How to Build a Stronger Ego - Steve Pavlina

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Locked
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: How to Build a Stronger Ego - Steve Pavlina

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

Well, as a result.
User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: How to Build a Stronger Ego - Steve Pavlina

Post by Dan Rowden »

There are no results, there being no cause and effect.
User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: How to Build a Stronger Ego - Steve Pavlina

Post by Cahoot »

Talking Ass wrote:Cahoot: Paris, Texas is a pretty damn good film. That scene is pure Shepard. In fact, he wrote the beginning of the screenplay for the film but the middle of it Wenders struggled to write, but then Shepard came back in precisely with that scene and the ending of the film. The version of the film I have (Criterion Collection) has an a separate extra all the Super-8 they shot but didn't include. Radiant stuff.

I have a few other recommendations, if you like films: One is a Louis Malle production of the Chekhov play Uncle Vanya: 'Uncle Vanya on 42nd Street'. Masterful. Another film I tremendously admire is a Korean film by Lee Chang-Dong: 'Secret Sunshine'. A woman loses her husband and then her only little boy is killed and, avoiding her pain, has a Christian conversion. Then is forced to work her way back to reality, back to the reality of her loss, and away from this shallow conversion. It's very good. The other one is a German film by Götz Spielmann: 'Revanche'. A small-time German crook falls in love with a Russian hooker and to escape their mutual economic plight he robs a bank. Stupidly, he takes her along and she gets killed. But he escapes back to his grandfather's homestead in the country and the bulk of the film is his dealing with his 'revanche' (desire for revenge against the cop who shot his GF).

It is an interesting exercise to imagine these 'Dialogues of Enlightenment', the people here, and the contrast between a written projected existence and the 'real life' each must surely have, in a theatrical or dramatic setting. Dan with his karaoke. Dennis with his chihuahuas and their little electrocution collars. Blissful David on his bicycle. Liberty Sea with his volume of Heidegger in a cyclo wending its way through the busy streets of Hanoi. Bob Michaels with a copy of Mein Kampf and the layout of an Ark. Alex with his stacks of books and chintzy 'putas' in broken down Colombian hotels while the bells toll mass and the eagle screams (writing epic missives on his fucking iPhone! for christsakes!) Diebert stoically making his way across Dutch campuses of Higher Learning and tipping his hat to the damsels, stopping now and again to jot down a profundity. Movingalways in a full lotus posture with the backdoor open and the wind from some N Eastern forest blowing in leaves. Kunga with her oversized bottle of wine, tippy-tapping rhapsodies in capitals...

Every character has motivations, whether obvious and stated or perhaps unknown even to themselves. I think about this because at some point, I heard, David was writing a screenplay: a didactic drama to demonstrate his points about enlightenment. To some degree at least this is a theatrical medium since it is all moved along by dialogue and nothing else.
Old Travis. In the beginning the futility of caring deeply owned him, then a purpose inspired by the intent of life set his mind free of that possession. Interesting that physically the actor Harry Dean Stanton closely resembled what an adolescent buddy of mine came to look like at that age.

*

One of the greatest movie scenes, though this isn't all of it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ll_-pnXC8NU
User avatar
Jamesh
Posts: 1526
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 3:44 pm

Re: How to Build a Stronger Ego - Steve Pavlina

Post by Jamesh »

One of the greatest movie scenes, though this isn't all of it.
Yes, very good. Don't recall seeing that before (don't watch old films).

I'd say John Hurt used this scene to develop his portrayal of The Elephant Man.
User avatar
Unidian
Posts: 1843
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:00 pm
Contact:

Re: How to Build a Stronger Ego - Steve Pavlina

Post by Unidian »

Just because we may be skeptical of "full egolessness," I don't really see how it means we should run out and accept strengthing and reinforcing the ego as a good idea. And Steve Pavlina is basically a marketing guru - not really the sort of guy I would go to for advice on these matters.
I live in a tub.
User avatar
Unidian
Posts: 1843
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:00 pm
Contact:

Re: How to Build a Stronger Ego - Steve Pavlina

Post by Unidian »

LKook at what he says here:
but the one thing they usually have in common is that they’re borderline broke most of the time.

This is a very half-assed approach to enlightenment.
That ought to tell us about all we need to know about the worth of his thoughts on spirituality, I think.

One can't make a much more egregious error than trying to tie it to material wealth - it's really something only hucksters do.

I don't mean to be overly harsh, but this sort of thing doesn't really ring my bell at all. If it does yours, then I guess go for it.

I'm not just borderline broke, I'm usually flat broke, and see it as having no relation to spirituality other than the fact that I share the non-materialistic views of people like Buddha, Jesus, etc. And that's actually quite a significant relation, come to think of it...
I live in a tub.
User avatar
Unidian
Posts: 1843
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:00 pm
Contact:

Re: How to Build a Stronger Ego - Steve Pavlina

Post by Unidian »

Consider the words of the Ass, for only a fool or a nutcase seeks the abyss before his time.
It's not about "seeking" the abyss, it's about preparing for it. Other than the recent Tibetan ruckus, one doesn't generally see Buddhists or Daiosts killing themselves off in droves, which would be the logical behavior if they were truly "seeking the abyss." It's only a rope or a gun away, and not hard to find. The point is to work on becoming prepared for the eventual loss of all that one has come to regard as meaningful and sigtnificant, culminating finally with the ultimnate loss of one's own individual idenity. Many are very deep denial of these facts, thinking that's all a joyride forever, and as a result, they also have to cope with extreme fear of what they spend so much time vainly trying to deny - the inevitable.

If one can accomplish this (to at least some extent) before death, than they are at a psychological advantage when everything starts falling apart.

Guys like Steve Pavlina will have an unpleasant surprise when old age sets in, health flees, all their money becomes useless to them, and the reality of the Buddha's observations become clear. I hope it isn't too late for them by then, because death can be especially ugly for those who behave as if the world is a plaything and we get to live forever. We don't - not by a long shot. We have about 70-80 years (if lucky) to investigate reality and come to terms with it. That isn't a long time, and therefore it doesn't pay to waste any of it trying to pander to the ego and pretend life is our personal Disneyland.
I live in a tub.
User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: How to Build a Stronger Ego - Steve Pavlina

Post by Cahoot »

Buddha said that life is not a joyride forever?
User avatar
Alex Jacob
Posts: 1671
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:10 am
Location: Meta-Rabbit Hole

Re: How to Build a Stronger Ego - Steve Pavlina

Post by Alex Jacob »

The 'immortality formula' is a big seller... ;-)
Unidian wrote:The point is to work on becoming prepared for the eventual loss of all that one has come to regard as meaningful and significant, culminating finally with the ultimnate loss of one's own individual idenity. Many are very deep denial of these facts, thinking that's all a joyride forever, and as a result, they also have to cope with extreme fear of what they spend so much time vainly trying to deny - the inevitable.

If one can accomplish this (to at least some extent) before death, than they are at a psychological advantage when everything starts falling apart.

Guys like Steve Pavlina will have an unpleasant surprise when old age sets in, health flees, all their money becomes useless to them, and the reality of the Buddha's observations become clear. I hope it isn't too late for them by then, because death can be especially ugly for those who behave as if the world is a plaything and we get to live forever. We don't - not by a long shot. We have about 70-80 years (if lucky) to investigate reality and come to terms with it. That isn't a long time, and therefore it doesn't pay to waste any of it trying to pander to the ego and pretend life is our personal Disneyland.
I find what you have written interesting because you have really cut to the chase and located what the issue really seems to be: the terror of death and dissolution. Ernst Becker wrote The Denial of Death around that same notion. But not from within the structure of Buddhistic thinking or praxis, but from within and out of, if you will, the Western soul. And there is a big difference.

Instead of confronting the inevitability of death with, say, a Buddha's coping strategy---what you call 'investigat[ing] reality and com[ing] to terms with it', as if a monolith---there are other different approaches.
  • 'If there is any science man really needs it is the one I teach, of how to occupy properly that place in creation that is assigned to man, and how to learn from it what one must be in order to be a man.'

    ---Emmanuel Kant
  • 'Ah, mon cher, for anyone who is alone, without God and without master, the weight of days is dreadful. Hence one must choose a master, God being out of style.'

    ---Albert Camus
  • 'Take stock of those around you and you will ... hear them talk in precise terms about themselves and their surroundings, which would seem to point to them having ideas on the matter. But start to analyze those ideas and you will find that they hardly reflect in any way the reality to which they appear to refer, and if you go deeper you will discover that there is not even an attempt to adjust the ideas to this reality. Quite the contrary: through these notions the individual is trying cut off any personal vision of reality, of his own very life. For life is at the start a chaos in which one is lost. The individual suspects this, but he is frightened at finding himself face to face with this terrible reality, and tries to cover it over with a curtain of fantasy, where everything is clear. It does not worry him that his 'ideas' are not true, he uses them as trenches for the defense of his existence, as scarecrows to frighten away reality.'

    ---Jose Ortega y Gasset
Unidian wrote:That ought to tell us about all we need to know about the worth of his thoughts on spirituality, I think. One can't make a much more egregious error than trying to tie it to material wealth. I'm not just borderline broke, I'm usually flat broke, and see it as having no relation to spirituality other than the fact that I share the non-materialistic views of people like Buddha, Jesus, etc. And that's actually quite a significant relation, come to think of it...
I compressed your paragraphs and deleted a line or two for compactness and clarity. You say 'that ought to tell us about the worth of his spirituality' with a definite authority! But in actual fact there is no reason whatever why having or gaining wealth should be considered, or is, unspiritual. To refer to 'Jesus' or 'Buddha' is weak argumentation, it seems to me. I seem to remember, Nat, some of our previous conversations on this subject! While a strict life of mere wealth-getting is perverse---as perverse as many different perversions---gaining a certain amount of financial solidity, being able to contribute to the construction of things within this plane of existence, educating one's children, and creating with one's wealth and knowledge a decent world, or community, or family, just does not at all seem to me a bad idea. To 'self-actualize' in this plane of existence has all sorts of different elements.
Ni ange, ni bête
User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: How to Build a Stronger Ego - Steve Pavlina

Post by Cahoot »

Joyrides. Seems like what the Buddha was getting at is that the concept of joy, how one defines joy to oneself, is affected by memories of experiences (joy and suffering), and understanding the nature of how this concept of joy forms, reveals both the nature of man's circumstantial life and the nature of mind. However the actual human experience of joy, regardless of how it is later conceptualized and named, is the same for all, from infancy onwards. Come to think of it, I've never known a woman named Joy ... selling rides ... county fair ... quarter a ride. I do remember a good man who found joy when he was young despite hard times, found joy in living out his final years on money he had saved, and eventually found joy in standing for fifteen seconds without collapsing.
User avatar
Jamesh
Posts: 1526
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 3:44 pm

Re: How to Build a Stronger Ego - Steve Pavlina

Post by Jamesh »

Unidian wrote:
Guys like Steve Pavlina will have an unpleasant surprise when old age sets in, health flees, all their money becomes useless to them, and the reality of the Buddha's observations become clear. I hope it isn't too late for them by then, because death can be especially ugly for those who behave as if the world is a plaything and we get to live forever. We don't - not by a long shot. We have about 70-80 years (if lucky) to investigate reality and come to terms with it. That isn't a long time, and therefore it doesn't pay to waste any of it trying to pander to the ego and pretend life is our personal Disneyland.
But life is our personal Disneyland (and torture chamber).

