Denying the Subjective Experience to Justify The Ego

Do people deny being subjective in life to try to assert that their ego is in full control of their life? These seem like the people that think everything can be controlled and predicted. It sure makes the ego look good to say that it is not subjected to anything other than itself which doesn't make much sense to me. I'm not trying to make this a god issue but we are still subject to reality whether you want to call it god or something else.

I don't understand Subjective...

reply to post by Ralphy

Dear Ralphy,

Hi, again.

As strange as this may sound, I agree with you. There are many people who say if I can't measure it, it doesn't exist. That way lies madness. But they try nonetheless. They are looking for a safe way to be subjective, but I don't know what that would be. You have to open your heart sometimes and let your mind just watch.

Some of it is God, but some of it is something else. Thanks for the post.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by blazenresearcher
experiences are unique to the person experiencing them,if we experience a simple example we experience pain subjectivly when we go to the doctors we can describe the pain,we cant share the experience lol but because we all at one time experience pain then we have an objective understanding of what it is

reply to post by Ralphy


evil this is the only answer, there is no logical reasons when the premise is absurd

if u deny ur free constant sense for what u look like objectively, u would mean very little reality being u so it cant get to ego pretentions

only the free sense so the subject is the one constancy reason for speculations possible as relative thing out of constancy fact

the free sense would b evil and the objective existing moves too

this is the whole issue, when there is truth there is evil too

truth is relative absolute superiority fact out of constancy absolute value fact

it is like we have constancy nothing then relatively u may enjoy going u or down since u r always

correction, u might enjoy going up or down

No. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There are many things that simply can't be accomplished without subjective interpretation.

Umm, subjective experience IS ego.

I think it would have made more sense for you to say "people who deny the OBJECTIVE REALITY, of the metaphysical, or of the suprapersonal" seek to justify ego.

It is precisely their subjective, sublunar perspectice that prevents that from apprehending the objective reality beyond their personal selves.

Originally posted by dontreally
It is precisely their subjective, sublunar perspectice that prevents that from apprehending the objective reality beyond their personal selves.

Without subjective interpretation, there is no beauty, no love, no happiness. Everything becomes dull and meaningless.

reply to post by smithjustinb

Without subjective interpretation, there is no beauty, no love, no happiness. Everything becomes dull and meaningless.

And everyone, being a subject, is able to 'interpret' reality as they please.

The ultimate issue is connecting to an objective reality - and by doing so, EXPERIENCING that reality, obviously, subjectively.

So the dynamic to be sought is objective - subjective, instead of subjective - subjective.

Originally posted by Ralphy
Do people deny being subjective in life to try to assert that their ego is in full control of their life? These seem like the people that think everything can be controlled and predicted. It sure makes the ego look good to say that it is not subjected to anything other than itself which doesn't make much sense to me. I'm not trying to make this a god issue but we are still subject to reality whether you want to call it god or something else.

There are people who need to have that "control over reality" thing as part of their identity. Truth is that we're each in a life-long struggle to create and establish an inimitable identity - even those folks who've chosen the most pathetic and loathsome versions we can imagine. The human being - once it has graduated from the corporeal development stage - is eternal, and as with all that exists as eternal, the only survival imperative expression that drives the human being is inimitable identity. Hell, some people actually commit suicide to serve their carefully (although subconsciously) crafted identity's requirements. That's a pretty extreme example of how critical identity is to the human psyche - that it is served even to the point of violating all other means of corporeal survival - but as we all know, self destruction is not that uncommon among societies of human beings. Other forms of violating natural corporeal survival imperative expressions are less overt (smoking, boozing, drugging, chaotic and dangerous lifestyles) but these are suicidal-centric behaviors nonetheless if you compare them to what a non-human corporeal organism (like a horse or a cat) engages in. The death takes longer to achieve, but the relentless destruction of the corporeal body is still the primary purpose of those sorts of practices, and no other otherwise healthy corporeal animal engages in that kind of behavior.

On this board, you can easily witness identity struggles on display in each thread and in each forum. In fact, these Internet forums are a great laboratory for any researcher who's working in the field of human identity establishment and defense. The main reason why humans engage in such extreme efforts to establish and maintain inimitable identity - and why no other species of animal on this planet does, to anywhere near the same extent - is that the human being isn't really fully developed and fully viable until it has cast off the corporeal form and finally emerged whole within the eternal realm.

The human being is not - once fully developed - a corporeal being. You can call it "spirit" or "soul" or you can refer to the human being as a fully dynamic perception-informational being (as I do) but what is innate about the human being is that deep inside, it realizes that its true existence is eternal and that all other survival imperative expressions pale in comparison to what any eternally existent entity must achieve and maintain - inimitable identity. Inimitable identity is what delineates whatever it is that exists from everything that shares existence with it. Without inimitable identity, there can be no existent "something", since contextually, if it isn't unique or definable, it's simply not existent. Inimitable identity is the one primordial expression of the lone existential imperative Survival. The sole existential requirement is Survival and no survival expression is more primordial, pervasive and necessary than inimitable identity.

Ego is how the human identity is established and defended. It's just that simple.

Not really sure what you're asking, but I was just recently thinking about the "denial of subjective consciousness" that you sometimes hear about. Kind of goes along the lines of what one poster just said about the unreality of anything that cannot be objectively measured.

My thoughts on the subject are that, in reality, the subjective is all I know for sure. Everything else may be an illusion, but I know at least that this conscious experience is. I have to take that for granted before I can begin to consider the reality or unreality of any of the "objects" that appear to me as a result of this subjective consciousness.

I think it is all about personal happiness. Some people are only happy trading a million dollars on wall street, so that is what they will want to do, so long as they dont prevent others from doing what they want to do.

reply to post by smithjustinb
cup of tea and some subjective idealism anyone????

Originally posted by dontreally
Umm, subjective experience IS ego.

I think it would have made more sense for you to say "people who deny the OBJECTIVE REALITY, of the metaphysical, or of the suprapersonal" seek to justify ego.

It is precisely their subjective, sublunar perspectice that prevents that from apprehending the objective reality beyond their personal selves.

I'm glad to say you are eligible for the PLAIN ENGLISH SOCIETY'S 'what the f*** are you on about' award, in the perversion of syntax category.

reply to post by NorEaster


Wouldn't you agree ego is an identifier for life experiences as it would pertain to a series of lives?Ego would the target to measure the development of the entity as well as an extended expression of the complete universal mind in a singular form.

reply to post by dontreally

Just a point, do you mean COMPREHEND instead of apprehend? because apprehend in that lot is a contradiction.Even after that tweak the sentence structure is still like a pork pie at a bar mizvah.

reply to post by cuchullainuk777

What a petty thing to make a post about.

Apprehend: Understand or perceive

Link

Now, using your powers of inference, replace the word 'that', which was a typo, with 'them', and the sentence will then make sense.

reply to post by dontreally
i thought you'd bite but go on zzzzzzzzzz ill read your reply even though im tired

Originally posted by dontreally
Umm, subjective experience IS ego.

I think it would have made more sense for you to say "people who deny the OBJECTIVE REALITY, of the metaphysical, or of the suprapersonal" seek to justify ego.

It is precisely their subjective, sublunar perspectice that prevents that from apprehending the objective reality beyond their personal selves.

ill ignore PERSPECTICE ok the typo them instead of that,oh and omit the word personal ,because 'their selves' will suffice,because their selves cant be anything other than personal.But having said that how can one not comprehend objectivity the very objective reality with which one gauges subjective understanding?