JimC wrote:...It seems to me that there are times where this construct of self gets in the way of our own mental well-being, particularly when we cling to it strongly. I have a sense that some of the tenets of buddhism reflect this; clinging to the construct is something that may cause us suffering, and perhaps can be altered, and we are not inevitably locked into a stance of a permanent self, never allowing itself to let go...
I think so, too. In the past, when I subscribed to the conventional view of selfhood, I identified myself (to myself and others) with sentences such as, "I'm the kind of person who...", "I'm not the kind of person who...", "I've always been like...", "I've never been one to...", etc. In other words, statements based on an assumption that "I" was some sort of immutable entity/identity residing in this ever-changing body from birth to death. Not until I started studying Buddhist philosophy did I start to question this and investigate it further. Naturally, I studied not only Buddhist philosophy, but also areas of science that were related to it. I found that the two were compatible, to say the least.
Anyway, once I let go of my assumption of being an immutable entity/identity, I found a tremendous release from the strictures I'd placed on myself and am now more open to change and adaptation to the environment than ever. (I'm even willing to dress in bib overalls and a tiara upon request.
) There's no healthy way, as far as I know, to permanently shake the first-person perspective, and that's not my goal. If nothing else, communication would be practically impossible without it (consider how many times the dubious word "I" appears in this post, for example). But I'm still working on further releasing myself from those strictures mentioned above, whether they come from within or without. Still got a lot of work to do, but it's a worthwhile experiment for me.
Edit: Charlou, I read your post after posting this one. Yes, I think this is a huge portion of what Buddhism as depicted in the Pali Canon is about. Theravada Buddhism, anyway. Mahayana stuff is full of mysticism and woo.
"A philosopher is a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn't there. A theologian is the man who finds it." ~ H. L. Mencken
"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the fucking irony in that."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion."
Only one seed...
After he surfaced again, he called this "a very good thread" and especially liked Jim's last comment (on rivers, rocks etc). I very much agree with him.
. And then when they come back, they can 