What results in the personality?

Hi everyone!
While I was replying a comment on the forum, a sudden question sprang to my mind: What creates our personality?

To be more exact, where does our personality originate? Is our personality merely an expression of our essence, which is our being, or is it a derivative of our ego mind, which is our being that has the negative emotions? I'm not saying that there is an exact definition of our personality, because the ego mind can also be a result of our personality!

How is it that our ego mind, essence, and personality can all be related?

Links:
http://psychologyforum.us/general-psychology-forum/what-results-in-the-personality/new/#new

New Link:
http://onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=13883#13883

http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/showthread.php?p=389846#post389846

where does our personality originate? Is our personality merely an expression of our essence, which is our being, or is it a derivative of our ego mind, which is our being that has the negative emotions? I'm not saying that there is an exact definition of our personality, because the ego mind can also be a result of our personality!

Psychologically speaking, our personalities are a result of our nature (genetic predispositions), our upbringing(nourishment), environment, and other influential factors. However, I don't think you mean to focus on answering your question from a scientific perspective. So in terms of essence, I think our personalities definitely to some extent reflect our essences. However, I feel that our ego minds tend to overpower the essence. You said that the ego mind is "our being that has the negative emotions." I have to disagree with that we clearly need our egos to be able to interact with others on a day to day basis. From previous forum discussions, I've reached the conclusion that the key is balance. A healthy balance between the control of the egomind and the expression of the essence are generally the ingredients to the happy harmonious person.
Additionally, it is an observed phenomenon that people often act differently in different situations or when interacting with different people. I have been wondering, what calls for these personality shifts? Perhaps this is less relevant, but what about people with dissociative identity disorders, where two distint identities or personalities exist in a single person? Are they just plagued with ego-mind overdrive, are their essences in any way different from "normal," or is there something more to it?

You have asked a really great question, Ivy

In my opinion, personality may be the result, or combination, of many elements of the body, including those you mentioned – the essence (the being) and the ego-mind. The negativity and seemingly rigid spontaneity that the ego-mind spurts are continuous cycles of the desire to reform our body and, by wishing to do so, to manipulate our beings and inner selves. The being becomes a protective shell that retains whatever is left of our true individuality – or, more appropriately, the inner-most core of our individuality that represents the entire essence. The ego-mind swiftly neglects this resistance of the being, and continues its daily suppression of the being. The essence does not vanish; it is still there – just as the ego-mind remains, intact and well. These two elements of our body are in reality both intact and well: they are of vastly different natures and treat the individual in different manners, yes, but they are both forever present.

If “personality” were ever a member of the body, meaning that it too would have the status as an element in the body, then it would be classified. I don’t think that personality should be classified as anything, however. It is likely that personality is the combination of all the elements, as I’ve mentioned. And perhaps it is not. Perhaps it is not a single element in the body, or a mere combination of the being and the ego-mind – and maybe it is the result of the influences that the essence and mind have (or force) upon each other. After all, combining and “cooperating” do not necessarily mean communicating (which leads to influencing and affecting). The ego-mind might inflict, utilizing its powerful strength, much pain and distress upon the essence, a creation purely of evil and corruption; the essence may strive to bring about serenity and peace (sometimes without success) throughout the body. The two elements evidently do influence each through this manner of “interaction.” But does this interaction occur only within the individual, or does it extend beyond our own physical domains (bodies)? Is personality innate, something unconstructed by the ego-mind (but able to be influenced by it), or is it built by the influences we receive from our surroundings, the people around us, and our thoughts and perceptions?

Hey Ivy!

I really like your question because it really makes me think a lot and synthesize everything we've learned to try to come up with an answer for it. To answer your question, I think that our personalities are a mixture of componenets of the ego-mind and the Universal Being (or essence). Essence is the infinite potential and possibilities that we all possess, but because of our ego-minds, we tend to disbelieve that fact of infinite potential and interconnectivity, and thus, we're not all supermen capable of seemingly miraculous acts.

How does that have to do with your question? Well, as said in Phil's thread about music and emotions, our likes and dislikes (which are parts of what make up the personality) seem to be related to what we are familiar with and what we are not familiar with. Thus, because the ego-mind sees us all as individual entities (no interconnectivity),we cannot realize the infinite potential and connection that we have with everything inside of us, and because of that, we each have different talents and traits (the potential from the vast sea of infinity that we have recognized and connected to). Due to the different potential that we have mastered more in degree than others, we start to develop a certain personality.

What I mean is that if everyone were able to feel essence of a regular basis, then we would all know that everything is interconnected, and thus, we would be ONE on the nonlocal domain where there are no different personalities. But on the physical domain, where the ego-mind is still much at work, the mindset of 'we are all separate and different' causes our varying personalities to be conspicuous. Different personalities, however, is not necessarily a bad thing because with different talents and potential, when human beings come together as a WHOLE (puzzle pieces that make ONE big picture in the end), we will be able to withstand the different challenges life has for our species.

