ON THE CONCEPTS OF THE "I" AND THE "EGO" AND THEIR MEANING

The concepts of the "I" and the "ego" are labels that are used to encompass what we consider to be "our sense of self" and our sense of self is the identity that we have and give to our "being", it is also a combination of the character that one has as well as the character one develops and is in the process of developing for oneself in the sense of future goals to work towards, so the concepts of the "I" and the ego are parts of a process that is partly fixed and partly changeable as an identity in our consciousness and being. The concept of the "I" is a simplification of the many aspects of being that this concept encompasses and it consists of some of the following; the will, our character traits, our sense of self, our insecurities, our moral values, our virtues, what we think we represent, our desires, our needs, etc. In the ego insecurities appear as a defensive attitude and also as an inflation of one's attitude and estimate of oneself due to arrogance, arrogance is usually a result of a feeling of insecurity, and emptiness, and the feeling of arrogance attempts to make up for and cover up this defecit of feeling in the ego by appearing to fill the gap of what the ego feels it lacks. As part of the ego the mental abilities and also the character abilities of a person as well as the security of mind one has appears as a type of calm modesty, and it presents itself as a form of congeniality of character, for instance, modesty is always a sign of ability and security of mind and this occurs because you cannot cover up what you do not lack, which is what arrogance attempts to do, modesty is basically an attempt to tone down one's feeling of ability and security. In many cases insecurity is usually ill-founded and is the result of doubt and ignorance about reality. A tendency to want to always be right, and correct appears in the ego's of those who are amongst the ignorant and unwise and this attitude is always fully enforced by the will, the highly intelligent and wise amongst us on the other hand tend to be more unsure of themselves, and are more likely to compromise, and avoid conflict in most cases. The concept of the "I" by itself without reference to the ego represents our true selves whereas the ego is our false self or the part of ourselves that acts and pretends and that takes on a separate image from the subjective "I". In a sense the ego is just as much a part of ourselves as the "I" because you cannot have one thing without another, for instance, the "I" would feel fragmented by itself so it needs the ego to present itself in a simpler and more adaptable form that can act and deal with circumstances quickly in our every day situations of dealing with others aswell as with most objective goals. I will now endeavour to explain and describe what this subjective inner "I" is in which if it is anything at all constitutes our true self. It can first be pointed out that the subjective inner "I" that is ourselves is in a sense a process of composite elements which ultimately lead to a perception or intentionality which has an objective direction leading outwardly in the sense of looking out at the world and this is so because the will is the true essence and driving force of the "I". This subjective "I" is partly fixed in the sense of consisting of those aspects of our character that don't really change and if they do it happens rarely and these represent our true motives, desires, needs, traits and will and this is due to our nature, custom, habit and our actions because our true motives come out in our acts and not in our opinions. We always do the things that mean something to us and we tend to ignore and neglect the things that don't mean much to us. Our deepest motives are subconscious and so we are not always aware of them. The subjective perception of the "I" has no choice but to face intentionality whether enthusiastically or more apathetically but in so doing will encounter objective ideals and values that it follows and these usually play a huge part in our evolving and progressive natures. The final part of the "I" that I am to explain as being part of its content is the fact that we as dynamic beings need change and progress so therefore the inner "I" evolves and progresses and makes the required adaptations due to its inner needs and desires. All the internal dialogue that occurs in our being happens between the "I" and the ego and being truthful to ourselves usually means being truthful to the "I" and not the "ego". The ego sometimes alienates us and leads us into inauthenticity in the sense that the ego exists as an image which is capable of dividing us away from the "I" in our consciousness and this can create neurotic behaviour. It is the ego which represses the "I" and causes problems when we are not being truthful to ourselves, but the "I" always wants to be truthful to itself and this process happens in all of us. Many of the motives, desires, needs, wishes, ambitions, feelings and ideals of the "I" are latent and deep within the subconscious and this is why our passions and feelings are very dynamic and can seem mysterious and even overwhelming at times and so it is a bad thing to repress the subconscious aspects of the "I". The ego on the other hand can be very superficial and petty because the ego is imaginary and maintains a false appearance of coherence and completness. According to the philosopher Slavoj Zizek the concept of the "I" is an empty shell unless filled with the contents of the world (i.e., the stimuli and ideas of the outside world as sense data to fill us as subjective or inner content). Zizek's observation is correct to a certain extent, but we can still have a sort of basic "I" or underdeveloped character without much sense input, because this can be found in nature in animals that live under the ground, such as mole's and other types of rodents. The concept of the "I" is not a fixed thing and is in a constant change or flux, but yet part of its behaviour is consistent and predictable. Thinkers like Zizek claim that the "I" does not exist within us at all, he claims that it exist outside of us, to him it exist only in our behaviour and in a sense its non locality gets lost in our outer behaviour, according Zizek it can never be found within us. What Zizek fails to mention is that outer behaviour originates from our inner behaviour or inner consistencies, you cannot have outer behaviour without the inner behaviour conducting it. It is safe to say that Zizek's analysis is incomplete. Inner behaviour completes the outer behaviour and vice versa. The "I" exists as "potentiality" and as "actuality" due to the essence of the potentialities and possibilities inherent within vital organisms. Our thoughts, feelings and our behaviour are responses and choices that shape our potentiality and actuality of existence because of external stimuli. It is our thoughts, feelings and our behaviour that is either good or bad or good or evil due to our choices, not our potentiality. Good or bad, etc., are also relative terms. We are our intentions, choices and behaviour, it is this that represents who we are and shapes the actuality of the "I". The potentiality aspect of our being is neutral, it is the choices and intentions of our behaviour and our decisions generally that shape who we are. Potentiality and actuality exist together within our being, one pushes forward the other, one comes from the other, yet they exist together and shape the "I". The "will" or choice and decision making aspect of our being that exists as potentiality, is the most mysterious aspect of our being, it ultimately has the choice to do what it wants, regardless of the consequences. Behavioural psychology and science prove that we can largely be shaped by conditioning and education whether internal or external, we can even recondition ourselves, i.e., will a new self.