What results in the personality?

Yes, I do think that it is unclear whether or not we are our true selves when we are alone and when our behaviors are unseen by others. Our characters cannot be defined by mere actions of spontaneity since those are reactions to things that are monitored and directed by the ego-mind and its everyday guidelines that we tend to follow, often blindly. The ego-mind is forever active. I don’t think it sleeps at all.

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!

Do we really not want to see the ugly side of ourselves? Doesn’t the ego-mind often bring about the “negative” sides of the individual and urge the individual to act slightly “out-of-balance”? I don’t think all of us are Brees. I don’t think we are all on our best behavior when nobody is around (think of procrastination). It is true that the ego-mind propels us to strive for brilliance, but does the ego-mind strive toward excellence itself? Does it not aim to suppress and restrict the human potential? I don’t think that the ego-mind strives to “save face,” really, because its presence also results in the inner humiliation of the self – which then leads to (not always) slight, or even tremendous, regret. But yes, I suppose the ego-mind does try to feel good about itself, and places its wellbeing well above that of the self. But I think that no matter where we are, whether we are by ourselves or in our social circles of friends and acquaintances, we are guided by the ego-mind, since our essences are enveloped by its layers of instinctive wants and orderly commands (that do help us survive).

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?

As I mentioned in my previous post, there is a possibility that we have two personalities – one that is of the essence, of the true self and the most intuitional behavior; and another one that is of the ego-mind and is influenced/altered whenever the ego-mind experiences a shift in its own character. So I don’t think that the personality is restricted, since it may be subject to change over the course of the individual’s lifetime. Even though the personality seems solidly defined in every individual, it may still be “infinite”; we do not necessarily have to be interconnected to have continuous growths in our personalities.

Do we really not want to see the ugly side of ourselves? Doesn’t the ego-mind often bring about the “negative” sides of the individual and urge the individual to act slightly “out-of-balance”? I don’t think all of us are Brees. I don’t think we are all on our best behavior when nobody is around (think of procrastination). It is true that the ego-mind propels us to strive for brilliance, but does the ego-mind strive toward excellence itself? Does it not aim to suppress and restrict the human potential? I don’t think that the ego-mind strives to “save face,” really, because its presence also results in the inner humiliation of the self – which then leads to (not always) slight, or even tremendous, regret.

Even if the ego-mind is competitive and procrastinates, the ego-mind itself will never think of itself as a monster. It will always have the victime mindset and make up excuses for its behavior, thus, the ego-mind always wants to think well of itself. I mean, how many times have we thought 'gosh...I'm such a terrible person' versus the amount of times we think 'I'm the victim here.. they're all so mean' or 'gosh...I'm such a nice person'? Think about that, Angel, and you'll get what I mean.

Do we really not want to see the ugly side of ourselves? Doesn’t the ego-mind often bring about the “negative” sides of the individual and urge the individual to act slightly “out-of-balance”? I don’t think all of us are Brees. I don’t think we are all on our best behavior when nobody is around (think of procrastination). It is true that the ego-mind propels us to strive for brilliance, but does the ego-mind strive toward excellence itself? Does it not aim to suppress and restrict the human potential? I don’t think that the ego-mind strives to “save face,” really, because its presence also results in the inner humiliation of the self – which then leads to (not always) slight, or even tremendous, regret.

In overdrive, the ego mind wants to assure that everything it does is right. Therefore, it does not want to see that it is wrong; it only chooses to see the part of the truth that it likes.

Fermin, love the example from DH. ^^ Of course not all of us are Brees. When nobody is around, some of us do things that we wouldn’t normally do if others were around – those dirty little secrets that we hide. But, is that really our true personality? Or these things that we do when nobody else is watching, are just things that we do not normally do, therefore our curiosity leads us to try them? If someone is always the good boy, he might secretly want to try experiencing doing something bad. If a person is always stealing items with his friends, he might secretly want to buy something for a change. Do these acts necessarily reflect their true personality?