However, on the nonlocal domain where everything is possible and everyone can access such an infinite potential, there is no need for different personalities or different strengths. If we could simply exist solely on the nonlocal domain or believe in the law of attraction, then there would be no need for differences because we all have what other people have and we all can do what other people can do, right?

Yet, since we still pretty much exist on the physical domain in our flesh and bone bodies, we need different personalities to help us deal with changing life conditions. And thus, different personalities develop because of different responses to environmental stimuli. The Supreme Being that makes varying frequencies of energy waves and particle-information when creating organisms and objects which accordin to the law of attraction, will come into play when determining what kind of people we are. If our energy waves are more sociable, then we will tend to be more sociable and be more open as we grow up. Therefore, in terms of biology, the Supreme Being is the DNA sequence that is full of infinite varieties and possibilites, and the mRNA that gets made into proteins is the varying frequencies that ultimately become our physical bodies and personality. Thus, the expressed genes or our personality is dependent on the work of the Supreme Being and the ego-mind's belief of each person being separate from everyone else. D

Hope that made sense!

Ivy,
great job on the posting. This is a good discussion, so far, you all! I look forward to watching where it leads to. Good job on the posts, really, you're all offering quality observations and comments; quite well informed.

i'm impressed, and interested.

ok, cheers!
Ms. kay

What I mean is that if everyone were able to feel essence of a regular basis, then we would all know that everything is interconnected, and thus, we would be ONE on the nonlocal domain where there are no different personalities.

hmm.... Not sure if I agree or not, I'm a little iffy on that. Like in Siddhartha, he finds that he must search for truth himself and not follow others in order to find enlightenment. Basically, the processes of reaching the nonlocal consciousness are different for each entity, but the destination is ultimately the same. But exactly what is the personality here? If it is the process, then we are of course different from one another, even when connected to essence. If it is the destination that is our personality... Wait, the destination cannot have personality. A personality is found in one person, and we cannot say "this is the personality of the nonlocal consciousness."

So yeah, I agree. The process of reaching the essence is what contains our personality. I like your description of the Supreme Being as DNA with unlimited possiblities, and it seems true. But is the Supreme Being moved by our societal conditioning and experiences? Or are we given our personality at the beginning and we each hold it individually and mold it like Play-Doh, with no higher power assisting us during the course of life? People have gone through complete personality changes after a near-death experience or something with similar gravity. Is the law of attraction exercised by the Supreme Being, or by ourselves? Must we have that mediator in order to change our personalities, or do we have direct control? Not sure if that makes sense.

and to steph:
The dual personality thing--yeah I'd say that if someone has two conflicting personalities, it must be the overclouding of the ego mind. There would be an unbalanced amount of mind and soul. I guess this is what people mean when they say we put on a mask before we go outside. We have that solid wall between ourselves and society--the wall being the mask that we molded from social pressure and conditioning, and it could be serving to protect our real personalities from the unaccepting world. Would that completely egomind based "personality" be considered a true personality?

And then there are people that are less aware of their two-faced-ness--like people that are bipolar (SILVER! ). I guess that happens when people feel emotions too strongly, and although they may have a single unique personality, the seesaw teeters so fast and hard that it throws that single personality into turmoil, where it appears to turn into two. Usually the more negative side, when people are extremely mad or sad, are affected by the ego mind and all the stuff that is seriously unneeded.

I might've gone off topic a bit, sorry

Heyy ivy! Intersting question you have there...ive been wondering about it since i saw it in biology class =P

Anyway…where does our personality originate? Right off the top of my head, I would answer essence. Because after all, we are all made of the same substance and therefore our identities may be expressed through different frequencies and wave lengths. But, the ego mind does serve its purposes too, right? Therefore, the ego mind does take a share in our personality (from my perspective.) Each individual’s dependence on the ego mind is different, and each individual’s emotions are different. From what I have said, it kind of sounds like our personality is a mixture and the interaction of both our Being – essence – and our ego mind. The Being balances out the ego mind when it is about to go into overdrive and when we are about to lose control over it. Yet, the ego mind may also balance out the Being with its classifying character along with other beneficial characters.

The personality that one person presents to the society may not be the personality that one holds at home or with close friends. In society, the ego mind may dominate and cover up one’s real identity with a mask. It may do so to allow one to blend in more with the society and to fit and interact with the social conditioning. The ego mind may hold a greater percent of influence in such conditions. But when one is with close friends – where hypocrisy is not created – it is the Being that is present, which allows the intermingling of energies and the innerrelation that forms a bond between them. This kind of relates back to Fermin’s moderation topic, about how close friends or people who meditate – when they allow for their Beings to dominate and allow for a channel of intuition to open, they will be able to “feel” one another.

