How to Build a Stronger Ego - Steve Pavlina

[Bobo]

David brought Alexis complexes months ago, and who knows brought that more since then. The repetition and recurrence of GF is a real problem, as Diebert calling Guest_of_Logic feminine for an example. As the uncounscious resurges here all the time and time again.

Let's still make the Freudian slip valid:
"Until “them,” indeed. If you’re not willing to make the subject “you,” then you will always be concerning yourself about “them” . . . . ."

That 'them' then would be an obsession about here. What does it mean to make 'you' the subject here?

[Dennis Mahar]

Alex,
Every story known to man, in whichever medium the story is enacted, be it book, film, pantomine etc.
Involves 3 primary roles.
The victim
The persecutor
The rescuer

The drama or play is the exchange between these 3 roles.

You as the author or generator of this situation take these 3 roles entirely in hand.

In your victim statement there is the implication of an 'innocent' terribly wronged.
There is the element of the 'dark night of the soul' where the 'poison' is taken in, absorbed, felt and metamorphosised.
from grub to monarch butterfly.

A project is found.
The project of the rescuer.
A project envisioned for the saving of humanity.

A 'voice' is found.
The voice of the persecutor.
The culprit of the atrocities must be vilely condemned, stalked with intent, exposed, humiliated, berated,
jeered at, scalded, condemned, despised and brought to justice.

It's like musical chairs,

the innocent becomes the victim becomes the rescuer becomes the persecutor becomes the victim becomes the rescuer becomes the persecutor.
round and round she goes.
It's basic human machinery.

It's in your head lad,
a psychodrama.
being a writer a psychodrama is your breakfast, lunch and tea.

Heroism.
Heroic ambitions.

Toiling.
To have 'meaning'.
To make 'meaning' out of nothing.

The main question is Alex,
as a man who is in love with writing and generates and acquires material for such, have you found possibilities here for script enhancement for the magnum opus.
Have you found a 'character' in a central place in the canyons of your mind that 'groks' this 'dreamscape' as 'dreamscape'.

The great novelists/novels involve a central detached 'narrator' that holds all the threads together as an access to wisdom.

[Tomas]

I know you are working the victim-angle, you puppy torturer, but you must read that paragraph as a subtle parody, and not with the inflection you are attaching to it. I suggest you get out of this torturer-victim mentality. Your whole style is remarkably like those shock-collars you put on your canine captives. Weird.

Yes, the (administer pain to) dog electro shock is out of character for Dennis. Foibles, indeed!

PS - If he's that messed up in the Creation (animals feel pain, too but they are more deserving) where else is he screwing up?

[Bobo]

It's Them agaist us. If they could wouldn't the animals just eat us alive?

If dogs could talk, perhaps we would find it as hard to get along with them as we do with people.
Dashenka, or the Life of a Puppy (Dášenka čili Život štěněte, 1933)

[Diebert van Rhijn]

The repetition and recurrence of GF is a real problem, as Diebert calling Guest_of_Logic feminine for an example. As the uncounscious resurges here all the time and time again.

Actually I called him a puppy killer and his attitude of whining and nagging about Dennis his dogs was rather feminine in the sense of not very constructive. Just complaining because it somehow made him feel better to have found this little hint of a shadow behind Dennis. That's a stereotypical feminine role in many poor relationships, often played by the weaker one. But Laird admitted he acted like a jerk in his approach by the way so what's the big deal here?

Not sure if I called Laird feminine before, I don't think so, although we disagree on what the feminine is. And I don't see him like that really. But with you it's different. You disagreed then strongly about the puppy thing as well and still bring it back into this discussion to make some underhanded point against me. And then hinting some psychoanalytic theory to explain the "resurging" of unresolved shadows. Hmm, you check all the boxes: you're feminine alright! Or acting out a very weak role in your life right now perhaps?

[Bobo]

Wanna a bet that I can find a post of David calling GOL feminine at least 3 years ago? To see if it's a resurge or not?

A bet of integrity of course.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Diebert, aside from my own messianic greatness, the topic is the notion of 'building a stronger ego' as opposed to the dissolution of the ego, or the masking of it.

That's exactly one of those attempts to ignore, rewrite or change the topic of the conversation, without warning, just because you don't like it. The topic was actually about what Steve Pavlina thought the ego was and in our discussion specifically it was about what I wrote about the dual nature of self:

• 1. A notion of "self" enables one to conquer the mountain on a bike, even winning the race, overcoming suffering with endurance.
  2. The clinging to "self" spirals into deception and suffering for all those close around; a suffering rippling outwards.

