Quote:
Ciornia:
Good arguments, you gave me something to think about.
if you are smart you can take the benefits [of ego] (like being able to act more confident, having higher standards, being able to plow) from it and block the disadvantages (like being an asshole, arrogant prick, cocky MoFo:).
Have you seen the David Deangelos DVD Deep Inner Game? Dr. Paul is talking about something that you have to have like a camera over yourself. In methapor speaking.
Like a observatory above yourself.
So you are kinda detached from the things you do and just observe yourself from objective point of view.
Like having two minds.
This prevents you from doing stupid stuff, because you see things objectivly. It's hard to develop this, because ego keeps interfering with your thoughts and deeds but it can be done.
Prosp3ct,
Yes, I have seen that DeAngelo video, and it makes some good points.
When the ego pops up and we are able, through self-awareness, to observe its tricks and shed light on its dark corners, we are able to strip it of its power.
In my opinion, though, pickup is, as its full name suggests, an art. Ideally, it is about the creative moment and about flow. Take a painter or a writer or a sculptor as an example. While immersed in the flow of a creative moment -- that is, while in the act of creating each element of a work of art -- the artist must be open and fully in touch with his or her inner self. There is no place in that moment for a critical, editorial eye over the shoulder; that eye only hinders the creativity and flow. Sure, the artist can think beforehand about what he hopes to do, and he can assess afterward -- with that critical, editorial eye -- what he's created, in order to fine-tune it. But in the moment of creation -- in the moment of pickup -- the artist should strive to be at one with himself, not two separate entities.
To my mind, the "benefits" you ascribe to the ego -- confidence, standards, etc. -- do not stem from the ego at all. They stem from being true to yourself -- from following your passions. You can't "act" confident, in the sense that true confidence is not a cloak you can put on and take off. Confidence can certainly ebb and flow at different points in our lives. But, at any given time, either you
are confident or you
aren't confident. If you're "acting" confident, you're just faking it. Granted, if you're not at a point where confidence can flow naturally from you, it's better to fake confidence than to showcase insecurity. But perceptive girls will quickly sniff out this hole in your inner game.
In my view, the critical, editorial eye is not the same thing, as you seem to suggest, as the ego. At any rate, neither the ego nor anything else can prevent us entirely from acting stupidly; we are human. At best, we can hope to reduce the number of stupid decisions we make. And, in my opinion, we don't
ever see things objectively. We can only see them subjectively. A situation in which many people speak of seeing something "objectively" is really only one in which their prism -- their view based on their own experiences -- happens to match the view that many other people are likely to hold of that situation. Even as we try to remove the self -- as we might strive for compassion or empathy -- we do so subjectively.
Another portion of food for thought. Hope it helps
Ciornia
CHAT
