It seems to me that ego is a mental construct from intellect, dictating that our responses be tailored a certain way. Many are defensive or closed off to new ideas that challenge the fragility of these flimsy intellectual constructs. On Steemit/Hive the account named Baah was a master at exposing others enslavement to these constructs via their ego. I both marveled at his adeptness at probing and prodding, as well as at times feeling sorry for those who were incapable of seeing what he exposed to them. If you ever get an opportunity to check out his back and forths, I would urge you to do so. I mentioned before that while the approach the two of you took was vastly different (with my preferences being the approach you take which affords dignity and takes into account the fragility of anothers ego) that I sometimes speculated you two were the same person. You both have an amazing knack for seeing the foundations in others, in probing those foundations.
RE: GOOD ADVICE
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
GOOD ADVICE
(IFF) ego is a "construct" of intellect (THEN) what is the origin of intellect?
In other words, is intellect merely a tool of our instincts? Which would make ego just one tool of our intellect in its quest to serve our instincts?
Which relegates ego to a "second level" tool of our instincts?
And yes, I did have some encounters with Baah. They seemed intellectually capable, but they grew weary of my gentle counter-punches surprisingly quickly and unfortunately (apparently) "rushed-to-disqualify" me.
Baah tried to "argue" that being "correct" (whatever the hell that might mean) is more important that being logical.
Baah then defended jumping to conclusions specifically to justify engaging in AD HOMINEM attacks.
https://peakd.com/hive-174578/@baah/re-logiczombie-q6k7dy
Baah also seems staunchly PRO-DOWNVOTING,
https://peakd.com/informationwar/@baah/re-logiczombie-q6k6fz
I don't know it's possible to know this answer. I lean towards a belief I read that says that it is a foreign installation by beings who feed off of the emotional energy they cultivate in us through it. It was further asserted by the same belief system that it was accepted due to its aid in survival. These are only tales to me, but after stalking my thoughts sporadically for almost 4 decades now I find this the most credible explanation I've come across.
A tool, yes. I don't believe it to be naturally instinctual though, but it has been trained into us to appear instinctual to the point we lose ourselves to it, allowing it to call the show as we believe we are it. Its many whispers via the internal dialogue lulling most to a waking sleep as submission to the God if intellect lives our lives for us. This is the fate we are trained to live.
That is how Baah tests others to see how lost they are in the spells of intellect they have bound to themselves. If one gets defensive, as most who he interacts with does, he doubles down to see if they are capable of seeing this in themselves. Usually the person focused on reveals they revere their belief so much they will defend it at any cost, resulting in their panicked rebuttals that reveal they hold things to be true they can't defend or verbalize the why of. Baah is much more than what many see in their encounters with him. As to his motivations, I'm uncertain. But there is a keenness to him, an ability to see that eludes most. I also have seen kindness in him that most would be to afraid to know, as to get that close to him one must not be defensive unreasonably.
I had surmised the possibility of you two being the same due to seeing in ways most seem incapable of. While i never belonged to any school debate team, I've know others who have. One facet of their training was to argue positions that they disagreed with, or practicing arguing both sides of the debate. I believe that both of you have this critical ability to do just such a thing.
In the book Demian by Herman Hesse he talks of the mark of Cain, insinuating it is actually a mark of intelligence. Using this as a reference point, I see this mark in both of you. So when I say I wondered of the two of you, it is meant as a compliment, although as I've stated, I always prefer kindness and dignity to the attacking approach.
As I said, your approaches are night and day, yet your intellect
And yes, he has always been outspoken in favor of the down vote feature.