Okay, before I start with my overly complex comments, I want to find some solid grounds that everyone agrees with. So, technically, everyone is all for the personality is a combination of both the essence and the ego mind, right?

Now here’s the overly complex comments and inquiries of mine

Fermin Liu wrote:Thus, because the ego-mind sees us all as individual entities (no interconnectivity),we cannot realize the infinite potential and connection that we have with everything inside of us, and because of that, we each have different talents and traits (the potential from the vast sea of infinity that we have recognized and connected to). Due to the different potential that we have mastered more in degree than others, we start to develop a certain personality.

I think what has been said is important in the sense that we do have the potential to develop our own personality. However, our personality and our ego mind can both affect each other. There is a probability that the ego mind is a reflection upon our personality, because our personality has some qualities of the ego mind – the determination, competitiveness, irritability, and other characteristics of us. So, drawing the lines that our ego mind and our personality has an order of coming first and second is rather too black-and-white. I’ve been struggling with this question ever since I saw Fermin’s reply, so give me feedbacks!!

proey wrote:The process of reaching the essence is what contains our personality. I like your description of the Supreme Being as DNA with unlimited possibilities, and it seems true. But is the Supreme Being moved by our societal conditioning and experiences? Or are we given our personalities at the beginning and we each hold it individually and mold it like Play-Doh, with no higher power assisting us during the course of life?

Proey has both made a point that I’m rather interested in. The Supreme Being as DNA and the societal conditioning and experiences are just like what Steph has said at the very beginning – Nature versus Nurture. Nurturing definitely has a say on who we are today, so our surrounding, environment, and the society are all conditioning us..Does that mean our knowledge is also a mediator, causing us to turn out to who we are today?

Angela wrote:Yet, the ego mind may also balance out the Being with its classifying character along with other beneficial characters.

As Angela has pointed out, the ego mind may balance out the Being with its classifying characters. However, if we strip away the influences of the ego mind, and see our personality as how it originally is when it first emerges from the essence, what will it be? Does that mean that all of us are essentially the same in terms of nature because of the Universal Being?

LOL ivy. Well, to Angela (and Fermin)--yepppp, I agree. The ego mind brings in the society, emotions, different qualities that are not developed through intuitive connection. But what determines what that personality becomes, if we consider that the "essence" part of our personality is essentially the same? Siblings that are brought up in the same circumstances may have completely different personalities--why is that? Hmm, maybe this is where the higher power comes in with the choosing of DNA. Then... what would the classification of the Supreme Being's choice be? Is that part of the essence or part of the mind?

Okay, now I'm starting to confuse myself :/ So, there's the essence. And then there's the ego mind. We have concluded that the essence is the same. And I believe that in previous discussions we have concluded that the ego mind is the same in everyone as well? Does that mean that the only difference between our personalities lies between the two, where local consciousness comes in? And also in our experiences? I think I just repeated myself ...

Hi Ivy,

After reading the posts and your questions, i took some time to think about it, and i did not come up with a definite and defined answer. However, another question poped into my mind, that is, why is it so important to label all of these parts. If as we have discussed that personallity is a combination of nature, nurture, essence, and the ego-mind, and we also know that it is a combination of everything together, then why try to set "personality" under a title or a category?

However, regarding to your question about the uniqueness of individuals at the essential-being level, i think that to a certain extent, we are all the very same in essence. I think this is the case because before molecular chemistry, we were defined to be all made of different elements, however, humans soon found out that all matters are made of the same elements in different amounts. Later on, humans again found out through quantum physics the non-local connection, even though we have not yet determined that everyone is same at the very essence, I think that the science discoveries are pointing towards this direction.

But, again, i would say that it is impossible to live a life of pure essence and nature, therefore, as humans, we are still different individuals of different vibe and energy as well as different personalities.

Does that mean that the only difference between our personalities lies between the two, where local consciousness comes in? And also in our experiences?

Proey, do you mean like the difference only appears at the physical level and maybe the quantum level of energy and information, but on the nonlocal level, there are no difference between our personalities because the nonlocal domain is a level of pure potential and essence? If so, then yes, I agree with you. I think like many others have pointed out before me, we are all made out of the same essence, just varying frequencies of energy that give us the certain personaility and form that we have.

Essentially, everything comes from the Universal Being of infinite potential, and it is from the infinite variations of energy waves and frequencies that these endless possibilities arise and make everything in the world the unique individual and object that they are. Every experience is then also made up of its own energy frequencies that may come together to shape the energy frequencies that form an individual if the experience has that strong of an impact on the person's life. Similar energy frequencies will tend to add onto similar energy frequencies and thus, one's personality can kind of be defined at a very young age and it does not change except becomes more evident? I'm not sure if that is true or not but it seems logical unless the experience that involves a totally differnt set of energy waves anf frequencies had such an impact on someone that it transformed their energy frequency to one more similar to that of the experience's. (Thus, this would follow the contagious emotions example of tension in the room that so many have talked about before.)

