Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Burl

Yoga and Meditation Increase Narcissism

Recommended Posts

hmm. Could be ....  but perhaps the average person practicing meditation or Yoga that was selected is practicing for other reasons other than what Buddhism represents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JosephM said:

hmm. Could be ....  but perhaps the average person practicing meditation or Yoga that was selected is practicing for other reasons other than what Buddhism represents.

Certainly not the last word on the subject, but it points out why one cannot use their own judgment as an indicator of truth when it concerns their own behavior or cognition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Burl said:

Certainly not the last word on the subject, but it points out why one cannot use their own judgment as an indicator of truth when it concerns their own behavior or cognition.

I think the devil might be in the detail as to the degree one may or may not use their own judgement as an indicator of truth concerning their own behaviour or cognition.  Unfortunately this brief article provides none of the explicit detail but typically highlights a couple of soundbites for media purposes.  I don't see it much different from exercising - I'm sure anybody who completes a bit of exercise would probably feel a little fitter than when they were previously just sitting on the couch.  But they're not saying they are now Olympic athletes.

I would suggest one can use their own judgement, with caution, as should always be the case when using one's own judgement whatever the case may be (biblical interpretation, politics, and any other activity that provides a degree of self enhancement).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to read and understand in far greater depth the stats. 

Immediate question I have is this study replicable? Another, the people that succumb to meditation and yoga may have a certain personality type that leads to this type of thing. I am reminded of Campbell's question … who exactly is trying to quiet the ego? And I am sure I have read/heard somewhere on good theological authority that prayer and meditation are the same thing. Nothing wrong with egos; we all have them, I would not be me without mine: it's the universe's fault … 😉

But I have some ammunition to tease my wife who does both, yoga and meditation. 

Edited by romansh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the study is out yet, but it does have lots of issues.  The entire field of social psychology is a semi-science at best.

One of the basic rules of science is it always requires an independent observer.  I think this study does point out that eudymonia is commonly mistaken for evidence of truth.  Not all truths are pleasant or evidenced by rationality.

Edited by Burl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Burl said:

The entire field of social psychology is a semi-science at best.

I see it as a very difficult science to apply rigorously in that all the variables are difficult to identify nevermind to control.

4 hours ago, Burl said:

One of the basic rules of science is it always requires an independent observer.

Err no … science is a process. It will autocorrect over time for dependent observers. Science in fact teaches us there is no such thing as an independent observer. 

4 hours ago, Burl said:

Not all truths are pleasant or evidenced by rationality.

While truths might not be pleasant to overly dependent observers. If the axioms can be considered as true for the "evidenced by rationality" then I would like to see an example where appropriate axioms processed rationality are not to be considered true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2018 at 10:42 PM, romansh said:

SNIP

I am reminded of Campbell's question … who exactly is trying to quiet the ego?

SNIP

 

No one. The ego is the illusion that you are someone and separate and it will drop when one realizes it never existed in the first place except as a concept. It is a natural step in the evolution process of consciousness on the  phenomenon we refer to as Man. Essentially in reality there is no self.

Joseph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting reading Burl. Name it DPD or whatever but I don't share the unbearable part as in the first case.   ON the contrary to me it is more a freeing feeling that i would describe as peace and joy and perhaps a feeling of home.

Ps Also can't relate it to drugs as i don't do any except coffee. 😀

Edited by JosephM
Ps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎6‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 8:56 AM, JosephM said:

No one.

Then this becomes a delusion and not an illusion.

On ‎6‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 8:56 AM, JosephM said:

The ego is the illusion that you are someone and separate

That I think is a little more  justifiable. Even the Buddhists amongst us don't go for no one … it is more a not self. I can't see how that the "I" and all the trappings of ego and consciousness are not a product of an unfolding universe. We all unfold together so to speak.  I would argue it is the ego itself that is trying to quiet the ego. A sense of self exists, even if that self is not what it seems.

On ‎6‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 8:56 AM, JosephM said:

Essentially in reality there is no self.

Again I think Buddhists see no self and not self as different entities. "rom" is a verb as is "JosephM" as is "tree". Treating them as nouns gives them their separateness.  "Self" is a verb as well, though non philosophical grammarians will disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting discussion, as usual.

As someone who has looked into Western yoga and meditation practices from time to time, I think the Buddhist practice of attempting to quiet the ego does not seem to be their aim for the most part. The focus is very much on the self: self-love, self-care, taking time out for oneself, centring oneself, improving oneself, etc. The only link to Buddhism is the word 'namaste' spoken at the end of the session - which is taken to mean "we're finished, thanks for coming, you can go home now."

That's just my personal experience of the participants' attitudes before and after these sessions, the words spoken by instructors during the sessions, and the way these sessions are promoted. 

I might be a little cynical, but I certainly wouldn't associate Western yoga and meditation practices with the tenets of Buddhism. That's like saying that attending church every Sunday is living the life of a Christian.

As for DPD, I think the feeling of disconnect associated with this disorder suggests that it is not the same as the Buddhist concept of 'not self' - which seems to be more a perception of interconnection that renders any sense of self irrelevant, rather than this sense of disconnection from a self that one still believes is essential.

Just thinking out loud...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, possibility said:

it is not the same as the Buddhist concept of 'not self' - which seems to be more a perception of interconnection that renders any sense of self irrelevant, rather than this sense of disconnection from a self that one still believes is essential.

This is accurate I think 😊

 

edit Just as an aside … I don't think meditation is about self love etc. Not that you said it was per se. But self love is a stepping stone that we will get off if we want to move on with our quest … whatever that quest may be.

Ten Zen Questions might be of interest to some … there is an abridged version on line and the book itself is short. Susan Blackmore of course. It may have a different title in North America.

Edited by romansh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think meditation is about self-love, either. 

And having slept on it, I understand that the practice of meditation is engaging in attention to self as a search for self, and in the process of that search, looking beyond the fear of its non-existence and coming to terms with 'not self'. I have read Susan Blackmore before, and I highly recommend her writings on Zen Buddhism - she describes this process very well.

Most commercialised western yoga and meditation practices (in my experience) stop short of this, however - they seem content with 'glancing' at the self illusion in a way that only reinforces its existence, like a comforting, absent-minded pat to reassure ourselves it is still there, functioning as expected. This chance to focus on 'me' is all people are chasing for the most part, so it sells really well in this form.

Most people who have a go at meditation or yoga will pull back as it gets confronting, uncomfortable or challenging beyond the physical. After all, it's all inner experience from this point, and unless you're working one-on-one with a guru, no one else is going to care that it's as far as you're willing to go. As long as you keep paying for classes and telling everyone how 'centred' and 'peaceful' you feel after it...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, possibility said:

Most commercialised western yoga and meditation practices (in my experience) stop short of this, however - they seem content with 'glancing' at the self illusion in a way that only reinforces its existence, like a comforting, absent-minded pat to reassure ourselves it is still there, functioning as expected. This chance to focus on 'me' is all people are chasing for the most part, so it sells really well in this form.

Well I have to bow to your experience here … as I have none. 

Stephen Batchelor is another Buddhist type I follow. Blackmore is not a Buddhist though she does practice Zen meditation … if I have understood her correctly.

😊

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2018 at 10:59 PM, possibility said:

I don't think meditation is about self-love, either. 

And having slept on it, I understand that the practice of meditation is engaging in attention to self as a search for self, and in the process of that search, looking beyond the fear of its non-existence and coming to terms with 'not self'. I have read Susan Blackmore before, and I highly recommend her writings on Zen Buddhism - she describes this process very well.

Most commercialised western yoga and meditation practices (in my experience) stop short of this, however - they seem content with 'glancing' at the self illusion in a way that only reinforces its existence, like a comforting, absent-minded pat to reassure ourselves it is still there, functioning as expected. This chance to focus on 'me' is all people are chasing for the most part, so it sells really well in this form.

Most people who have a go at meditation or yoga will pull back as it gets confronting, uncomfortable or challenging beyond the physical. After all, it's all inner experience from this point, and unless you're working one-on-one with a guru, no one else is going to care that it's as far as you're willing to go. As long as you keep paying for classes and telling everyone how 'centred' and 'peaceful' you feel after it...

possibility,

A couple of questions based on your recent writings and I understand the answers might be elusive at this point - which is fine.

if the self searches for self but it actually doesn't exist ("beyond the fear of its non-existence and coming to terms with 'not self'") what or who is doing the search?

if self is illusion, what is the reality (at least in your present understanding)?

why is there the illusion of self in the first place? why (in your understanding at present) is there anything?  If whatever is beyond the illusion, manifests (or creates) in or through illusion, why?

And, how do you see yourself, which 'philosophy' speaks most powerfully to you: Christian, Buddhist, a combination or other?

Just some questions over morning tea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, thormas said:

And, how do you see yourself, which 'philosophy' speaks most powerfully to you: Christian, Buddhist, a combination or other?

Let me answer this question on my behalf.

Reason based on evidence.

Do reason and evidence resonate with you thormas?

Here is a typical Zen meditation for you thormas … Where are you between thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, romansh said:

Let me answer this question on my behalf.

Reason based on evidence.

Do reason and evidence resonate with you thormas?

Here is a typical Zen meditation for you thormas … Where are you between thoughts?

Of course you do - but since we have been over this, I will wait on 'possibility' to whom I directed my inquiry. And also wait while you read Hart as you said you would.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, thormas said:

And also wait while you read Hart as you said you would.

Where did I say I would?

But the question you asked of possibility clearly shows you are missing the point.

2 hours ago, thormas said:

if the self searches for self but it actually doesn't exist

The self does exist but it is not what it seems … and we have been over this many times. This is why I disagreed with Joseph when he said "no self".

And we have been over this many times and yet this question is repeated.

Also possibility nailed it when she said:

Quote

it is not the same as the Buddhist concept of 'not self' - which seems to be more a perception of interconnection that renders any sense of self irrelevant, rather than this sense of disconnection from a self that one still believes is essential.

 

 

Edited by romansh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

double post

Edited by romansh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rom,

For your information on Buddhism...

from http://www.fundamental-buddhism.com/buddha.htm

Essence Buddha's Teachings 
a short explicit explanation of Buddha's discourses based on the Pali Canon recognized by Buddhist scholars as the oldest record of what the Buddha actually taught

Absolute changeless permanent reality, the unconditioned, itself alone is, 
all else has always been, is, and always will be just a state of make-believe fiction, 
a state of delusion worn like a costume with multiple fabricated viewpoints, 
with each self-sustaining itself in a self-perpetuated state of self-ignorance, 
until each decides to come to closure through self-enlightenment and self-awakening 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, romansh said:

Where did I say I would?

Exactly what I expected and I just won $50 bucks, so dinner in on you :+} I'll let you pour back over the posts but................again, as expected!!!

 

1 hour ago, romansh said:

But the question you asked of possibility clearly shows you are missing the point.

This too is as expected. This is your opinion and what we have gone over is your belief and, from your own words, not Joseph's. I was asking 'possibility' about her present opinion/belief and ....elaboration. So, my questions stand...........for 'possibility.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, JosephM said:

For your information on Buddhism...

Thanks Joseph … I have a copy of Buddhism for Dummies which uses slightly plainer language. The authors seem really well qualified:

Jonathan Landaw is the former English Translation Editor, Translation Bureau of His Holiness the Dalai Lama.

Stephan Bodian has studied and practices several schools of Buddhism.

Gudrun Bühnemann, Professor, teaches the Sanskrit Language and its literature, along with courses on the religions of South Asia.

The book taught me enough to know that I am not a Buddhist (dummy or otherwise) but can see parallels. I will have to walk my own path on this one. What other path could I walk? I am happy to accept the illusory nature of existence. I can't quite agree the implied delusion in your link. A reflection yes. We can work to reduce the aberrations.

Edited by romansh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a handy dandy search function for you thormas. Type in the word "read" and hit the magnifying glass icon. 

You will find I have not used the word "read" in conjunction with Hart

Let the fingers do the walking … evidence wins out all the time.

Apology accepted and can I choose the restaurant? 😉

Edited by romansh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, JosephM said:

Absolute changeless permanent reality, the unconditioned, itself alone is, 
all else has always been, is, and always will be just a state of make-believe fiction, 
a state of delusion worn like a costume with multiple fabricated viewpoints, 
with each self-sustaining itself in a self-perpetuated state of self-ignorance, 
until each decides to come to closure through self-enlightenment and self-awakening 

 

Joseph,

if absolute reality alone is, what is 'each-self' that is in a state of self-ignorance and needs self-enlightment? To me to seems like this suggest, in spite of the first line, that there is more to absolute reality. If only the absolute alone is, why is there any delusion in that which is? For lack of a better way to say it, who is or what is deluded? Why or how is there multiple fabricated viewpoints in absolute changeless reality that alone is (suggesting that nothing else is)? 

This seems contradictory and I am trying to get a handle on it - especially is there is no-self.

On 6/21/2018 at 11:56 AM, JosephM said:

It is a natural step in the evolution process of consciousness on the phenomenon we refer to as Man.

If reality is absolute, changeless and permanent - an evolutionary process suggests incomplete, change and impermanence??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×