Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="JayJay" data-source="post: 54685" data-attributes="member: 147">My impressions is that the &quot;I&quot; as a psychological and language construct doesn&#039;t really capture real experience by itself, and should be employed with care, as it is a source of suffering.As I have investigated my life experience, there are actions that are performed automatically. For example, sometimes driving the car or studying my favorite subjects happens without &quot;I&quot; performing the action consciously, the so called &quot;flow state&quot;. This I have wondered: How can I claim that &quot;I&quot; did something when it was in a flow state, if the action happened by itself through causes and conditions that allowed it to happen without some &quot;I&quot; separate from causality?Sure, it was me, or what you would call the body-mind that everyone conventionally agrees that it is me that performed the action, but &quot;I&quot; as a psychological construct actually did nothing, and this is the main point I want to drive forward:The thing is that it is really curious to claim that actions that happen at the unconscious level are ours, because even thought it was our own body-mind the one performing the action, it is a delusion to think that &quot;us&quot; as a psychological construct performed it. It happened by itself through causes and conditions. One could take the analysis even forward and start analyzing the middle line between where this distinction drops may fade.The &quot;I&quot; as a psychological construct, the bringer or taker of suffering, much care to use one has to employ.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="JayJay, post: 54685, member: 147"] My impressions is that the "I" as a psychological and language construct doesn't really capture real experience by itself, and should be employed with care, as it is a source of suffering. As I have investigated my life experience, there are actions that are performed automatically. For example, sometimes driving the car or studying my favorite subjects happens without "I" performing the action consciously, the so called "flow state". This I have wondered: How can I claim that "I" did something when it was in a flow state, if the action happened by itself through causes and conditions that allowed it to happen without some "I" separate from causality? Sure, it was me, or what you would call the body-mind that everyone conventionally agrees that it is me that performed the action, but "I" as a psychological construct actually did nothing, and this is the main point I want to drive forward: The thing is that it is really curious to claim that actions that happen at the unconscious level are ours, because even thought it was our own body-mind the one performing the action, it is a delusion to think that "us" as a psychological construct performed it. It happened by itself through causes and conditions. One could take the analysis even forward and start analyzing the middle line between where this distinction drops may fade. The "I" as a psychological construct, the bringer or taker of suffering, much care to use one has to employ. [/QUOTE]

Name

Verification

Layout Options

Color Schemes

Reply to thread