I am imagining Shiv welding a huge sword slicing through the Gordian Knot of spiritual psycho-babble. What a heroic essay, sir!
Yes, the term 'ego' is thrown around with all sorts of different meanings and contexts. You keyed in on the core of the definition and the dynamics around it.
“The ego is a persistence of the animal instinct elaborated through the mind and intellect and given authenticity by the mutual agreement of society.”
This is a crucial observation. The ego is nothing more than the animal instinct at its very root. The instinct to survive. The instinct to reproduce. The instinct to thrive. That’s it. That is its basic mission, and it will do everything it can to ensure that mission succeeds at all costs."
Your mention of "animal instinct" reminds me of the psychological concept of Terror Management Theory where our ability to foresee our death creates a dilemma of how to suppress the resulting ennui and despair to have the will to survive (and thrive).
In Darwinian terms, humans, naked little apes that we are, are an improbable success story. To survive, we had to form communities or perish. The term 'ego' is also associated with the concept of self-esteem. We generally acknowledge that one with high self-esteem is "egotistical."
"Terror management theory (TMT) claims that self-esteem serves as a buffer against existential anxiety. Self-esteem is derived from adhering to social standards of what constitutes a valuable member of society."
Ego or self-esteem are survival tools allowing us to gauge our ranking within the prevailing social structure giving us a sense of survival possibility. High-ranking individuals generally receive more care and protection than those deemed less essential for the group's survival.
Our ego and self-esteem can be seen as collective and not simply an individualist endeavor. We comprehend or see ourselves in relation to how our collective society values our existence. Our ego is a social construct and varies as to culture.
"Cross-cultural differences in social standards might therefore lead to different views of what it takes to be a valuable person, possibly leading to different expressions of self-esteem in different cultures. It has been proposed that in individualist cultures, self-esteem is mainly based on the ability to express oneself and to validate internal attributes, whereas in collectivist cultures, it is based on the ability to adjust to the needs of others and to maintain harmony within the social context." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022103113001327
Despite a range of cultural differences, the essential motivation of the ego is primal survival. We just dress it up in different outfits depending on our culture but it is a pure, naked survival instinct. I tend to view it as the space suit our spirit dons to venture into the hostile space of mortality. We cannot be 'present' unless we have a 'presence'. There may be nothing spiritual about our ego, but it does serve a spiritual purpose.
Well said, John and appreciate the mention of TMT. Living in Japan I realized first hand how my individualism was viewed not as an asset but as a liability by many Japanese (although they were too gracious to mention it!) They often looked at me as a naive unsophisticated child whose need to stand out was evidence of his lack of worldliness. There is a saying in Japan that translates to: “the nail that sticks out gets hammered down first.”
Every culture has its own social survival strategy and egos develop in order to adapt to the KPIs that that culture values as being of highest merit. Very much in accordance with what you mentioned being the difference between collectivist societies and individualist societies, the people with the highest self-esteem in Japanese society were always the ones who conformed best to the collectivist norms.
I have made similar observations in the past on spiritual culture as well and especially the dynamics between gurus and devotees. The “master” is the one who confers power and those closest to him/her are the ones most favoured. This is how power hierarchies organically manifest no matter the arena of life. And the glue that holds the hierarchy together are the shared cultural beliefs and values.
The fact that so much of what constitutes “spirituality” today is nothing more than ego indulgence but most adherents of these cultures are blind to this reality - is proof of how invisible the walls of culture can become that people are unable to see their own enslavement to its ideals. And they call this enslavement “freedom”.
Yeah, in the West we have imagined the mythology of individual spirituality, but Spirit is omnipresent and we are all connected at some deep primal level. Studies have confirmed that collectivist societies are the most happy and content. It probably has something to do with the integrity of social norms and spiritual actuality. Spirit is omnipresent; we are all formed of the same 'stuff' and share a common heritage.
It is said that the fear of death is the source of all fears. If we can instinctively sense something beyond our mortality, then our mortal lives have a purpose beyond ego enhancement and our death loses its terror. We are giving temporary presence to our universal Presence, which is the simple sacred purpose of our being. As Ram Dass said: "We're all just walking each other Home."
i love this phrasing of this sentiment: "What most people refer to as ‘spirituality’ in society today is nothing more than a finishing school for the ego"
and this: "There are two ways to reinforce the ego. The first is by denying it what it wants. The other is by giving it what it wants."
Insightful writing Shiv. Banger after banger after banger. This particular insight is a much needed articulation for the spiritual addicts and those with a spiritual ego (I had one myself!).
A question, do you think society or any human contact at all is needed for the ego to persist? Would someone with no human contact have an ego? Not asking b/c I want to do it. No desire not plan of leaving society, but wondering if the “mutual agreement by society” is really necessary. Wouldn’t coming into contact with other animals (that may threaten the humans life or provide it with benefit) reinforce the ego? Or perhaps even perception of any object other than the human’s own body? I’ve heard of humans going insane in solitary, but is that observed insanity what a human would look like with no ego or is that an effect from something else not related to the ego. Would love to hear your thoughts on that.
Tawsif - I’ve been fascinated by the phenomena of feral children ie the documented cases of human children being raised by animals in the wild. These children have been found and integrated into society in certain cases but struggled to adapt, learn language, emotional expression, social cues and so on. I suppose a human being who has never had contact with other humans develops a very rudimentary ego at best, but nothing like the civilized egos we are accustomed to.
The human mind / intellect grows through its exposure to communal human knowledge. If one has never been exposed to communal knowledge they will likely have a severely underdeveloped intellect. And since the definition of an ego as per Hawkins is “the animal instinct elaborated through the intellect…” - in the absence of the intellect there cannot really be a sufficiently formed ego. All that remains is animal instinct.
This seems to be consistent with the state in which these feral children in the documented cases were found. Human in appearance but completely animal like in behaviour.
A potentially rudimentary ego seems closer to no ego than the spiritual ego that many in the spiritual world end up with and yet, I don’t think this is what they would want (or should want)! I see now that necessary social component - which is necessary for the development of those intellectual faculties used by the base animal instinct. I didn’t think that the intellect itself was so carved/developed by social contact/society as well.
Thank you for responding Shiv - and at the middle of the night too!
I was going to call out some parts of this essay for specific comment and praise, such as the cleverness and dead-on accuracy of the "finishing school for the ego" metaphor. But the further I read, the more I couldn't single anything out from the lucidity of the whole, which is just excellent throughout. So, in short, thank you.
This is one of the best things I have ever read on substack. Wow, so glad to have found this. You fucking get it man. All the unease I have felt exploring meditation and mindfulness the lzst few months makes perfect sense now. On some deeper level I can feel they are just enhancing the ego which feels wrong as it is the opposite of what I am trying to do.
"The ego is nothing more than the animal instinct at its very root. The instinct to survive. The instinct to reproduce. The instinct to thrive" .... I feel like I've overlooked this for a very long time, only recently tapping into it. The reactivity of the ego really is survival and status-based. Status ultimately is also about survival.
I am imagining Shiv welding a huge sword slicing through the Gordian Knot of spiritual psycho-babble. What a heroic essay, sir!
Yes, the term 'ego' is thrown around with all sorts of different meanings and contexts. You keyed in on the core of the definition and the dynamics around it.
“The ego is a persistence of the animal instinct elaborated through the mind and intellect and given authenticity by the mutual agreement of society.”
This is a crucial observation. The ego is nothing more than the animal instinct at its very root. The instinct to survive. The instinct to reproduce. The instinct to thrive. That’s it. That is its basic mission, and it will do everything it can to ensure that mission succeeds at all costs."
Your mention of "animal instinct" reminds me of the psychological concept of Terror Management Theory where our ability to foresee our death creates a dilemma of how to suppress the resulting ennui and despair to have the will to survive (and thrive).
