The Existence Of The Ego Trick Essay

The first unit on our textbook Interactions by Ann Moseley and Jeanette Harris talks about the self-concept. It is hard to find a definition for the self-concept because it is certain beliefs about ethnicity, religion, and personalities combined. This unit has a number of readings by various authors where it shows struggles with the self. Self-identity, ethnic backgrounds, and self-esteem are the major aspects of those readings. After reading their writings I found that I could relate to their experiences. The three readings that got my attention were “Zero” By Paul Logan, “I’m Just Me” by Lylah Alphonse, and “The Jacket” by Gary Soto.

The Ego Centric Problem states that the knowledge we have gained over the period of our lives in entrenched so deep that it prevents us from learning new things. Descartes states that “if we can only be certain of the contents of our consciousness, then how are we ever to gain knowledge of the world that lies beyond our minds. This brings up a good point, if we already have knowledge, does that knowledge have any influence on us that would hinder us to learn new things.

The concept of personal identity or personhood is a very complex area of philosophy that challenges our most basic understandings of mind and matter. Philosophers have generally settled into either the school of mind, or consciousness, and the school of body. As our ability to study the mind grows, through developments in psychology and neurology, consciousness-based theories have come to dominate the discussion of personal identity and body-based theories appear simplistic and even primitive. Thesis: Catriona Mackenzie, however, compels the field to make a renewed examination of the body by pointing out that the body is the very apparatus by which the self interacts with world, thereby shaping all of the experiences which constitute memory and consciousness.

Can that true self be distilled from the many personas I use? Even if I do not reveal that true self to anyone else, can I myself know the true me? The prophet Jeremiah relays God’s answer to that question, “‘The heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; who can understand it?’” [Jer 17:9] I think Tim O’Brien would agree with this assessment, as do I. Am I then reduced to a life of confusion about who I truly am, forced to analyze and second-guess every decision and motivation? While that might seem to be the case, I choose to embrace a lifelong journey of self-discovery. I will not arrive at an exact definition of my true self, but I will come closer to knowing who that person really is. In the interview of Dr. Bruce Hood about his book The Self-Illusion, Hood addresses this concept of discerning one’s true self. Hood contends that our distorted memories and unreliable preconceived notions comprise illusory identities. However, he optimistically deduces, “It doesn’t really matter if it [the true self] is an illusion. It’s a very adaptive illusion; one that’s very useful.” While in our private thoughts and internal wanderings, we are ever coming closer to a true self-identity, we have our multi-faceted self that allows us to maneuver through life in adaptive ways accepted by society. Whether we are cognitively aware of it or not, we all share this experience of multiple personas, which

He argues that "self" remains the same at every point in time. His main point is that self is always the driver. They never change, it's always in charge. A subject, however, is a passenger. It's only along for the ride.

In every person, an ego which interacts with the world appears to exist; hence, languages use the basic pronouns, “I” and “you.” However, what can one truly classify as the self? Cognitive scientist Bruce Hood defines an illusion as, “[the] experience of something that is not what it seems.” By this definition, he classifies the self as illusory; humans naturally experience their self, but it does not actually exist. Similarly, in Pablo Neruda’s The Egoist, Neruda contrasts the ego with the natural world, deeming abandoning one’s self a necessary step to obtain lasting satisfaction with existence. Neruda conveys his idea as a physician would a diagnosis; first identifying the problem’s nature, then outlining its effects and solution.

     The descriptive claim made by Psychological Egoists is that humans, by nature, are motivated only by self-interest. Any act, no matter how altruistic it may seem on the outside is actually only a disguise for a selfish desire such as recognition, avoiding guilt, reward or sense of personal ‘goodness’ or morality. For example, Mother Teresa is just using the poor for her own long-term spiritual gain. Being a universal claim, it could falter with a single counterexample. And being that I believe this claim to be bunk I will tell you why!

“People act for many reasons; but for whom, or what, do or should they act—for themselves, for God, or for the good of the planet?” (Moseley) An egoist would argue that one acts for one’s own self. More specifically, an ethical egoist is one who thrives to improve ones own self being, with much respect to morality. Ethical Egoism is the theory that one should pursue his or her own interest above all the rest. It is the idea that all persons should act from their own self interest in relation to morality.

     Two things can happen when we are required to base our definition of “self” on others.  One can take others’ ways of living and thinking, process them, and formulate his or her own definition, independent of anyone else.  Or, one can use the relationships he or she has with other people on which to base their own definition of self, thus making him or her dependent on those other people.  As young people, we learn and take in all we can through the world, our experiences, and relationships with other people.  From there, we grow and establish our own identities, our own “selves”, in response to those interactions with others.  This definition is continually growing and progressing as we evolve as people, interacting with different people in different environments and

In this world where we are all connected through another; it is impossible to find a person that hasn’t been touched both emotionally and mentally by a multitude of people and altered because of these personal influences, even unintentionally. Our mental and emotional beings are meant to shift and grow with each new experience and choice. And through this process we allow the alteration of self and the migration of our old self to our altered and perhaps more enlightened self. Our thoughts and ideas make up who we are and what we will eventually become. Through the migration of self, we see from personal experience what the migration process is through our individual growth and we find our inner selves or the person we were meant to be.

The theory of psychological egoism is indeed plausible. The meaning of plausible in the context of this paper refers to the validity or the conceivability of the theory in question, to explain the nature and motivation of human behavior (Hinman, 2007). Human actions are motivated by the satisfaction obtained after completing a task that they are involved in. For example, Mother Teresa was satisfied by her benevolent actions and activities that she spent her life doing. As Hinman (2007) points out, she was likely to reduce in activity if she experienced any dissatisfaction in her endeavors.

Philosophers over time have tried to explain their understanding on the view of personal identity some of the like Rene Descartes adding the views of the existence of the material souls or egos. His views on the existence of egos suggest that people have bodies which can die but still they continue to exist. In as such other philosophers proposed diverging views from him suggesting that such a simple

Many people question themselves, what is it exactly that makes them unique? What is it that defines them as a unique person that no one in the world possesses? In philosophy, these questions do not have just one answer, and all answers are correct depending on which theory appeals most and makes sense to you. In general, there are two ways people approach this question, some say that a person’s identity is the “self” that carries all of their experiences, thoughts, memories, and consciousness (ego theorists), and some say that a person’s identity is just a bundle of experiences and events that a person has been through in their life, these people deny that the “self” exists (bundle theorists). In this paper, I will be arguing that a person’s identity is just a bundle of experiences, denying the self and the memory criterion.

George Herbert Mead’s theory of the “I and the Me” claims that people are an object to the audience due to the emergence of the perspective of the others. The self is recognized as a social object set by our social structure and behavior. Mead divided the self into two separate parts. The “I” is known as the actor of the self. The “me” is the object that is formed by the evaluations of the audience’s perspective towards the self. Thus, the “me” controls and discipline the “I” of the self. The concept of the “I and the Me” was first derived from the work of self development. Mead wanted to focus on how the two separate part of the self define the identity of the person through symbolic interaction.

Self concepts begins in childhood but it continues to develop throughout life. As we observe how other people react to us, we modify our “self.” The “self” is never a finished project, and it continues to change as our life takes different turns. Our “self” reacts to the environment that we are in.