After an interesting link with Kunga's lack of control over her self but too much clinging to what she feels must remain, the discussion moved toward the theme of recovering from poison and the possibility you were doing that on this forum. You then made up the idea that I might believe we all are here to heal and cure in a similar way. And I opposed that in relation to what this forum is about: enlightenment, the lack of clinging and lack of ignorance caused and perpetuated by clinging.

We could have had a further discussion about the need for "control" in life to get somewhere but unfortunately you changed it into attacking the notion of enlightenment instead and after it was demonstrated you didn't know that much about it, you now suggest returning to the topic of "building a stronger ego" but within hours after posting that you announce one of your many sudden retirements from the forum. It's impossible to have any serious discussion this way. This while our shorter exchanges are always very good and high spirited on and off the forum. I just hope you'll stay away, because there's really nothing for you at this forum to bring or to take back. Whatever you might believe is here for you.

[Dennis Mahar]

The innocent party terribly wronged is the puppy.
Who is to be condemned is Dennis.

The hook is always the innocent terribly wronged

without that, drama can't be accessed
there's no root for which to take hold.

something has to be felt to be abandoned.

I think the sense Pye brings of Alex 'in therapy'
and we are contributing editors

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Wanna a bet that I can find a post of David calling GOL feminine at least 3 years ago? To see if it's a resurge or not?

A bet of integrity of course.

He might certainly have. As masculinity vs femininity is a recurring theme on the forum, the work of David, Weiniger, Solway and more. Why do you think it would mean something shadowy if it's brought up often in open and plain conversations assessing ones psychology or type of thinking? Actually I think it has died down a bit as theme if I compare it with memory of the last six years here.

[Dan Rowden]

Since Laird tends to be highly feminine, it's to be expected that David may have characterised him that way on more than one occasion.

[Bobo]

Woof, woof. I'm calling you a dog.

Can we find the first ball that got it rolling?

And that's an example for the greater pattern of recurrence.

*That remembers me, Diebert the Bulldog Vs Diebert the post-mortician.

[Dennis Mahar]

masculinity/femininity
genderising it is an error because suffering and conflict generates as more drama proceeding ad infinitum.

the duality is best expressed as
void and drama,
in this way perspective and detachment presences.

no one is completely void and no one is completely drama.
we all like a dramatic context.
the essence of drama is always/already an exchange between 3 participatory modes:
victim, persecutor, rescuer.

Void as a noun is meaningless.
to void by way of reflection disentangles drama,
detaches.

to avoid drama is impossible this side of a Himalayan cave,
to void drama is a possibilty for running along experiencing freedom of being.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Can we find the first ball that got it rolling?

Adam and Eve? Drama in a nutshell.

[Kunga]

After an interesting link with Kunga's lack of control over her self but too much clinging to what she feels

This is not a very truthful statement. I control myself too much actually....that's why I thought it nessesary to indulge in a little truth serum (I rarely ever drink alcohol or do any drugs)....it also wasn't intensional that I had my CAPS on...it just happened...and I wasn't concerned about it...i thought it looked aesthetic actually....but what would you guys know of aesthetics.....you have the taste of cardboard.

I don't cling to what I feel either....displaying feelings from time to time is normal.....you talk as if .....oh never mind.....it's pointless....you guys think you know it all......you don't know half of it. You make statements based on incomplete information.....

Take a look at Life. Take a look at nature. It is both masculine & feminine. Learn to balance it.
The Earth is both masculine & feminine (flowers/rocks sun/moon water/air)
(Concerning the statements about Laird....lay the fuck off others....look at your own mistakes/faults/character)

[Diebert van Rhijn]

But Kunga, all the information is there in your posts, your actions, a hundred times repeated on the drama wheel. It's beyond reasonable doubt, the specifics do not matter anymore.

Your "truth serum" was really just a drunken rant, nothing more although you want it to mean something now. It's part of the self-destructive patterns which come after too long clinging, not to mention the pattern of lying to yourself. It's a kind of mindless rebellion but not really revolutionary. You need more control over all the things you have been "letting go" and less control over your false image of that you're doing something "good".

Even if life would be a balancing act between void and drama, that doesn't mean one shouldn't deflate the pattern of drama once in a while before the balloon pops all by itself. It comes with such a violence!

[Dennis Mahar]

Diebert,

whilst travelling in India I fell into the company of a band of old Hindu guys whose interest was distinguishing the human condition.

From time immemorial, in relation to the spiritual Life, the distinction of clarity was 'void and drama'.
To develop spiritually is to cut the drama and embrace the void.
It was also acknowledged that women tended toward the drama side of the spectrum and men to the void.

