Is there a connection between the ego and emotions and if so what is it? Or what

1. 77

   Mr. Happyposted 13 years ago

   Is there a connection between the ego and emotions and if so what is it? Or what does it mean?

   replyreport
2. 73

   shampa sadhyaposted 13 years ago

   I feel ego has no connection with emotion. Ego is a self inflicted false attitude while emotion is a heartfelt feeling.

   replyreport
3. 77

   Ruchiraposted 13 years ago

   I feel ego is blind and thus, blocks out all emotions. That makes us become all nasty and indifferent towards people.

   replyreport
4. 61

   Notasheepposted 13 years ago

   I believe there is a connection, someone's ego is their self-esteem and, self-confidence. It is how the person perceives the world, themselves, and others. In my opinion, our ego is in control of our emotions. How we view our enviroment, how we interact socially, and how we view ourselves all contributes to our emotions and how we feel. This means if we have a balanced ego, and view ourselves and the world around us in a posative way, we will put out posative emotions! Love, happiness, and kindness.

   replyreport
5. 0

   Phoebe Pikeposted 13 years ago

   The ego has a direct connection to emotions. While the ego is not "good" or "bad" it is how we perceive things in relation to us. If we are hurt by the words of another, it is because it hurts US. It has little to do with the other person, but because we felt hurt, or we felt like they should not behave or speak in such a manner, we felt pain.

   replyreport
6. 62

   cobrienposted 13 years ago

   I think all our emotions start with ego. Even compassion for others starts by how we would feel in their shoes.

   replyreport
7. 68

   anupmaposted 13 years ago

   Although both are different aspects of mind and heart. But I observe that a egoistic hurts easily, because of his/her rigidness. To some extent ego is good. Excess of self-confidence turn into ego. 'I am good-looking' is an example of self-confidence, but 'I am the most beautiful in the world' is an ego problem.
   Egoistic always want praise, if they do not get, their emotions hurt. However, they do not understand others' emotions. I mean they more hurt others. So there can be also a relation between one's ego and others' emotions.

   replyreport
8. 70

   Tusitala Tomposted 13 years ago

   If you can liken the ego to the 'self image' you'll gain some idea as to why anything that adds or detracts from who we IMAGINE ourselves to be (our self image or ego) affects our emotions.   
   
   Of course, the emphasis here is on self image.  We can have a healthy self-image, one that comes closest to our own ideal of how we feel we should be, or its opposite, one where we fear that everything and everyone is conspiring to bring us undone.    Ego lives in fear of being found out.   It is like the proverbial house build on sand.   It has no foundation except as a conglommerate of crystalized idea in our mind.
   
   The Real Self is that which can stand back and witness and perhaps even laugh at the foibles ego involves itself in.   For, as it has been said to me, the real (little) self which is of this world is as a little finger placed into the murky stream of man-made thought.   But that finger is an extension of something very, very grand - our own Higher Self.

   replyreport
9. 60

   wingedcentaurposted 13 years ago

   Hi, Mr. Happy!
   
   I believe ego is just a Freudian psychological category of Being. My understanding -- and I could be wrong about this --- is that ego is one of your modes of being.
   
   Under the classic Freudian set up, I believe, there was the Id, your mode of being that simply wants what it wants, it is sheer WANT; the superego is you in your "ethical" or "moral" one (provided life circumstances has given you one, perhaps) -- it is the voice of NO that you have accumulated over your life experience under the supervision of adult authority figures; those two forms, I think, are your moderators; and the ego, I believe, is your experiential life self, you in action in the world, that is modified by the other two phases.
   
   If you think about it, the connection between ego and emotons might be tricky. If you are angry, where does that come from? Could it come from the thwarted Id that does not get what it want? Or does it come from the superego, your ethical or moral self that judges right from wrong -- by the way 'right' and 'wrong' is not going to be the same for everybody.
   
   Or, I suppose the anger could come from the ego, you-in-action-in-the-world might feel wronged (cut off by another driver on the highway or something). This anger would not come from the Id, which is a kind of primordial force of WANTING within us, according to the way I understand the classic Freudian set up.
   
   The anger would not come from the superego, you probably can't process being cut off on the highway (as quickly as these things happen) in some ethical or moral way.
   
   I guess my answer to your question, then, is that it depends on how you understand the ego. Second, if we use the classic Freudian set up, it depends on what the nature of the emotion is -- depending on the situation triggering the emotion, I suppose we might file it under 'ego,' 'superego,' or 'Id.'

   replyreport
10. 59

    bright_sorcererposted 13 years ago

    It was the Geek philosopher Epictetus who observed that, "Man is not distressed by events... but rather by his interpretation of them." Imagine being left-handed and visiting the middle east. Every attempt at trying to shake hands with the natives with your left hand is accompanied by anger and indignation, which you don't understand. You might assume, based on your knowledge or understanding, that they didn't like you or perhaps did not want to acknowledge friendship by shaking you hand. What you find out later is that the left hand, in many middle east countries, is used for wiping ones butt after defecating. To them, it is an insult to try to shake with the left hand but to you, it was merely an attempt at being friendly.
    
    The connection you refer to is very similar to this observation by Epictetus. We all have unique experiences that define us as individuals, giving us very specific perspectives that are based on our present level of knowledge, insight or awareness. The ego tells us that we have every right to be angry with the Arabs who wouldn't shake our hand. Negative emotions attached to a specific issue or event are almost always the result of a conflict within us... courtesy of our ego. We are most deeply affected, if we choose to be, when that involves our religious or spiritual belief. We believe that our version is the "correct" one, because it works for us. When people do not respond as we expect them to, our ego works overtime and we can work ourselves into a lather.

    replyreport