Pavlina is a realist rather than an idealist. There are only a small percentage of people for whom the philosophies of the QRS, will ever result in gaining what they have – a totally consistent relationship between knowledge and reality. For the rest it will just result in more frustration. David has acknowledged this in his blog article Crossing the Road.

Pavlina is more suited to the multitudes, than are the QRS. Though a lightweight, he is expressing superior views to the Buddhist styled new agey stuff that still exists. I’ve always had the view that any philosophy that is more correct than incorrect, should be given a positive value on the basis of being “horses for courses” and not totally dismissed like the QRS do. The viewpoints in his article are ones that ordinary folk could accept and follow – and this is better than turning to irrational philosophies such as religion.

I think his sort of philosophy could help give a younger person the right sort of disciplined mindset as a sort of stable platform upon which for some, via the pursuit of intelligence, or via bad luck creating the sort of suffering his philosophy can’t deal with, would then lead more of them to look at the higher level philosophies of the QRS and perhaps have the courage to really sink their teeth into it.

Egotists always control the world. Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire – we have more chance of winning philosophical wars (changing the memes of the masses) with a contest between skilled mature egos versus the immature predatory ones who now hold all the power in society.
A number of people who visit here, probably drawn here more by personal suffering rather than an inherent lifelong desire for truth, deep down know that the QRS way is too much for them. Many of us value the ups and downs of emotions, and feel that “the place assigned to man” is to be an emotional animal, not Supermen of Rationality.

Pavlina’s viewpoint appeals to me as I do not have courage. I, having no discipline, just don’t have the right launching pad to dive into the void of relational selflessness. This leaves two things on the value scale – Keep trying here and possibly end up with 20 years of frustration with a lack of progression to a pure mental state (possibly declining into greater madness), or do a cosmic shift and put more effort towards ego maturity.

:) I’ll probably do neither – rather I’m most likely to throw the scale away like spoilt child in a fit of angst when the unrequited desires of the ego get the better of me.
We have about 70-80 years (if lucky) to investigate reality and come to terms with it.
One does not have to have a truthful reality. To be content with life over the long term - all one needs is to be a fundamentalist – any kind of fundamentalist. Now this is certainly not ideal – but it is the truth. You just need some set of fixed ideas that you can attach to and always fall back on. Of course, the more rational the set of fundamentalist ideas, then the more likely they will provide the right course of action when needed.

Don’t oversell the period of death suffering and don’t undersell that which gives people a comfortable aged life (money and personal skills). You could of course do both those things, if achieving the QRS mindset was like qualifying for Doctorate – just a matter of learning. It is not – it is more like winning American Idol – though you might learn lots on the way - you still won’t win without having a naturally good voice in the first place.

Take Dan and David’s writing. They already had fairly clear minds in their late teens to determine which philosophies of others were rational and which were not – which ones had the voice of reason and which did not. Even in the early days they wrote with considerable clarity, and have built on that since. Part of the reason for that clarity is that they have limited what they write about to what is certain, not bothering much with empirical issues or worldly matters, and have become expert specialists knowing the ins and outs of what can be deemed certain. To “have what they are having” one must have that natural sensitivity and aptitude to rationality, and if you don’t then it is idealist to think one can think with the same clarity as them. Of course, as their detractors like Alex and sometimes me point out - to have what they have comes with an opportunity cost – they lose to a degree another natural attribute of being human – emotions and forms of herd based interconnectedness. They might be super rational, geniuses – but will never be super lovers, motivators, inventors, fatherly figures.

Unlike Alex, I do not find them dangerous. I would like to see them influence millions. Presently the human world needs a lot more QRS types, not more Alex types. I attack them sometimes when I’ve got a bee in my bonnet about what I see as truth dead ends, but overall I support their aims. Even if what they are selling appears too expensive to me, that doesn’t mean that I wouldn’t mind it at a cheaper price – so I keep returning to look at what is available within the ideas market of this forum, looking for some way to buy at a discount price.
Locked