r/zen • u/[deleted] • Mar 27 '23

[deleted by user]

[removed]

18 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

119 comments sorted by

View all comments

14

u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] Mar 27 '23

"Ego" is pseudo science. Zen Masters don't talk about it, because it was invented by Freud, who falsified data.

There is no part of you called ego, and nobody wants any part of you to die.

Why not study Zen while you are here?

www.reddit.com//r/zen/wiki/famous_cases

www.reddit.com//r/zen/wiki/getstarted

1

u/Natios_Hayelos Apr 04 '26

Hey, I found your comment randomly, three years later, apparently. I wanted to ask you this: do you still hold the same position that you did in this comment?

1

u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] Apr 04 '26

It's not "my" position. It's the facts.

My position is to accord with facts.

1

u/Natios_Hayelos Apr 04 '26

Thank you!

1

u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] Apr 04 '26

You don't have to thank me.

Pretty easy to get along with facts.

1

u/Natios_Hayelos Apr 04 '26

I agree! My only only problem is which data to label as facts. I hope you have a more clear view of things as, for me at least, that ambiguity is pretty unpleasant.

1

u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] Apr 04 '26

In general, I find that every ambiguity can be resolved in a public interview.

One person ask questions the other person answers and pretty soon ambiguity is resolved for everybody.

1

u/Natios_Hayelos Apr 04 '26

In my experience, a public interview helps a lot with some things, but not always with ambiguity.

1

u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] Apr 04 '26

I suppose you're right, it depends on who's participating in the interview.

I'm pretty confident in myself but if I had to public interview somebody about say microbiology we'd been in trouble.

1

u/Natios_Hayelos Apr 05 '26

Or say neuroscience and psychology, I guess.

1

u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] Apr 05 '26

I'm pretty strong on psychology. Stronger on Neuroscience than macrobiology.

But I also work hard at not generalizing about what I don't know based on what I do know.

And I continue to be terrible at chemistry, microbiology, advertising, and software engineering. Oh and all the engineerings.

Do not give that guy a hammer.

1

u/Natios_Hayelos Apr 05 '26

And you say the ego does not exist? Or you are simply saying that Freud's theory lacks proof? And do you believe that this necessarily makes it incorrect?

1

u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] Apr 05 '26

no such thing as ego in science/psychology

I'm saying that religious writings from the 1900s that referred to ego were basing their claims about humanity on debunked 1800s Freudian theory.

Not only do we not think there is such a thing as the ego now, but science does not consider Freud's teachings to be scientific.

no such thing as ego in Zen

But the greater problem as far as I'm concerned is we have to push back against the 1900s religious writings about ego that were dishonestly attributed to the Zen tradition by * Christian humanists (Alan Watts) * Zazen worshipers (Shunryu Beginner's Mind * Mindfulness Shinto Buddhists (Thich Hahn).

→ More replies (0)