How does an atheist define the ego?

Christian said:
I think it is. I think it used to describe that "entity" associated with worth. I mentioned the bruised ego, others the big ego. I think it is used much more by theists because it has the same quality as soul (in the same category).
Click to expand...

You think that, because you've witnessed it, or have some sort of study or poll that indicates this?
Or is it just...something you think?

I spent my first 30 years of life as a theist, and I never heard such. I surely never once have heard anyone, anywhere, at any time utter the words, "Man that Brother Thompson sure has a big soul," in the same sense as "big ego."

I'd need to see evidence that theists tend to use the term or concept of ego in the same sense as soul. It is not at all my experience.
 
Side Comment

Wow, things have changed around here. Back in the days, there was no moderation of posts. Now, there is effective moderation. Very interesting.
 
slingblade said:
You think that, because you've witnessed it, or have some sort of study or poll that indicates this?
Or is it just...something you think?

I spent my first 30 years of life as a theist, and I never heard such. I surely never once have heard anyone, anywhere, at any time utter the words, "Man that Brother Thompson sure has a big soul," in the same sense as "big ego."

I'd need to see evidence that theists tend to use the term or concept of ego in the same sense as soul. It is not at all my experience.
Click to expand...

http://www.andrewcohen.org/teachings/ego.asp

http://www.oprah.com/community/thread/22750

I think it is a big thing now. There is this trend now about Eastern teachings that mix the Buddhist concepts with Western ones.

Not great evidence, but I decided to infer from the trend.
 
Thank you.

Wow, it sounds like a few people are trying very hard to pump even more woo into religion, and I can't say I'd have believed that was even possible.


Sickening, as well. I feel like I need to wash my eyes...
 
They don't look like very mainstream people to me: are they very well known in America?
 
Huh. It appears that Mr. Tolle lives in the same town as I do, but I've never heard of him. Of course, I don't spend much time in the self-help section of book stores, and I stopped watching Oprah ages ago when she went all woo with guests like Deepak Chopra and the ladies of The Secret. It sounds like he's more of the same, but with hazier credentials:
Mr. Tolle, 60, is the German-born spiritual speaker and author of “The Power of Now.” With a seemingly limitless pool of middle-class discontent to tap into — and a major push from Ms. Winfrey — he has become the most popular spiritual author in the nation. His books hold the top two spots on the New York Times best-seller list for paperback advice books.
Click to expand...
For all his fame, many details of Mr. Tolle’s personal history are murky. A biography provided by his American paperback publisher, Plume, offered few hints beyond his educational background, including a stint at Cambridge and his current hometown, Vancouver, British Columbia, where he lives with his business partner and girlfriend, Kim Eng. A spokesman for the university confirmed Mr. Tolle began work on a doctorate degree there in 1977, but did not finish.
Mr. Tolle’s own representatives had fewer specifics. “We don’t have a lot of knowledge about Eckhart Tolle as a person,” said a woman who answered the phone last week at the Vancouver office of Eckhart Teachings, and who asked not to be identified. “And I’m the only one here.”
Click to expand...
Is he popular among mainstream Christian theists, or is he only popular among the new age spirituality crowd?
 
SezMe said:
:bwall

Sorely needed in this thread, that's for sure.
Click to expand...
Thank you. I shall make a note of that for future reference.
Geezer said:
I think you are missing the point, Ladewig and others are trying to show you that your reasoning is similar to the following conversation.

Man1:"Have you been to New York?"
Man2:"No"
Man1:"Oh, do you know my sister then? She hasn't been to New York either."
Click to expand...
This. Oh so very much, this.
 
I'm a Christian and I have no concept of ego that depends on my Christianity, as far as I can tell. I don't find the concept useful. The first thing that occurs to me on hearing the term is 'outdated Freudian nonsense'. I agree with whoever posted above that consciousness and sense of self are emergent properties of the physical brain.

I don't have the arrogance to assume that all atheists, who are an extremely diverse bunch, must all be sharing some concept, and I can see that commonality and they can't. It really isn't the case that atheism is caused by some form of thought defect (which is what I assume you're getting at underneath all that).

Oh, and I've never heard of Tolle, sorry. Perhaps it's because I'm British?
 
Sun Countess said:
Huh. It appears that Mr. Tolle lives in the same town as I do, but I've never heard of him. Of course, I don't spend much time in the self-help section of book stores, and I stopped watching Oprah ages ago when she went all woo with guests like Deepak Chopra and the ladies of The Secret. It sounds like he's more of the same, but with hazier credentials:
Click to expand...

Agree. I stopped watching her long before I'd encountered skeptical, critical thinking, when some new-age guru she had on there went so far as to opine that a toddler who gets raped somehow brings it on herself, as we only get that for which we beseech the universe, or some effed up crap like that. It sickened me almost literally, and I have never listened to that windbagged woman again.


Is he popular among mainstream Christian theists, or is he only popular among the new age spirituality crowd?
Click to expand...

I can't say I'm active in such circles, nor that I have been for a while, but this is all new new-age bunk to me.
 
In my view, the question that this thread is based on is a strawman that can be boiled down to the question "how does an atheist define the ghost in the machine"

Therefore by definition the question is moot.
 
It seems that you are contending that atheists have the same concept of 'ego' as a small, self-selecting group of people who have read books by a virtually unknown author (unknown worldwide), or watched him being interviewed.
 
Christian said:
I think this person has been very influential.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/fashion/23tolle.html?_r=1&ref=eckhart_tolle
Click to expand...

I guess that explains why I never heard of this character. I don't read the Fashion and Style section of the NYT. Or watch Oprah.

So this is what this whole thing is about. Another Werner Erhart type has emerged from the desert to spread enlightenment to the gullible. The word "ego" apparently is used and Christian wants to know if atheists use it differently.

Is that it?
 
Christian said:
I think it is. I think it used to describe that "entity" associated with worth. I mentioned the bruised ego, others the big ego. I think it is used much more by theists because it has the same quality as soul (in the same category).
Click to expand...

I don't think that's true at all. Consider someone who is severely brain damaged, such that they are barely conscious and have no sense of self, no ego. Would many religious people argue that such a person has no soul? I doubt it. Would many people, religious or not, argue that such a person does not have worth, because they have no ego? No, they would not.
 
That reminds me of the Terri Schiavo fiasco, when a woman from the keep-her-alive crowd argued "but there's a soul in there!"

I wished that I had been there when she said it because I would have yelled "then why keep it trapped?"
 
How do McDonalds employees define ego?

Other than "that thing you have to do without when you start working here."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom