Post #2 - It's dangerous to be yourself.

"Be your self." Instead of what? Pretending I'm someone else? Pretending I am not some way that I am? Or that I am some way that I am not? This good advice or encouragement implies I've got the option to not be "my self".

We've all had the experience of 'not being our selves.' Or at least hiding parts of ourselves. Or sometimes being ways that feel false. Many of us are even confused about just who is my self? We know our roles and what we do. We know we have thoughts and feelings and sensations. We know and relate to other people and they seem to know who we are. Is all that my "self"? We also know the experiences captured in the statements "I am more my self when I am with so and so" and "When I am doing such and such I really feel like my self".

So "being our selves" is not a given. At least not our whole selves. We make choices about what we keep and what we discard or hide about ourselves. Very, very, very early ones. But why would I not want to be everything that I am....my whole self? The answers to this question are at the root of the creation of the ego.

The first part of the answer is that my survival as a body and as an 'inner-self-ness', my continued existence as both, is more important to me than keeping my 'inner-self' or my body intact, keeping them whole. Survival trumps the full well being of my body and my inner-self. In the beginning my survival  was completely dependent on my mother, my father, or those who cared for me. I would and did anything necessary to preserve my life sustaining connection to them and their willingness to stay connected to me. Anything. Like the wolf that chews its leg off to get out of the trap, I will cut off parts of me if staying connected demands it. The wolf lives but lives a three legged life. In circumstances that demand four legs, the wolf will be compromised and endangered. Likewise, I live but there is a cost, a loss of whatever capacities or qualities of 'inner-self' I had to 'chew off' to preserve my survival.

Let's look at what "survive" means, and for even greater clarity let's also explore what "thrive" means. Survive means to continue to exist in spite of something that threatened your existence or your well being. "I survived the crash". "I don't know how I survived the humiliation." Thrive means to flourish, to be full, to overflow. Most of us are surviving not thriving internally. We may be doing well materially and in terms of having the hallmarks of success socially. But there is an internal squeezing and squirming. An uncomfortableness being with myself, in my own skin. Like i am always more or less at risk, in danger. We have lots of more or less successful ways of blunting that discomfort and generating other, more pleasurable or acceptable internal feelings or states. And when we're successful, we feel good, even high or invincible. We live to maintain the high and blunt our awareness of the inner deprivation or costs. And it does not feel effortless.

Inner thriving feels completely different. In its fullest manifestation I feel at ease with my inner-self. There is absolutely nothing to prove about my inner-self. I move in the world from a bunch of givens: that my inner-self is safely mine and nobody can take it from me or make me compromise it; that I belong to, and am a fully acceptable member of, the human race; that my capacities (intellect, creativity, intuition, will, heart, and being-ness) are mine to use, develop, refine, and enjoy and be proud of; that the meaning and purpose of my life emerges from within my deepest internal source of knowing; and that I trust the authority of this inner source of knowing and discovery consistently. And it does feel effortless.

My ego is not my whole inner-self. It is the result, and the maintainer, of an inner "chewing off". The ego does not experience the 'givens' above. Nothing about my inner-self can be assumed. My revised and split up inner-self must be worked on, constructed, and maintained. I must continuously scan for leaks from those parts of me that I have banished into unawareness. What aspects of the inner-self must be eliminated in order to maintain connection to those groups that are vitally important will vary from person to person. Some of us are required to banish or "chew off" our aggressiveness and assertiveness in order to protect our good standing and membership. Others may be required to be bullies. Others may be required to banish their sensitivity. Still others have to hide their intellect or their sexuality. Some are required to conform, others to rebel. So we emphasize the parts of us we think are acceptable and hide those we think are not. This survival solution can severely limit our options and flexibility. We become the equivalent of the three legged wolf.

In my own case, for my survival, to preserve my connection, in my family, in the schools and peer groups I was in, and in my religious group, I developed what I call a "Saint" ego. The Saint must always 'be good'. For me that meant: have no needs; make sure others are happy; never get angry or fight; never be proud....even better be self-deprecating; don't have pleasure or excitement; suffer in silence (Mom, Dad, Priests, Nuns, and God will love you more for this); never criticize; don't be competitive; keep your talents hidden; it goes on, but you get the idea.