Does that mean our knowledge is also a mediator, causing us to turn out to who we are today?

Yes, I think that knowledge and everything of the world are factors that make us who we are personality wise. This is so because it is through knowledge and information about the past or sciences that we begin to like or dislike certain cultures or we begin to see the world in equations or theories. Thus, knowledge does have a way of changing on'e perspective and thus, personality since really, all that knowledge is is a collection of agreed-upon facts that are proven by the same set of scientific and mathematical laws that have not been able to capture and appraoch essence. So, in a way, knowledge is also another social conditioning; through history lessons or science lessons, we are persuaded to favor one country over the other, or claim the superiority of homo sapiens over toehr species of animals.

Therefore, everything whether it is energy or physical can have an effect on our personalities. I'm sure that the ego-mind is different in degree of paranoia for everyone--depending on whether or not the individual has been too conditioned by society and whether or not he/she has been successful in quieting down the ego-mind. And thus, the ego-mind, when dominant in an individual, will affect the individual's personality, making him/her frequently nervous, stressed, really sensitive, etc.

The ego mind brings in the society, emotions, different qualities that are not developed through intuitive connection. But what determines what that personality becomes, if we consider that the "essence" part of our personality is essentially the same? Siblings that are brought up in the same circumstances may have completely different personalities--why is that? Hmm, maybe this is where the higher power comes in with the choosing of DNA. Then... what would the classification of the Supreme Being's choice be? Is that part of the essence or part of the mind?

In response to Proey and therefore everyone who is involved with this big train of thought:
First I want to present an example of siblings brought up in the same circumstances and having different personality traits in my own family. My brother and I have essentially been raised in the same house, under the same parents and similar environmental pressures, yet we are quite different. For one, he is more gifted in public speaking, persuasion and when it comes down to it, arguing. So far all the debate practive I've had has not gotten me anywhere near what seems to come naturally to him. So this is indicative of some intrinsic, intuitive force then, yeah? Without the ego-mind, all we're left with is the intuitive essence, or the universal being.

97% of our DNA is shared, meaning completely identical, with all humans on the face of the earth. Because this was a practice AP bio essay question. This means that the 3% of our genetic identity actually differs from everyone else, and it is evident that this 3% has enabled a hell of a lot of variance among human beings. So is it the work of the Supreme being that establishes the specifics of the 3%? If we are all particles of this being, shouldn't it be aiming to make the best of us collectively? Perhaps this is the root of human diversity. With diversity comes the chance for group development and transcending though natural selection. Maybe this is why our personalities are so different--for the betterment of the human future. Hrm, though bad personalities aren't really eliminated from a population..or are they? Yeah wait I think they are because people with crap attitudes tend to be ostracised and their chances of mating or finding a spouse are decreased. But I digress. So our personalities vary across the spectrum because the Supreme Being "chooses" so. Does that count as a classification of the Supreme Being's choice? Then maybe the ego mind's subserquent interactions and environmental influences just serve as even more agents of variance. In regards to whether the supreme being's choice is of the mind or essence--can we really say one or the other? The supreme being is a collective energy, does it even have a "mind" or "essence"? I always thought it was just kind of present, like the all knowing observer of sorts.

The supreme being is a collective energy, does it even have a "mind" or "essence"? I always thought it was just kind of present, like the all knowing observer of sorts.

Yeah, that’s actually what I thought too. The Universal Being that resides in all of us and of which we are all a part of, is ordinarily considered by us to be merely a fraction of our deepest inner self. We do not know the exact “size” of the Supreme Being, this continuous flow of essence whose source is unknown – all we know is that it is forever present in its existence. But if it has the ability to choose, to instill in us the 3% of our genetic identities, then is it not being influenced in some way by its own surroundings and circumstances? Would its choices of placement then be related to the actions of its ego-mind, if it does indeed have one?

Since we know that the Supreme Being is the collective being, I’m starting to think that it sounds like “collective individuals” or just simply, “all of us merged/put together.” I’m not so certain about that, though; perhaps it is only one higher being, one enlightened force. If our personalities vary greatly because of the Supreme Being’s choices, are we not, in a strange way, choosing our own identities? Are we ourselves part of the choosing process, or is the higher, collective being determining our outcomes for us? Both ways seem like they spring from an innate source, one that is located deep within the individual. The Universal Being touches every one of our beings and thus communicates and connects with them; if the Universal Being is indeed collective humanity, our beings would also be the primary sources of the decision-making and choosing.