Somehow the distinction fell into the idea of masculinity/femininity possibly in response to the Buddhist expression that a woman can complete all stages of the Boddhisattva and then, in the last second, require a man's body to pass thru'.


The masculinity/femininity scenario is vicious, futile, stupid and concealing of the truth because the truth of void/drama is obscured in that Story.
Whatever man/woman call each other is just more drama.

Any 'colouring', movement away from, failure to recognise, attempt to distort the fact that Being 'presences' for Dasein embracing void and Being withdraws when anxiety-fuelled Dasein embraces drama.

Your model Diebert reflects this same understanding and it is gender-free. It is a human being issue rather than a gender issue.

Quinn himself doesn't hold the idea of woman as a 'fixed condition' incapable of 'crossing the road'.
I queried him on that and he responded emphatically in the affirmitive that it is a possibility for women.

As for drama,
which has been 'grokked' completely.
An ego is 'miffed' and seeks revenge.

and so, we have a David and Goliath show.
Goliath is resting at the moment.

This isn't concerned with absolute truth.
It's a relative truth concerning the human condition which I think you were getting at Diebert when you responded to Pam by saying 'as far as it goes'.

People love their personal drama because it seems there's nothing else to do.

Void is 'scary'.

[Bobo]

I don't want to step in drama, especially if it can drag more people in it. Maybe that was a bad example after all, because of the emotions in it (being a statement made about someone).
So I will compare the way you said it (indirectly, about what 'is'), instead of what is said, in hopes of making what may be a stronger connection:

Diebert:
"Haha who is defending women and pets as usual?"

DQ:
"Incidentally, you can see how Laird's mind works in posing this scenario. He is identifying with the women and children on the basis that they share his own pure, innocent self. In other words, he believes deep down that he possesses a pure, innocent self (unquestioned, unchallenged, it's just what he happens to feel) and then projects that onto the women and children."

Maybe this is no shadow, but just regular group interaction.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Bob, it's interesting this phenomenon with men, how they go about with their ideals, ranging from ideals for the future, the route to take, about women and even ideals about animals. And they can get very protective of those vivid images. But it's essentially a form of projecting innocence and purity (not of this world) onto something else. Every thinking man should know exactly what David is talking about. Although not every man would handle it exactly the same. In general it's the easiest to project on women, children and their substitutes. This is what is being described here. It's really interesting and crucial to know these things about life. Laird has a strongly idealistic character but unlike philosophers he acts a lot on the emotions all the imagery keeps invoking. He keeps getting seduced by a very old and biologically very useful idea.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Dennis, thanks for replying on my question here.

From time immemorial, in relation to the spiritual Life, the distinction of clarity was 'void and drama'. To develop spiritually is to cut the drama and embrace the void.

Void as a noun was meaningless you said so the distinction is dramatizing ("playing") and voiding.

My interest right now is in the possible genius description of "drama". There's for example the crime, the victim and justice. Betrayal, dead body and forgiveness. There's a lot going on here!

The masculinity/femininity scenario is vicious, futile, stupid and concealing of the truth because the truth of void/drama is obscured in that Story.

The truth is always obscured in all stories since a story can only be driven by the inner and for ever "hidden" meaning. We're immersed in a culture which has created "man" and "woman" roles. It goes very deep and nearly all people fall into the groove to some degree. It's obvious that genders are shifting and as the position of women is getting stronger by the day, they do not have to act from a position of weakness (victim) and "feminine" tactics are increasingly discarded. But some would say, also the masculine ones.

[Dennis Mahar]

Darwinian Survival.
Instincts and extinction.
human machinery.

The instincts will be to Rescue and protect
as Victim to feel the fear of the personal threat
as Persecutor there must be an instinctual counterattack capability to drive away the threat, or for flight.

Human-victim
God-rescuer
Devil-persecutor

Human-victim
Buddha-rescuer
Persecutor- ignorance

How deep does this shit go?

We can't say anyone is 'guilty' of drama-ing.
We can't say anyone is 'innocent' of drama-ing.

It is dependent arising,
therefore transformable,
by way of a curriculum of education.

Alex is funny.
He goes:

GF users-victim
Westerrn liberal traditions-rescuer
New age buddhist psychobabble-persecutor

[SeekerOfWisdom]

p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.

This is that sound you make with your lips when you kind of "pop" them, makes a kind of p sound.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

It was in rhythm

[Dennis Mahar]

What I can hear is bong bong bong bong bong.
Get off the bong.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Wasn't high not high now, all I hear is perceived/created contention, maybe you should have smoked some weed when you were younger, might not have been another talking ass

[Dennis Mahar]

See how easy it is to hook you.
p p p p p
it was in rhythm.