4 ms·

If you can provide examples of durable productivity in the face of a deconstructed ego that would help. I've only been able to find examples to the contrary, su

If you can provide examples of durable productivity in the face of a deconstructed ego that would help. I've only been able to find examples to the contrary, such as some of the most ego-less people also being the least productive (in the traditional sense of the word implying labor and output), i.e. monks. To be clear I'm not making any moral or value claims here, rather simply observing the correlation between ego and productivity/commitment.

nils-m-holm 5y ago
Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj received people every day for decades and answered their questions. He made it very clear that the answering just happens without anybody doing it, and he continued doing it even in the presence of the pain of terminal cancer, weeks before his death. You could call that commitment, but Maharaj said otherwise. Source: Jean Dunn (Ed); "Consciousness and the Absolute"; Acorn Press, 1994 Then there are lots of books written by people whose "ego died" (although what does not exist cannot die), and from own experience I can tell you that writing a book requires a lot of momentum--or what you call commitment.
- gbuk2013 5y ago
  Wrong kind of productivity for the capitalist environment though. Once the ego is out of the picture it is easy to enjoy “having enough” and choosing more worthwhile pursuits than the rat race to make someone yet more wealthy.
e1g 5y ago
It depends on how broadly you define 'ego', as people committed to a cause larger than themselves are often extraordinarily dedicated & productive. Priests, teachers, explorers, scientists (driven to find a cure for a genetic disease), etc. Their motivation might have a small component of individual ego ("I found it!"), but mostly it's egoless service to a significant problem they observe in their society/world.
- gmaster1440 5y ago
  That's a fair response, and we may disagree here somewhat, but to me there's a subtle redefinition of "ego" going on when we talk about traditionally "selfless" acts or charity or, as you put it, commitments to causes larger than individuals. To me, certain egos are fed by selfless works and dedications to grand causes. This is not to say that's a bad thing or that we don't want to create incentives to have more of this, but I do think it circles back to the original problem of the ego. It's just that certain people's egos are more effectively fed when not focusing just on themselves.
jfengel 5y ago
The ego-less people tend not to spend a lot of time telling their stories. So such projects tend to be known by the result. Apollo 11 was one particularly prominent example of lots of people putting their egos aside for the common goal. There is perhaps always an ego at the top, at least when the project itself is ego driven like Apollo. We only know the stories that somebody told.

nils-m-holm 5y ago

Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj received people every day for decades and answered their questions. He made it very clear that the answering just happens without anybody doing it, and he continued doing it even in the presence of the pain of terminal cancer, weeks before his death. You could call that commitment, but Maharaj said otherwise. Source: Jean Dunn (Ed); "Consciousness and the Absolute"; Acorn Press, 1994 Then there are lots of books written by people whose "ego died" (although what does not exist cannot die), and from own experience I can tell you that writing a book requires a lot of momentum--or what you call commitment.

gbuk2013 5y ago
Wrong kind of productivity for the capitalist environment though. Once the ego is out of the picture it is easy to enjoy “having enough” and choosing more worthwhile pursuits than the rat race to make someone yet more wealthy.

e1g 5y ago

It depends on how broadly you define 'ego', as people committed to a cause larger than themselves are often extraordinarily dedicated & productive. Priests, teachers, explorers, scientists (driven to find a cure for a genetic disease), etc. Their motivation might have a small component of individual ego ("I found it!"), but mostly it's egoless service to a significant problem they observe in their society/world.

gmaster1440 5y ago
That's a fair response, and we may disagree here somewhat, but to me there's a subtle redefinition of "ego" going on when we talk about traditionally "selfless" acts or charity or, as you put it, commitments to causes larger than individuals. To me, certain egos are fed by selfless works and dedications to grand causes. This is not to say that's a bad thing or that we don't want to create incentives to have more of this, but I do think it circles back to the original problem of the ego. It's just that certain people's egos are more effectively fed when not focusing just on themselves.

jfengel 5y ago

The ego-less people tend not to spend a lot of time telling their stories. So such projects tend to be known by the result. Apollo 11 was one particularly prominent example of lots of people putting their egos aside for the common goal. There is perhaps always an ego at the top, at least when the project itself is ego driven like Apollo. We only know the stories that somebody told.