I’m going to start to change a little in my thoughts here – perhaps the “structuring” of our individual personalities is not a structuring at all; perhaps it is an evolution of processes in which our most “fundamental” personalities (the personalities that are structured and are part of the “already-decided” portion of our identities when we are born) change in response to outer influences, people, etc. Correct me if I’m wrong, AP Bio people, but the 97% sameness we have with everybody – is this exact sameness, or does variation exist there too? Is the structuring of genetic material that determines 97% of our identities and personalities absolutely identical in every person? If not, then we are not completely identical with all humans on the face of the earth (but I also think that I’m 97% wrong about this too, since I know little of DNA, etc.). SO. If our 3% personality is a “split” from the 97% personality, and also the portion that makes up the “me,” the individual, unique personality, would this not be caused more by the ego-mind than by the being, the element in the body that is innateness and originality?

SO. If our 3% personality is a “split” from the 97% personality, and also the portion that makes up the “me,” the individual, unique personality, would this not be caused more by the ego-mind than by the being, the element in the body that is innateness and originality?

I think that the 3% of each individual that is genetically and physical different from everyone else on the physical plane is partly influenced by the ego-mind. What I mean by this is simply that without the ego-mind thinking that we are separate beings and thus restricting us in our flesh-and-blood bodies, we would all be experiencing life on the essence level of energy and being, which would be seeing things clearly as all interconnected and equiped with infinte potential. Therefore, the ego-mind here serves as a function to give us each a unique personality rather than behaving like a monster.

Thus, with the Universal Being's infinite potential and possibilities (the endless options to choose from), the ego-mind and its disbelief in infinite potential limits living organisms to only expressing the few traits out of a boundless sea of potential that our energy and its different frequencies are the most attracted to. So, I think that as partners, the Universal Essence and the ego-mind perform certain functions of providing infinite talents and personalities and limiting ourselves to think that we only have one personality and a few talents, respectively, to craete what is known as one's 'personality'. Yet, interestingly enough, when we are either in the nonlocal domain or completely dominated by the ego-mind, human beings share the same 'personality'--in the nonlocal domain, we all have infinite potential, and when we see ourselves as the ego-mind, we all become easily scared, nervous, stressed out, and paranoid.

I'm very proud of the AP bio people, who try to incorporate biology into this topic

Fermin has an important point that our physical appearances also affect who we are, either we are more confident or more congenial. once in a while i feel that people are restricted by their appearances, so they cannot fully expand their potentials, which results in a repressed personality. Well, as Ms. Kay said, people often judge others simply by how they dress, so people can also judge the personalities by how they look.

@Josh
Well, i think that the personality itself is pretty interesting, so trying to classify it gives me satisfaction. But then again, it's not black-and-white, so all we can do is try to find out the influences that has been added on to make us who we are today. after all, the ego mind is an important variable to making us human.

Anyway, according what Steph has said, the 3% is implanted into the being, which will then result as siblings being raised in similar circumstances, but resulting in different personalities. Since all of the people on this thread has siblings, i think its evident that although raised in the exact same circumstance, the children will turn out to be rather different.

According to what has been said, the Supreme Being might have created all of use with the same essence, yet with the twist of the DNA, we result as different personality. However, what is the Supreme Being as most of you have said? It is a collective force of energy, but that is only on the basis of being on the nonlocal domain. When we are put in the ego mind, the result is the physical domain. Which is more affective on our personality though, the essence or the ego mind?


After reading what Angel has said, i had a sudden thought. Can our personality be the direct reflects of the Supreme Being's own characteristics? Which means the Supreme Being also have multiple personality disorder...?

I think that the 3% of each individual that is genetically and physical different from everyone else on the physical plane is partly influenced by the ego-mind. What I mean by this is simply that without the ego-mind thinking that we are separate beings and thus restricting us in our flesh-and-blood bodies, we would all be experiencing life on the essence level of energy and being, which would be seeing things clearly as all interconnected and equiped with infinte potential. Therefore, the ego-mind here serves as a function to give us each a unique personality rather than behaving like a monster.

Like Fermin mentioned, the ego-mind is a partner of the individual essence who works along side the being in molding and structuring personality (and thus individuality). The ego-mind is heavily influenced by outer surroundings, and therefore infuses these influential elements into the body, which then spread to be perceived (and accepted, perhaps) by the being – the portion of the body that remains serenely silent during the entire process. So it is the ego-mind that separates us into unique entities, and surely into extremely different personalities. It is a definite key to consider when examining our traits and habits; it is partly due to the ego-mind’s seemingly frequent hunts for diversity, change, and variation in the surrounding environment or amongst and within other people that allow us to be so different. But wait … isn’t the ego-mind an element that loves structure, classification, and orderly functions? Does it not grow satisfied when the being is in the stage of obedience? Why is it then so evidently affected by outer influences and changes, when it seems like it absolutely dislikes variation and difference? Maybe the ego-mind, as Fermin said, is not a monster at all – maybe this is just a common misunderstanding. Maybe the ego-mind is more open-minded than we think it is; maybe it is a life-force of its own that takes joy and pride in its discoveries and its application of various influences.