In Darwinian terms, humans, naked little apes that we are, are an improbable success story. To survive, we had to form communities or perish. The term 'ego' is also associated with the concept of self-esteem. We generally acknowledge that one with high self-esteem is "egotistical."
"Terror management theory (TMT) claims that self-esteem serves as a buffer against existential anxiety. Self-esteem is derived from adhering to social standards of what constitutes a valuable member of society."
Ego or self-esteem are survival tools allowing us to gauge our ranking within the prevailing social structure giving us a sense of survival possibility. High-ranking individuals generally receive more care and protection than those deemed less essential for the group's survival.
Our ego and self-esteem can be seen as collective and not simply an individualist endeavor. We comprehend or see ourselves in relation to how our collective society values our existence. Our ego is a social construct and varies as to culture.
"Cross-cultural differences in social standards might therefore lead to different views of what it takes to be a valuable person, possibly leading to different expressions of self-esteem in different cultures. It has been proposed that in individualist cultures, self-esteem is mainly based on the ability to express oneself and to validate internal attributes, whereas in collectivist cultures, it is based on the ability to adjust to the needs of others and to maintain harmony within the social context." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022103113001327
Despite a range of cultural differences, the essential motivation of the ego is primal survival. We just dress it up in different outfits depending on our culture but it is a pure, naked survival instinct. I tend to view it as the space suit our spirit dons to venture into the hostile space of mortality. We cannot be 'present' unless we have a 'presence'. There may be nothing spiritual about our ego, but it does serve a spiritual purpose.
Well said, John and appreciate the mention of TMT. Living in Japan I realized first hand how my individualism was viewed not as an asset but as a liability by many Japanese (although they were too gracious to mention it!) They often looked at me as a naive unsophisticated child whose need to stand out was evidence of his lack of worldliness. There is a saying in Japan that translates to: “the nail that sticks out gets hammered down first.”
Every culture has its own social survival strategy and egos develop in order to adapt to the KPIs that that culture values as being of highest merit. Very much in accordance with what you mentioned being the difference between collectivist societies and individualist societies, the people with the highest self-esteem in Japanese society were always the ones who conformed best to the collectivist norms.
I have made similar observations in the past on spiritual culture as well and especially the dynamics between gurus and devotees. The “master” is the one who confers power and those closest to him/her are the ones most favoured. This is how power hierarchies organically manifest no matter the arena of life. And the glue that holds the hierarchy together are the shared cultural beliefs and values.
The fact that so much of what constitutes “spirituality” today is nothing more than ego indulgence but most adherents of these cultures are blind to this reality - is proof of how invisible the walls of culture can become that people are unable to see their own enslavement to its ideals. And they call this enslavement “freedom”.
Yeah, in the West we have imagined the mythology of individual spirituality, but Spirit is omnipresent and we are all connected at some deep primal level. Studies have confirmed that collectivist societies are the most happy and content. It probably has something to do with the integrity of social norms and spiritual actuality. Spirit is omnipresent; we are all formed of the same 'stuff' and share a common heritage.
It is said that the fear of death is the source of all fears. If we can instinctively sense something beyond our mortality, then our mortal lives have a purpose beyond ego enhancement and our death loses its terror. We are giving temporary presence to our universal Presence, which is the simple sacred purpose of our being. As Ram Dass said: "We're all just walking each other Home."
dear shiv,
thank you for this!
i love this phrasing of this sentiment: "What most people refer to as ‘spirituality’ in society today is nothing more than a finishing school for the ego"
and this: "There are two ways to reinforce the ego. The first is by denying it what it wants. The other is by giving it what it wants."
and this: "The spirit is as it has always been."
thank you for sharing as always!
much love
myq
Giving it what it wants can be even more pernicious. It can go smug and underground for a while from this.
