posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 03:38 PM
... The term ‘ego’ is commonly demonized, but the organ it describes is actually our active, conscious mind, and much like our heart or lungs it
is an essential component of our survival, not something to be defeated or overcome, any more than it’s counterpart the ‘id’ or subconscious.
They are meant to be in cyclic balance, alternating between each other as our waking, and dreaming states, and from either vantage point we can gain
insight on the other. The ancient symbol of yin and yang demonstrates their inseparable nature, and this alternating motion is what drives the
mechanism of life itself! What we are striving to do with this model, just as scientists map the neural synapses in the brain, is get a clearer
picture of the way thoughts exchange between the various chambers, or organs of the psyche. We want to know, how something can begin as an idea and
result as a violent action, how associations are made, and the nature of memory itself. Ok? That's not what the original Latin intended for it to
mean, stop twisting it to fit the Freudian model, a scientist makes a HYPOTHESIS which has to be corroborated by the data, not the other way around.
So to answer the original question, are they the same, NO in fact they occupy the most opposite possible positions within the diagram of the psyche.
The 'inner child' is the shadow, the deepest point of the anima which is completely insulated from direct contact with the external world by many
layers of subconsciousness and consciousness, which alternate in a spiral as is suggested by the yin/yang symbol constantly flowing into itself. Or,
if you prefer, the visual of an orrery or gyroscope, with a constant motion of concentric rings, which is synonymous with a mechanical description of
an atom with its electron cloud right? An inner world. The 'ego' as a general term can refer to the entire active thinking consciousness, or it
can center around the central layers that are slightly shielded from direct contact with reality by the pragmatic reactionary portion of the mind, but
also not in direct contact with the yang component of the 'inner child' which is the imagination. Imagination is one step up to the consciousness,
from the shadow. So the dual nature of the inner child layer is that of the shadow, or little girl, who is our root impulse of desire. -It’s
subconscious, feminine organ is the originator of all impulses, the deepest manifestation of the self, which is the shadow. Pure intuition, the very
pulse of self awareness and represented by the little girl, unfettered by any of the restraints of reality. This is desire in its purest form, and
some of the wishes can be dark until the little girl establishes a link to the outside world, and discovers that she is not the only being that
‘wants’.- Don't tack on unnecessary negative or positive associations on that, it is simply what I said, don't get bogged down in gender issues
because the gender I refer to is the primeval alchemical gender, yin/yang, receiving/giving. The only difference between males and females, truly, is
that males are most concerned about what is done, and females with what is NOT done. But for psychological purposes, these gender descriptions are to
differentiate the states of the internal mind between conscious/active and subconscious/latent.
The male counterpart to the shadow is the imagination. - This base impulse is passed to the most delicate stage of the mind, and also the most free,
which it’s the pure imagination of the little boy. Raw energy, the prima mobile is held by no bounds of mental conditioning. The subconscious
impulse of ‘want’ has found conscious manifestation in the idea of the self, ‘cogito ergo sum.’ Now the spirit, still unbridled by societal
expectations, gets a glimpse of its dual identity and compulsion to share with itself. ‘I want.’- This is the only connection between the ego
and inner child, and they are still worlds away!