The ego mind strives for what IT THINKS is excellence. It only looks like it is suppressing and restricting human potential if it needs to do that in order to achieve what IT THINKS is the best for the self. So we just control the ego-mind and not let it go into overdrive. Restricting human potential is not the main aim of the ego mind. I don’t agree that the presence of the ego-mind results in the inner humiliation of the self – after all, we do need the ego mind. Let us remind ourselves that when controlled, the ego mind is a tool that helps us. Why should we be humiliated with something that is part of us?

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?

This reminds me of instinct and reflex. I agree with Steph, how personality is also defined within our interactions with others. According to dictionary.com, personality is “the visible aspect of one's character as it impresses others.” It's not only how we act when we're alone, but how we act as a response to others.

haha. interesting example Fermin, Desperate Housewives.
Technically, I think that the ego mind does try to save face, because it cares about its well being too much. As Angel has said, the ego mind places its wellbeing first, so maybe it cares about its reputation, but that is when it is in public display. Think about being home alone, do we still have the ability to tear ourselves away from the computer? I know i can't, but that is when i am alone. There is no one to restrict me, so my ego mind can always tell me screw the GPA, go have fun. But is that the ego mind, or is it simply my procrastinating personality?
However, regarding what Fermin and Angel have said about the existence of our personality. Is it that we have two distinct personalities that all begin as nothing? As Steph has said, we can feel that we have a personality that is private and another that is on public display. Is it that one of the personality is shaped by our peers and societal values, while the other is also somewhat influenced, but closely related to our innate behaviors?

Just a minor digression, a reply on another forum has said that some of our personalities can be influence from our mother...Can it be that our personality is trying to "copy" another person's?

I have decided to visit your MOD question again =P

However, regarding what Fermin and Angel have said about the existence of our personality. Is it that we have two distinct personalities that all begin as nothing? As Steph has said, we can feel that we have a personality that is private and another that is on public display. Is it that one of the personality is shaped by our peers and societal values, while the other is also somewhat influenced, but closely related to our innate behaviors?

I agree with what Steph said about our personality having a private side and a public side. Perhaps this applies to most people. The person that you appear to be at school may be the complete opposite person of who you are at home. The personality that your peers see and who you appear to be may simply be a result of societal values – the trends and thoughts of others or external forces. This is where the face comes in. In another discussion, there was a discussion regarding the ego mind forming a mask that covers up who we truly are inside in order for us to fit the societal values or the so called “norm.” Therefore, I also agree with your second statement about the other personality or the one that is private and rarely exposed in public. Is it that our “private personalities” are more influenced by our Being and less by our ego mind? Perhaps this is where the term ‘duo-personlity’ comes in. =)

As I mentioned in my previous post, there is a possibility that we have two personalities – one that is of the essence, of the true self and the most intuitional behavior; and another one that is of the ego-mind and is influenced/altered whenever the ego-mind experiences a shift in its own character. So I don’t think that the personality is restricted, since it may be subject to change over the course of the individual’s lifetime. Even though the personality seems solidly defined in every individual, it may still be “infinite”; we do not necessarily have to be interconnected to have continuous growths in our personalities.

Aside from your idea about ever changing personality...I disagree with the fact that essence has a personality at all. Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought Essence was like the purest form, a being that generates whatever life force in us. Haha...Saying that Essence has personality makes it sound like a ghost. And even ghosts are not entirely something pure. It is my belief that ghosts are a mix between the essence realm and the physical realm. Unless you are agreeing personality is both a mix from the two, I don't see how Beings can have personality at all.
I just think Essence is basically universal, just like how our brains are universally functional. Beings are all equal right? So If every being was different, would they still be "equal"? The being cannot be uniqute and therefore It is more up to the mind and the ego to develop personality.

So what is exactly personality?

Just a minor digression, a reply on another forum has said that some of our personalities can be influence from our mother...Can it be that our personality is trying to "copy" another person's?