This ego's upside is that I had decent values, was kind, considerate and strove to be responsible to family, colleagues, and friends. But later in life, even being "responsible" was actually hampered by the downside of my Saint ego. In adult life, there are times when you have to fight for yourself, for your family. My ego forbid this. That was not 'saintly'. I would be terrorized by internal guilt and doubt whenever a situation arose in which I had to argue for myself. At one point many years ago, I took a job as the Clinical Director of an outpatient drug treatment program. It was my first experience in the role of "boss". I had a bunch of employees, and had a boss over me also. Early on in my role, I had to make a staff scheduling decision. I knew if I decided one way my boss would be angry. And if I decided the other way, my employee would be angry. I found myself frozen, unable to get clear what I thought was the best decision. I was so afraid of making someone angry, I couldn't think for my self!


To the degree that I have internally separated myself from a complete identity with my ego, I have done so not by denying that I have an ego. (Although "Saint" egos are supposed to be egoless which has added an extra twist to the process.) Rather, with some help, I began to 'see' my ego. To watch it in operation. To feel its grip when it had me. And most importantly I began to 'feel' my authentic inner-self and discover the inner authority and truth of my own deep internal knowing. I am still discovering this emerging self. The strength, ease, flexibility, and trustworthiness of that self is a joy to experience. And it doesn't feel dangerous to be my self. I can chose more wisely who to open to and with whom to keep my boundaries.

This inner work has given me insights into how our egos, if we are not conscious of them, rule our conversations, and severely limit our collective capacity to respond to the challenges we currently face in our families, our social networks, our work, our organizations, our governments, and our world. And some insights into how to incrementally decrease their rule in our collective conversations and increase our access to our collective intelligence, creativity, wisdom, and will. I will be sharing these insights with you in further blogs.  

Ego Mechanics - Intro Post from Dr Lou

"What you see is what you get." We've all heard someone say this, and/or have said it ourselves. It's usually said with some pride. It implies full disclosure and honesty...."I'm not hiding anything....I'm a straight shooter".

Let's take a closer look. Which is just what the person who makes this claim doesn't want us to do. The real meaning of this statement goes like this: "What you see about me that does not fit my picture of myself, I will not get." A person who really believes that what they see about themselves is all there is, is a person who is possessed by their ego. They think their ego is who they are.

The ego is best identified by its job description: The ego's job is to show to others (and myself) what I think is 'good' about me and to hide from others (and myself) what I think is 'bad' about me. The ego is the manager of our image of ourselves. It has a mind of its own and it takes its job very seriously. It has a powerful arsenal of 'sticks' and 'carrots' to keep us in 'acceptable' ways of being and behaving. It has the power to totally blind us to 'unacceptable' qualities and characteristics about ourselves that are completely obvious to the eyes of others.

So "what you see may not be what I get" and in fact may be something I have a powerful need not to get, not to see. So I will fight to keep my 'blind spot' blind by invalidating your perception of it in one way or another. Most folks truly have no idea this is going on. Most of us can see other people's blind spots but we freak when our own is pointed out. And acceptable conversation, both socially and in the work place, does not include a discussion of each other's blind spots.

The problem is that any dynamic, meaningful, and creative conversation is going to regularly poke our blind spots, about ourselves, our world views, and about others. So the current norm is for our conversations to stay limited, cautious, and superficial (mutually avoiding our blind spots), or to become accusatory, defensive, and destructive (pointing fingers at the blind spots of others and disowning my own). The negative impact of this way of operating conversationally shows up in the limit it sets on the access to the collective intelligence, creativity, wisdom, and will we so desperately need for the complex problem solving required of us today.

We have reached a point in our collective evolution where we can no longer afford these kinds of limited or destructive conversations. Our dependency on each other in creating our future and that of our planet is making it compelling that we understand, and own, our egos, individually and collectively. We must decriminalize the possession of an ego. We need to investigate with genuine curiosity how our egos actually work and what their purpose is. We must learn not to deny their presence but how to prevent them from ruling our thinking and our behavior. Otherwise our egos will keep us blind and disconnected from each other and from the realities that are pressing for attention in our lives and around the globe.
This blog will be devoted to that investigation. Comments regarding your discoveries about your own ego, as well as what lies beyond it, are welcome.  Dr Lou