Insightful writing Shiv. Banger after banger after banger. This particular insight is a much needed articulation for the spiritual addicts and those with a spiritual ego (I had one myself!).
A question, do you think society or any human contact at all is needed for the ego to persist? Would someone with no human contact have an ego? Not asking b/c I want to do it. No desire not plan of leaving society, but wondering if the “mutual agreement by society” is really necessary. Wouldn’t coming into contact with other animals (that may threaten the humans life or provide it with benefit) reinforce the ego? Or perhaps even perception of any object other than the human’s own body? I’ve heard of humans going insane in solitary, but is that observed insanity what a human would look like with no ego or is that an effect from something else not related to the ego. Would love to hear your thoughts on that.
Tawsif - I’ve been fascinated by the phenomena of feral children ie the documented cases of human children being raised by animals in the wild. These children have been found and integrated into society in certain cases but struggled to adapt, learn language, emotional expression, social cues and so on. I suppose a human being who has never had contact with other humans develops a very rudimentary ego at best, but nothing like the civilized egos we are accustomed to.
The human mind / intellect grows through its exposure to communal human knowledge. If one has never been exposed to communal knowledge they will likely have a severely underdeveloped intellect. And since the definition of an ego as per Hawkins is “the animal instinct elaborated through the intellect…” - in the absence of the intellect there cannot really be a sufficiently formed ego. All that remains is animal instinct.
This seems to be consistent with the state in which these feral children in the documented cases were found. Human in appearance but completely animal like in behaviour.
A potentially rudimentary ego seems closer to no ego than the spiritual ego that many in the spiritual world end up with and yet, I don’t think this is what they would want (or should want)! I see now that necessary social component - which is necessary for the development of those intellectual faculties used by the base animal instinct. I didn’t think that the intellect itself was so carved/developed by social contact/society as well.
Thank you for responding Shiv - and at the middle of the night too!
We enlightened one’s don’t sleep much 😜
I also wonder about human tribes living in the Amazon, with no contact with modern humans. Or how we were as hunter-gatherers.
I am in awe of your ability to put into such clear precise language what has been an amorphous fear lurking, at least I think, in me.
"No matter how much one grows in awareness, the ego is always their to claim: “I did it.”" - this has been my bane. It's unshakeable, the ego.
I was going to call out some parts of this essay for specific comment and praise, such as the cleverness and dead-on accuracy of the "finishing school for the ego" metaphor. But the further I read, the more I couldn't single anything out from the lucidity of the whole, which is just excellent throughout. So, in short, thank you.
Thank you Matt. This ego feels validated 😉
The ego is nothing if not a master of irony... 😊
Yes a lovable Loki like trickster. Which is why humour and levity are the best antidotes. Not spiritual seriousness! 😂
perf
To "evolve spiritually" is such a big joke indeed !
This is one of the best things I have ever read on substack. Wow, so glad to have found this. You fucking get it man. All the unease I have felt exploring meditation and mindfulness the lzst few months makes perfect sense now. On some deeper level I can feel they are just enhancing the ego which feels wrong as it is the opposite of what I am trying to do.
👌
😂😂😂😂 so good Shiv. "The king is naked" 👌
Great post Shiv. Thanks.
I’ve called many of Shiv’s articles a masterpiece, and this is no exception, like Da Vinci and Van Gogh in words
"The ego is nothing more than the animal instinct at its very root. The instinct to survive. The instinct to reproduce. The instinct to thrive" .... I feel like I've overlooked this for a very long time, only recently tapping into it. The reactivity of the ego really is survival and status-based. Status ultimately is also about survival.
We are localized causality generators, whirlpools, experiential. Movies, that's why we make plausible human stories; because truth is not relevant.
Feuerstein vs Wheeler vs the 7 “liberal” arts
Shankara vs Ramanuja vs Abhinavagupta vs
So what about emotional/shadow work? I see that the ego can identify with doing that. And with having experienced trauma.
This happened here. The ego loves a project.