I think what Ivy wrote is kinda close to it. Usually, Personality is created through external influences(experience) from an environment to fit in a soceity. Personally, I find myself somehow "copying" things I see/like. It becomes part of me, my identity. Of course, as you have all discussed, the egomind can sometimes get into our personalities, either modifying it or becoming it itself.

Actually, on a second thought beings could be unique individually because everyone is differently arranged as particles and information which confirms that even the Essence behind it must be different too. Argh, I just contradicted myself again...but oh well.....

Is it that our “private personalities” are more influenced by our Being and less by our ego mind?

Like Emerson wrote in "Friendship," I think that when we are by ourselves, the private personality that emerges is more influenced by our Being and less by our ego-mind (even though that is not entirely true ). When we are with a really close friend, with family, or by ourselves when we can just be ourselves, we take off the masks--we don't pretend to like something that we have no interest in, or restrict ourselves according to the rules of the society. With a true friend, each individual is basically naked--one's true personality completely exposed without being hidden by the obligatory clothes of society. Thus, I think that the privater personality is more real and truthful in regards to what we are, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is the personality of our inner being.

When we are alone, we still have our problems, worries, and fears. This will thus ensure the ego-mind's presence. Maybe the fears are different for our private personality from the ones for the public personality, yet the fear nevertheless exists. When we're alone, we still worry about death, we're still scared of whatever it is we were scared of in public--though maybe we are even more scared in private than public because in public, we often have to pretend to be 'fearless' and 'cool'. And with fears and doubts comes the ego-mind

Yet, often when we are by ourselves, we have less to worry about--we don't have to worry about how to behave or what to say like we do in the presence of company--and thus, the ego-mind is a bit more quiet than it is in public. So yea, I think that the private personality is definetly more influenced by essence than our public personality is.

It seems like we all have multiple personality disorder or something

Thanks for the feedback on the personality within interactions, guys Smart to have found a definition for personality there, Fermin. We've been discussing it for a while without a bottom line definition. Funny though, on merriam webster it is defined as "the quality or state of being a person; personal existence." So I guess when we synthesize these two we get what we have pretty much come to agreement in discussion, that personality is both the visible aspect of a person's character as well as their quality or state of being.

Addressing Ivy's suggested digression... "Just a minor digression, a reply on another forum has said that some of our personalities can be influence from our mother...Can it be that our personality is trying to "copy" another person's?" Great question. I don't know if this happens to anyone else, but sometimes being around someone for a long time, their personality starts to influence my own. Maybe that's just ego-mind interaction though. But actually mabybe not. Because our personalities really are shaped by what we encounter and how we choose to respond to these encounters. Yeah that makes more sense. As we go through life we see all kinds of personalities, some of which are applauded. For example, we see our teachers applauding peers who go out an do community service or something. So we are then more predisposed to think that a good personality consists of providing service to our communities. Contrarily, when kids get put on time out or something for being racist or something we (should?) learn that this is bad behavior and will try to keep this out of our personalities. I also get the feeling that two people from the same area/environment tend to have more similar personalities. I've even heard people say that NEHS is filled with a lot of the same "type" of people. This is because of similar external pressures, perhaps?

But its not always reinforcing from the authority figures. People can be heavily influenced by those around them, whether they are the Abigails (The Crucible) or not. When people see a personalitiy that they admire or think is cool, regardless of whether it is a "good" trait, they are likely to encorporate it into their own personality. So it seems very ego-mind based then, this shaping of personality? Or does this ego mind molding come to align with our inner essence? OOOOH maybe when the ego-mind's personality is consistent with the being, a person achieves happiness and englightenment and all. And when our ego-mind's molded personality does not fit with what our essences and beings want and need, we see a troubled, unhappy person.

I also noticed that as people get older, they become less receptive to different personalities? I'm not sure.. it feels like kids can morph their personalities tremendously, as if experimenting or something. With adults however, they've become more fixed (not completely fixed), and less able to embrace change. Maybe this is why so many people end up being troubled and "in love" with misery.