RE: Are You Living For Temporary Relief From Your Mind? (Part 2)
My interpretation of what @conditionedminds is saying. I apologize if I am out of line or have misinterpreted.
@conditionedminds is not saying that addictions in general stem from ego but that specifically mental addictions stem from ego. For instance, fears often stem from ego which make them a form of mental addiction. If I say, "I am afraid of needles," then I am identifying with my fear and reinforcing its existence. My fear is a part of my identity which means that I have already concluded that in every situation that I am to receive a needle, I will be afraid. This is actually absurd when you think about it. How do I know that I will be afraid in a future moment? Well, because my mindset is in a future that does not exist holding on to an idea that I am attached to and that is a part of my identity. On the other hand, if I were about to receive a needle and were to say "I am experiencing fear in this moment." Then I am living in the moment and am not really identifying my "self" with that fear response. Furthermore, I would not continue to reinforce the concept of a fear being a part of "who I am." So what @conditionedminds is saying is that in order to break our addiction to this type of mindset we need to interrupt our habitual way of thinking by being aware. If we are aware of our ego then we can actually stop the identification of "self" with it simply by being in the moment.
As an example: Now that I am aware that I identify with my fear I can interrupt that identification before it takes place. I will no longer tell others or my self (via my internal dialogue) that I am afraid of needles. Eventually my identification with my fear will dissolve because I am no longer reinforcing its existence and I am no longer living in a future that does not exist. I am living in the moment.
Hopefully that made sense.
There isn't any real difference and I know he was talking about mental addictions and I disagree that they all stem from the ego. Some might, but surely many don't.
Your example with fear is not a very good one as phobias do not really come from your identity or ego, but are an irrational response from a pretty basic level that is not really rooted in identity or ego at all. Usually addictions are a hijacking of our reward systems by some form of stimulus and getting that pleasure again is often a really basic desire that exists independent of the ego and being cognicent of your ego and living in the moment is not really going to curb it.
The principle of charity is attempting to understand the authors statements and considering their best form of interpretation. When the author uses terms like "all," I am sure they are making generalized statements to keep the post short. I doubt that they believe that every case can be explained by the ego and I am sure that we can all agree that many things are probably at work here.
I do not agree that physical addictions are the same as what we are referring to here, which is habitual thought processes that stem from the ego. I considered the comparison between physical and mental addictions to be an analogy personally (charity). Physical addiction involve very specific brain processes like the dopamine reward cycle, the release of endorphin's and things of that nature. Ego driven thought patterns involve the internal dialogue creating identity.
You do not like my example because it seems that you did not attempt to understand what was said. When it comes to fear there are three main things at work (generalizing - there may be more). Firstly, there is a bodily response: adrenaline, increased heart beat, changes in breathing etc. This response occurs to protect the organism so they can act quickly in the situation at hand. The second thing at play is the interpretation and labeling of the experience which occurs as a backward rationalization (IE I experienced fear in that moment). The third thing is the identification with the fear, "I am afraid of needles." The fear becomes a part of our identity. "I am" = identity.
There is no logical reason to ever say "I am afraid" unless we are conveying who we are. If a bear is chasing us through the woods I doubt we would be thinking "I am afraid of this bear right now." Instead we would just react in the moment, then interpret the body response through backwards rationalization, and then possibly identify with our interpretation.
This is getting too long to rehash the concept of living in the future and living in the moment, but the statement "I am afraid of needles" doesn't relate to a fear response in the moment, it relates to ego identification.
That's such a beautiful concept! :) I'll keep that in mind in the future. Still, I think the point of communication is understanding what the author meant and in platforms like Steemit where interaction is quite common, I guess it's always worth asking. But yeah, asking might have been a better way to go instead of starting with expressing disagreement.
Aren't they likely to involve brain chemistry, too? They probably do, don't they?
It doesn't mean your ego is feeding the fear though and it doesn't mean getting rid of the fear by acknowledging the ego component is likely to work as the ego is not the root cause of the fear. Same goes for addiction.
I just think in a forum like this (social media platform) we need to be generous toward other's ideas and allow for things like generalizations and such since that is how people talk casually. These articles aren't primary research articles meant for peer reviewed journals where precise language is required.
I think there is always going to be brain chemistry taking place. Neurons fire when we are thinking and neurotransmitters are released constantly when our brains are active. However, when we refer to the ego in this context, we are basically referring to ones internal dialogue - the ongoing conversation with our "self." Aside from knowing that neurons within our brain are firing, I do not think that we can identify a very specific brain process like those that are known to be involved in physical addictions. So I think we should simply consider the ego as a type of thinking.
Regarding your second statement. I want to clarify that I am not denouncing the bodily sensation that is associated with fear. I am pointing out how the concept of fear can become a part of ones identity. Individuals certainly have a fear response in a moment of danger, but other individuals identify with their fears and they become a part of who they are. So ego doesn't feed the fear (the actual body sensation or body response), it feeds the identification of "self" with the concept of fear. Saying "I am afraid of snakes" is not a fear response it is an identity, just like saying I am "leaky20" is an identity.
I think we are getting muddled here because we are comparing physical dimensions (IE. the fear response and physical addictions) to mental dimensions (the ego and thought processes). The two cannot really be compared cohesively, but they were never meant to be compared in this way. The bodily sensation associated with fear is irrelevant to what I am saying about the ego and physical addictions was originally meant to be an analogy to describe habitual thinking patterns.
Anyway, you seem to like to discuss things which is what I am all about so I'm going to follow you lol.
sounds like you are a good candidate for @steemdeepthink
ok I will check that out. thanks!
Apologies, i was unaware of this conversation taking place as it didnt pop up in my replies. @leaky20 we are definitely on the same wave length when it comes to identifying with the mind and what it poduces. You interpreted the post exactly as it was meant.
That's no problem
Yes I agree. It appears that we think alike :)
Followed