is there salvation in impersonality? On the contrary, on the contrary, I say, not only should one not be impersonal, but one must become a person, even to a much higher degree than that which was determined in the West. Understand me: self-sacrifice, completely conscious and not forced by anyone, for the benefit of everyone is, in my opinion, a sign of the highest development of the individual, his highest power, the highest self-control, the highest freedom of his own will. , to go to the cross, to the stake for everyone, can only be done with the strongest development of personality. A highly developed personality, completely confident in its right to be a person, no longer having any fear for itself, cannot do anything else from its personality. There is no other use than to give it all to everyone, so that others will be exactly the same self-righteous and happy individuals" (quoted from: A. Gulyga. Kant, p. 288-289. A. Gulyga also attributes the following view to Kant: “We know Kant’s views: freedom is following duty, and the formula of duty is the happiness of others.” Ibid., p. 288).
F. M. Dostoevsky criticized socialists, revolutionaries, Nechaevism, wrote the novel “Demons”, in which he condemned their behavior. And what? In many ways he said the same thing. Both he and they are collectivists. For him and for them, a person is only a person when he sacrifices himself for the sake of others.
The same reproach can be made to V.S. Solovyov. He wrote, for example: “Personal self-sacrifice, victory over egoism is not the destruction of the ego itself, the personality itself, but, on the contrary, is the elevation of this ego to the highest level of existence” (Soloviev V.S. Morality and Politics // V.S. Solovyov. Works in 2 volumes, vol. 1, M., 1989. P. 270).
Heroism
Rejecting altruism as everyday, ordinary, normal human behavior, we at the same time do not reject the positive significance of individual acts of self-sacrifice and selflessness when a person finds himself in exceptional circumstances, i.e. in an “either-or” situation (or he takes care of himself , sacrificing others, harming others, or he takes care of others by sacrificing himself). In these circumstances, by making a choice in favor of others, a person acts like a hero. Heroism in emergency situations, in fires, in war, etc. is completely justified and common, if we can talk about it as a normal phenomenon. Yes, heroism is normal behavior in abnormal (exceptional) circumstances! And he... is abnormal behavior in normal circumstances, in normal life.
—————
It is sometimes argued that heroism is a purely human behavior. I dare say: this is not so. Human heroism has a prehistory: the self-sacrifice of animals. After all, the basis of heroic behavior is self-sacrifice. And it, self-sacrifice, takes place both in human society and in the animal world. Here is an example of such self-sacrifice: in one foreign educational film shown on television (December 11, 2002), a real case of self-sacrifice of a mother hen is described. In the yard where the hens and chicks were walking, suddenly everyone cackled and began to run away: alarm, the hawk was circling and choosing a victim. The chickens began to hide in secluded corners and in the chicken coop. The chickens of one hen pecked as if nothing had happened (they were still fulmars). Their mother hen was at a distance. And when everyone fled, these chickens remained. The hawk began to circle over the chickens. Then the hen ran up, called them to her and covered them with her body, pressing herself to the ground. The hawk, of course, swooped down on her and began to torment her. Then he flew away. The farm owner approached the chicken. She lay motionless. The chickens began to crawl out from under it. The farmer thought she was dead. He picked her up and suddenly she moved. The chicken was alive. Thick plumage saved her. The instinct of self-preservation gave way to the instinct of procreation (the story about this hen said that, until she had chickens, she behaved like a hen who had lost her chickens, that is, not quite normally).
Another example of self-sacrifice is described in I. S. Turgenev’s story “SPARROW”:
I was returning from hunting and walking along the garden alley. The dog ran ahead of me.
Suddenly she slowed down her steps and began to sneak, as if sensing game in front of her.
I looked along the alley and saw a young sparrow with yellowness around its beak and down on its head. He fell from the nest (the wind strongly shook the birch trees of the alley) and sat motionless, helplessly spreading his barely sprouted wings.
My dog was slowly approaching him, when suddenly, falling from a nearby tree, an old black-breasted sparrow fell like a stone in front of her muzzle - and all disheveled, distorted, with a desperate and pitiful squeak, he jumped a couple of times in the direction of the toothy open mouth.
He rushed to save, he shielded his brainchild... but his whole small body trembled with horror, his voice grew wild and hoarse, he froze, he sacrificed himself!
What a huge monster the dog must have seemed to him! And yet he could not sit on his high, safe branch... A force stronger than his will threw him out of there.
My Trezor stopped, backed away... Apparently, he recognized this power.
I hastened to call the embarrassed dog away and left in awe.
Yes; do not laugh. I was in awe of that small, heroic bird, of its loving impulse.
Love, I thought, is stronger than death and the fear of death. Only by it, only by love does life hold and move” (April 1878).
Man does not cancel biology; it is present in him, using Hegelian terminology, in a sublated form. In a biological sense, human behavior is based on at least two instincts: self-preservation and procreation. Culture does not abolish them, but develops and improves them, builds on above them is very complex human behavior, thousands of behavior options that sometimes seem very far from the direct manifestations of biological instincts.
These instincts, in principle (in general) act in one direction: preserving, maintaining, improving life as such. But there may be a conflict between them. Thus, during the period of love fever (the action of the instinct of procreation), animals ignore or temporarily “forget” about another instinct - self-preservation. Wood grouse, for example, talk so much that they hear nothing (which is why they are called wood grouse) and, accordingly, expose themselves to great danger. And the cited cases of animal self-sacrifice are from the same category.
There is nothing supernatural or unnatural in human heroism. According to its roots, it is just one of the manifestations of the instinct of procreation.
Normal behavior
In most cases, a person is not an egoist, not an altruist or a hero; he takes reasonable care of himself and others. Because most cases are situations where self-care, self-love and care for others, love for others are inseparable, they are one thing. Take the love of a man and a woman. The greater the love, the more reciprocity there is. Loving a woman, a man loves himself, his feelings, his soul and body. And a woman loves a man largely due to the fact that she loves herself and loves being loved.
Any communication - and we are awash in communication - is a two-way street. It necessarily presupposes mutual interest, affection, care. Where communication is one-sided, it quickly fades or barely smolders...
Now let's take creativity. Along with love, it is the most important element of life. Creativity is upbringing, training, education, knowledge, art, philosophy, management, invention, technical creativity. And what? Almost any act of creativity is simultaneously an act for oneself and for others. In other words, like love, creativity does not separate “for oneself” and “for others.” By creating, a person experiences the highest joy of life and at the same time works for all people, serves the progress of life.
If I were a poet, I would compose an ode, a poem, a hymn to normal behavior, to normal human life. Normality has everything you need to dare, to love life and enjoy it!
From the book: L.E. Balashov. Ethics. M., 2010.
