- Shai Hulud
- |
- Exalted Mythic Member
With B.B. gone, the passion of Bungie.net has lessened.
Posted by: GameJunkieJim
Posted by: BadKarma
Posted by: GameJunkieJim
I think that we should embrace every part of our being - whatever helps to differentiate us from everything else... I think it's wrong to attempt to destroy any part of one's being.
i have destroyed my color, my race, my religion, and to some extent my gender. why? because i do not wish to be defined by any of those things. and because it allows me to see the world in a similar manner. without prejudice or stereotype or hatred. of course, that's not to say that anyone who doesn't share my view is a bigot. and it certainly doesn't mean i have no appreciation of culture. i just happen to believe that people breed culture.
EDIT:
think of it in terms of pruning. you remove the things that stifle growth. stagnation is not something that humankind should strive for. but at the same time, we should not be in such a rush to evolve that we forget our selves.
It has nothing to do with your ego, Karma... That's simply denying yourself some of your own points -- You should aways be proud (to a point) of anything you do or are. Race, religion gender etc. won't have any bearing on your ego, and shouldn't affect the way people view you either --
If you have to do this to cope with your own environment I pity you - because anyone who defines you in such a manner isn't worth knowing anyway - and you are going to be just as bad as they are..
Pruning parts of your self-being and awareness is an awful damaging thing to do -- you cannot hope to evolve yourself without knowing where you have been.
I think there is a difference between who you are and what you are... But they are both interlocked, like strips of a woven basket. Perhaps what BadKarma is trying to say is that he's destroyed part of what he is. I've done the same thing, to an extent. My reason for doing so (history involved with what I am... White, male, and by looks, "Aryan.") may differ from his, though. I've done it to an extent that I feel very uncomfortable filling out sheets of paper that has questions like, "What race are you." I even come close to anger when I don't see a box with "HUMAN" printed next to it (which I would check if that option was available). BadKarma, if I missed your point, please say so.
What you are can, no doubt, influence who you are (due to values associated with religion, particular life-styles of particular races/societies that can be "imprinted" upon one's self). I think that the Who, or Ego (in the definition that ObbiQuiet got) is created based on the way you look at things. This Ego can be what people usually associate Ego with; An unconcious, usually unnecessary, desire for things you don't imediately need, and a certain haughtiness or arrogancy that may accompany it.
But this Ego can also be something else, that most people don't see it as... A good, caring part of one's self. That Ego might give the person an unconcious, unnecessary desire to help others. Does he/she need to help others? Will he/she die if she decides not to help?
So is the question, "Should Ego be controlled or embraced?" answerable? I don't think it is (but I don't think it shouldn't be asked, since its still incredibly fascinating to think about), because since Ego is Who, and Who varies with each person.
---------------------
Whilst in the car yesterday, being driven home by my mother, I asked her, "What's your definition of Ego?"
Her definition, like everyone else's that I've encountered (including mine), was just a bunch of meaningful words that led the listener in a loop-di-loop to the spot where it all started:
[color="steelblue"]What is Ego?[/color] [color="crimson"]I don't know.[/color]
With that little "fact," please note that my definition is probably not the right one, and I'm probably missing some point that was said somewhere else.
[Edited on 8/20/2004 12:33:38 PM]