According to what has been said, the Supreme Being might have created all of use with the same essence, yet with the twist of the DNA, we result as different personality. However, what is the Supreme Being as most of you have said? It is a collective force of energy, but that is only on the basis of being on the nonlocal domain. When we are put in the ego mind, the result is the physical domain. Which is more affective on our personality though, the essence or the ego mind?


After reading what Angel has said, i had a sudden thought. Can our personality be the direct reflects of the Supreme Being's own characteristics? Which means the Supreme Being also have multiple personality disorder...?

Well, I think initially, the essence has more of an affect on our personalities--actually, it's pretty much the only thing that does. We are born into the world without any previous knowledge. When babies are born, some cry, and some do not. And that has been proven to be linked to future personalities. However, after birth, we are forever shaped by the way we are brought up, the people around us, the place we live, etc.

WAIT I just thought of somethingg. Is it possible that the ego mind merely serves as a cage to our true personalities? That the ego mind creates a mask that we might not be aware of? How are we to know that we are actually acting of our personality? Is the personality only a perception from others, or is it based on what YOU believe is yourself?

To answer your second question in the quote above, I don't think that the Supreme Being exactly has a personality...? I mean, you could probably say that the Supreme Being has multiple personalities, but it is because that's the culmination of all of our personalities--the higher power is part of the unending source, where all pure potential is stored, and brought to us, little by little. Even in the Bible, I do not believe that God has a "personality," and the Bible presents Jesus as the good Christian, the role model, which is how many Christians shape their personalities. The higher power wouldn't be some supernatural human that presides over us--it's probably a lot more than that.

Are we more affected by essence, since essence is marked by freedom and unlimited potential that is evolving, resulting in our change of personalities? However, as Proey have said, I do think the ego mind may also set the transparent barriers that blocks us from displaying our true personality. The ego mind that can worry and fear too much when not controlled properly and has gone into overdrive. But how do we know what is our true personality? Many people express themselves differently depending on the location and the people that they are with, like some people may be really bubbly and talkative at school but then never really say anything at home (and vice versa, of course.) So which one is the true us? Which one is the mask that we put on? Or both of that is us? So then maybe those who seem to have multiple personality disorder are actually the people who are expressing the true them, while most of us are caged by the thought that there IS only one personality, so we are only acting the true us - which is what people expect of you from their cumulative understanding of you? For example, someone is always making other people laugh. One day, he doesn’t do that. So other people ask, “Why aren’t you being you today?” Is the person who always makes other people laugh the true him? Or is this simply the only part of him that other people are exposed to? Our personality can change, so what you believe is yourself is probably not the most definite answer, which leads us to constantly search and learn about ourselves.

Are you saying that the Supreme Being has many facetes? The question of nature vs. nurture. After all, our personalities are also shaped by outside factors such as the society. But the supreme being isn’t? Let's say someone's personality is quite violent. Is that necessary reflective of the Supreme Being?

I think I’m beginning to see something new.
After talking to my sister about it, I began to see our inner builds in an entirely different manner. The 97% of our identities that is already “decided” and defined is structured by and is, I think, the essence, or being, itself. And about the “caging” of the essence of our true personalities … yes, it is possible. It seems possible to me now that the ego-mind (whose size and shape we are not certain of; it is an ever-transforming element of our bodies that is affected by our outer environments and circumstances) is not part of the 3% of our identities, but merely influences it. Think of it in this way: the being is there, present in its 97% from. The ego-mind is a gigantic bubble (or as a less friendly image, a cage) that wraps around this 97% of true personality, and holds it still. This would make sense because as we all know, the ego-mind suppresses the being, just like the bubble holds down the 97% being here. And what about the other 3% of our identities? Well, I’m not exactly sure about this, but maybe it is hollow – maybe it is empty at the moment of birth, purely a space of nothingness. This would then mean that it has nothing to be influenced by, that it is just there. But why would we have such different personalities then? I think that the ego-mind, which is influenced by everything out there, “presents” (or injects) information into the emptiness of our identities. Perhaps this is how we have such different personalities; it is this “transformed” 3% that allows us to be so entirely different. This is the portion of us that evolves not definitely according to the ego-mind, but is touched upon by it and influenced whenever the ego-mind is influenced. Does the individual personality spring from this place then?

hiii! Sorry that i didn't reply yesterday, i was planning to but then the wireless died after right after i finished reading -__-

Hmmm. technically, i think although that the ego mind is bound to structure and to cages, it likes to be nonconforming. The ego mind itself is a paradox, thus it is radical. It does not like to follow the rules, yet it is, just like what Mr. Guenther has said about we do not want to be free, even though we claim that we do. Although this seems paradoxically, yet can this be the reason why the ego mind adds bits of flavor (fine, maybe a huge chunk) to our personality.
Also I think Angel and Fermin have a point about maybe the ego mind is not a beast, it is merely a way of protecting ourselves to fit into the society. Just as Anita has said about the example, maybe that is only the supreficial impresssion that people had stereotyped them as. This is a result of people's tendency to categorize people. Why is it that people try to fit into the impression of what others think? Is it because it is the ego mind that is urging us to transform our personality?

