Consultation & Dialogues with the Analyst: Dear Dr. D.

This section of this rolling blog and web page is specifically designed to ask question of the analyst. Think of it as the old Dear Abby column that appeared in newspapers for decades.  Questions can be as personal or as general as you would like to make them.  The comment section of this blog page will serve as the template for on-going discussions as well as for specific question and answer between and among members of this site.

Please feel free to make any inquiries here.

4 responses to “Consultation & Dialogues with the Analyst: Dear Dr. D.

  1. charlie

    Dear DR. D, After reading and re reading your piece on ego vs self, it lead me with the conclution that first, either I’m the most nieve individual I know or ,my preferd scenerio, the most secure. I arrive at this conclution based on my lack of internal battles. But I I am left with this question.

    is the Ego a manufactured conceptual entity than we, as “self” create early inlife. And if so, then are we not capable of re-designing its infulence upon us.

    If,No. The Ego is not a manufactured entity, then It leads me to question the possibility that perhaps the Ego is in itself an inate self perpetuating conceptual entity, in and of itself, unique onto itself. and as a result becomes the perpetuator of our own internal conflicting dialoge which we can only chose to heed or dismiss for our own servival skills, learned or instinctual. And as such we religate the title insabordination to it. When perhaps, it is our own insabordination to the Ego’s demands that create intrnal confict.

    The trouble maker, charlie. my example directly relates to my resent blog comments. Ex: If I present myself as the obstinate demanding uncontrolable “EGO” will the reader as the “SELF'” respond to the challange or will the “self” chose to ignor the Ego’s demand for attention much like a parent choses to ignor a disruptive child.

    my conclution: Ego in it true state is probably a self perpetuating conceptual entity. it is simple inherent. It is not created by our design. This sence of ego is not to be confused with the sence of ego that we create and project onto the external world.

    Your thought’s welcome.

    • The Ego is a metaphor for the cluster of dendrites, synapses and neuronal activity that are operational during mentation. It is not so much a location as it is a cluster of operations. Like a bird who might or might not fly, it is born with the competence to fly. We are born with a linguistic capacity and the material that is stored in that linguistic capacity is the ego. The self is the wider context in which the ego is born. The self is the body/mind matrix that includes many other sorts of knowledge. The cells in the heart have a heart intelligence to them, the cells in your liver do “liver” things. The wider consciousness includes our ancestral and evolutionary knowledge. It does not speak in language, it whispers from the depth and it it is not listened to it can ramp-up its attempt to get the organism. It will go so far as to create pain to let you know something that it wants you to know.

      It is, as one might say, “a self perpetuating conceptual entity.” But it is the major factor in our thinking about who we are. Spiritual philosophers say that to understand the ego we simply think of the ego as that which we conceive when we call ourselves by our first name. Simply, My ego’s name is Al.

      Thank you for taking the time to ask a brilliant question.

  2. charlie

    Perhaps, like many lay people not immerced in the daily search for self and self understanding, I’ve simply held a long standing opinion that psychoanalysis or psychoanything is simply a redundency of symantics, a juggling act of concepts produced to try to explain our action and thought processes and convince us that there is some utopic place through some mystic conection to some universal cosmic center that will bring us to exactness with the universe. And if we can arrive at this uforic state of wonderment then, the song ‘Sister Morphine’, would finally hold no meaning. (Marrianne Faithful’s vertion is excellent)

    But, I can see now its “additive” quality. I will read your essays, as a casual observer from the sidelines, perhaps willing to conceed a fraction of maybe a little more willingness to allow myself to explore this area of study with a slightly more positive acceptance to the possiblity that perhaps I may have been too hasty to pre- judge.
    Thanks, charlie

    Don’t you just want to say, “Yo dude, don’t let me force you. Freaking neanthethal.”
    But I’m sure you’ve encounted skeptisysm, before
    Is there a spell check here somewhere? The only thing French Catholic nuns thought me was that a half day of french and then a half day of english diffenitlly screws up your sence of vowels and spelling. I’ve never recouperated.

    • Je suis Canadien et Francais …je connait bien les soeur do la Presentation de Marie…ill faux que vous excusie mon français …

      I have never recouperated either–so lets make a deal to accept each other’s limitations…..dr d

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s