About the Supreme Being having multiple personality disorders, I was thinking of using it as a metaphor, because that is where the essence springs from and where a part of our personality is from. When we are all different, how is it that the Supreme Being can create a part of our personality if it is essentially the same? It is where all of us has sprang from. Also what do you think that the Supreme Being has created? Do you think that the Supreme Being has created only the positive aspects of our personality? Or is it possible that the negative aspects of our personality is to be blamed on our ego mind overdrive? I think the ego mind not only has contributed to the negative portions of the personality, but also some postive forces to the personality. What does the ego mind and the Supreme Being contribute to our personalities?

Why is it that people try to fit into the impression of what others think? Is it because it is the ego mind that is urging us to transform our personality?

Really great point there, Ivy! I think that people often confirm because of their fears, doubts, and insecurities which all spring from the ego-mind. You know the saying, "You have to learn to like yourself first before people can learn to like you"? I think that can be directly applied here. The ego-mind is constantly worrying about what other people think of it--whether they like it or not. Thus, by quieting the ego-mind mind is like one finally accepting oneself for who one is--realizing that everyone was created unique and that all our unique talents are essentially vital pieces of one big puzzle known as the UNIVERSAL ESSENCE.

I think the ego mind not only has contributed to the negative portions of the personality, but also some postive forces to the personality. What does the ego mind and the Supreme Being contribute to our personalities?

Yet, like Ivy said, the ego-mind does have postivie functions as well. Its obsessively paranoia can be used as a motivation to accomplish great goals (I know that's how I use it). And I think it was Lee in Vicky's thread or Vicky herself that said that the ego-mind's function is to keep us alive (whether that reason may be selfish or not). Thus, as long as we have control over the ego-mind (not letting it go into overdrive and controlling us instead), we can always use it. Like Ms. Kay said, "If the ego-mind doesn't serve a function, then why does it exist?" Also, the ego-mind is an useful tool in our fast-paced, business first friendship second world of today. It makes us competitive and aggressive which are the tools needed to survive in such a money-based society.

Therefore, not saying that such a society is good, but as long as human beings are the ones making up the rules of society, the ego-mind will always be needed. This is so because since it took the ego-mind to make up such rules, it will also take the ego-mind to follow them and carry them out the best way possible.

This has been one of my shorter posts. I will problably come back to elaborate on what I just said if it wasn't very clear since I'm so tired right now.

What Fermin has said made quite an impression on my mind. It is important to realize that the ego mind does keep us alive, because without the competitive side of the ego mind, how can we strive for success and excellency? When we are competing with our inner selves, isn't it also the ego mind that drives us to work for the better? I think there might be some parts of our personality that blurs the line between what are the products of the ego mind and what are the results of the essence. Perhaps perseverance is both of the ego mind and of the essence, because it does have some postive qualities; however, if we are obsessing over it, then we are putting too much of our ego mind into it.

Just yesterday, i was thinking about how sometimes people are shocked because i said some things that are rather sarcastic. Now that i think about it, do our true colors show through our behavior? Some times, when we act spontaneously, is that period who we truly are? We are going with the flow, and when we are being spontaneous, are we being one with the Supreme Being?

I definitely do agree with Ivy and Fermin when they say that the ego-mind possesses a positive quality, and that it helps the human being strive towards goals and utter perfection.

Just yesterday, i was thinking about how sometimes people are shocked because i said some things that are rather sarcastic. Now that i think about it, do our true colors show through our behavior? Some times, when we act spontaneously, is that period who we truly are? We are going with the flow, and when we are being spontaneous, are we being one with the Supreme Being?

When we act, as you said, “spontaneously,” we are partly our true selves, I think. Our true colors are exhibited as responses to various acts, words, and other things. These responses are reactions, often so extremely immediate that we do not have the time to process in our heads the manner in which we behaved. Yes, I do believe that our spontaneous “actions” define, at times, the way that we really are. But we also carry around these large ego-minds of ours every day, and follow its dominant guidelines – these rules are certainly bound to affect our spontaneous reactions, since these reactions are also part of our “everyday” actions. So are we at one and connected to the Supreme Being when we act spontaneously? That depends, I think, whether or not we are acting consciously in our reactions. After all, one cannot be conscious all the time. We daydream and our minds wander off in those momentary shifts in time; that is being partially conscious, I think. Awake, but a little unconscious. I don’t really think we are fully connected to the Supreme Being when we act spontaneously, because acting spontaneously does not really present our true personalities and inner beings. In these spontaneous moments, the ego-mind is being just as spontaneous and alive as it is in any other moment; it monitors every move of the individual. It is not suppressing the individual but, rather, directing it – we do move around along with and according to the ego-mind daily, after all. But there is also a possibility that we can connect with the Universal Being when we act spontaneously; perhaps the inner being is one step ahead of the ego-mind under some circumstances, perhaps it is our true emotions (amplified by our sudden reactions and responses) that are being shown in these moments without preparation. Are emotions equivalent to true personalities?

I’ve been wondering about the identity of “personality” for some time. The originality of the inner personality remains undefined and a mystery to me. Is there only one personality for everyone? Or is there one personality that is of the essence, which is encaged by the ego-mind, unable to show its face in the functional, everyday realities that we presently live in, and another one that plays by the rules of the ego-mind and is enhanced by the influences upon the ego-mind?

Sorry for the lack of participation from me the past two days; I was chilling with my grandparents down in Tainan where the internet was quite lame.

Interesting where this thread has ended up since my last comment..looking at personality through the ego-minds competitiveness. Ivy said, "It is important to realize that the ego mind does keep us alive, because without the competitive side of the ego mind, how can we strive for success and excellency?" I just wanted to bring up that pop quiz from earlier that competition at its best is within the self. We learned that external competition was able to drive us forward, but that it should be considered secondary to competition with the self. Hmm, so that leads me to wonder, when we are competing with ourselves, do we compete with our ego-minds or our beings?

Just yesterday, i was thinking about how sometimes people are shocked because i said some things that are rather sarcastic. Now that i think about it, do our true colors show through our behavior? Some times, when we act spontaneously, is that period who we truly are? We are going with the flow, and when we are being spontaneous, are we being one with the Supreme Being?

I find this extention of the original topic very interesting. There is that saying that a what a person does when nobody is looking truely define him or her. and when Jess told us that during PE it wasn't the first time I'd heard it either. But is it true? It seems as though one's true colors can be clearly defined in the absense of societal or peer pressure or whatever influences, but it also feels like as the social animals that we are, our true colors should be defined within our interactions with others. Or maybe I just think that because it is hard to imagine everyone else alone and what really happens when no one is watching.

But I started out with a digression from Ivy's question already :S About spontaneous behavior...I think the majority of spontaneous acts can not be used to define a person's "true colors." I don't know if its just me, but I sometimes spontaneously say stupid things that I haven't thought out. Freudian slips, if you will. I don't think I'm just defending myself, because I know cognitive psychologists for one don't buy that all spontaneous "slips" are representative of unconsious desires. They might just be mess ups with grammar or punctuation. On the other hand, there have also been times when I've spontaneously slipped things that were really on my mind and weren't suppose to come out. Maybe this is more representative of a person's true colors?

Interested if you guys have anything to say to Ivy's question in general.

It seems as though one's true colors can be clearly defined in the absense of societal or peer pressure or whatever influences, but it also feels like as the social animals that we are, our true colors should be defined within our interactions with others.

I think that although sometimes the way we behave when no one is around is who we truly are as a person, it is uncertain whether that person that we become when no one is around is actually our being and thus our true colors. Even when no one is around to judge us or criticize us, isn't the ego-mind still active, telling us what to do and complaning about certain things (for thsoe of us that haven't shut the ego-mind down yet)? Usign an example from Desperate Housewives, Bree is a character who is very organized, pedantic, and essentailly, a Stepford's wife (a robotic housewife who does all the chores while still managing to look all dressed up and beautiful). At the beginning of the show, teh audience may think that Bree is just putting on a show for the neighborhood so that people will admire her (which is partialyl true, thus showing the ego-mind part of the equation), but then, we realize that part of the reason that she is so 'neat' even when there's no one around is that she feels like she is in control of things when she follows social etiquete and cleans the house. Thus, sin't this still the ego-mind here trying to be in control and fearing the possibility of it not knowing?

Another example: a lot of the times we can still not our true selves when we are by ourselves because we don't really want to see the ugly side of ourselves. Thus, we do all the good deeds in the world (not because we want to) and act like a good 'Puritan' just to assure ourselves of the good people that we are. Isn't this also the ego-mind who wants to save 'face' more than anything else and feel good about itself? Yet, the ugly side of us that gets revealed through our interactions with other human beings in competitions, I don't think that is our true personality either. That is still the competitive ego-mind who wants to win no matter what!

So maybe we don't really have a personality...I mean why would we ahve a limited personality if when on the nonlocal domain, we are all interconnected--being and capable of doing and achieveing anything? Doesn't that then make the personality something definetly of the ego-mind ebcause it is restricted--different yet not infinte with all of us?