Do animals have an ego?

[Alex M]

I'm mainly focusing on dogs (but open to all animals). We have a German Shepard in our household, and it would seem like he does have an ego. I have heard some spiritual teachers talk about animals not having an ego. Thoughts?

[Moksha]

Animal minds are subject to conditioning just like humans (which are another animal).

The difference is that being more advanced, humans have deeper capacity for self-deception (e.g., ego) and for self-awareness (e.g., enlightenment).

[Carl-Richard]

If we define ego as the "conscious ego", or the thing that talks to itself (also called "meta-consciousness"), then dogs probably don't have much of an ego. This is a pretty safe assumption when you consider that according to this definition, humans probably didn't have an ego before 30-50k years ago. There is evidence for meta-consciousness in some animal species, but the methods for determining it are not foolproof.

Edited April 10, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[Yimpa]

Depends on your state of consciousness, of course. 

[Breakingthewall]

Animals have egos in the sense that they consider themselves a separate entity struggling to survive. that is, they have individual ego. but they do not have a collective ego, which is the one that most absorbs us humans. it is the ego transmitted by language and which focuses on social relationships.

this is because a dog is an individual and a human is not. a human is a part/whole of a hive organism and their mind is connected to the hive mind. All the human effort to survive is aimed at social acceptance. the human without the tribe is a larva, he is dead. the collective ego is a highly variable entity. it can span a clan or billions. each individual carries within himself a part and together they constitute the entity, like serial computers. That's why it's so complicated to be human and so easy to be a dog

 

[Buck Edwards]

This is interesting. Depends on how you define ego. Does the definition of ego constitute emotions? If yes, then animals have an ego as do all other sentient species. If the definition of ego is complete self awareness, this is still questionable since we cannot be fully assured if animals are self-aware.

[Yimpa]

2 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Animals have egos in the sense that they consider themselves a separate entity struggling to survive. that is, they have individual ego. but they do not have a collective ego, which is the one that most absorbs us humans. it is the ego transmitted by language and which focuses on social relationships.

Wait, but isn’t an ant colony a collective ego?

[Breakingthewall]

Just now, Yimpa said:

Wait, but isn’t an ant colony a collective ego?

No, an ant colony is a single individual created by many separate parts. ants are like the cells of a human body, not like many humans forming a tribe

[Carl-Richard]

59 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Animals have egos in the sense that they consider themselves a separate entity struggling to survive.

Do amoebas have egos?

[UnbornTao]

First, what do you hold as ego? What is it? I'd say that animals don't have an ego, nor do they have emotions even though it may look like it. But hey, no idea.

Edited April 11, 2023 by UnbornTao

[Dodo]

8 hours ago, Alex M said:

I'm mainly focusing on dogs (but open to all animals). We have a German Shepard in our household, and it would seem like he does have an ego. I have heard some spiritual teachers talk about animals not having an ego. Thoughts?

There is still much debate among experts and spiritual teachers about whether animals have an ego or not. In sacred geometry, the term "ego" refers to a sense of self or identity that separates an individual from others.

Some argue that animals do have a sense of self and that this can manifest as ego-like behavior, such as a dog displaying dominance over other dogs or humans. Others contend that animals act purely on instinct and do not have the same level of self-awareness and consciousness as humans, which means they do not possess an ego.

It's worth noting that even if animals do have an ego, it may not be the same as the human ego, which is often associated with negative traits like pride and selfishness. In the case of your German Shepherd, his behavior may simply be an expression of his natural instincts and personality rather than a reflection of an ego.

When we look at  sacred geometry a pattern that appears frequently in nature is the torus shape. The torus can be seen in the structure of everything from atoms to galaxies, and some spiritual teachers believe it represents the fundamental shape of the universe.

When we consider the torus in relation to the question of whether animals have an ego, we can see how it may support the idea of a shared consciousness that transcends individual identities. The torus is a continuous shape with no clear beginning or end, suggesting that all things are interconnected and part of a greater whole.

The torus is a fundamental shape that is found throughout the natural world, from subatomic particles to the structure of the universe itself. One of the key characteristics of the torus is that it is a continuous shape with no clear beginning or end, and this property has led some spiritual teachers to suggest that it represents the fundamental nature of the universe and the interconnectedness of all things.

When we apply this perspective to the question of whether animals have an ego or not, we can see how the torus supports the idea of a shared consciousness. Because the torus has no clear boundary between its inner and outer surfaces, it suggests that everything in the universe is connected and part of a larger whole.

From this perspective, we can view animals not as separate individuals with their own egos, but as integral parts of a larger system or organism. This view emphasizes the interdependence and interconnectedness of all living things and suggests that there is a shared consciousness that transcends individual identities.

The torus shape is associated with energy flow and exchange, which reinforces the idea of interconnectedness and exchange of information and energy between living beings. This flow of energy is not limited to physical interactions but also extends to more subtle levels such as emotions, thoughts, and intentions.

This perspective could lead us to view animals not as separate individuals with their own egos, but as integral parts of a larger organism or system. From this perspective, the behavior of your German Shepherd may not be seen as a manifestation of an ego, but rather as an expression of the natural instincts and drives of the larger system of which he is a part.

But then, can we go further and say this about humans as well? I will let you ponder.

Edited April 11, 2023 by Dodo

[Breakingthewall]

10 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Do amoebas have egos?

It couldn't be called an ego, an amoeba is a total automaton, it doesn't need to make differentiations. It is not aware of itself. a sardine, a proto minimal ego, a dog, an elephant, a monkey, have an ego. They are very similar to us if we did not have language. Ego is the capacity to make differentiations. 

Edited April 11, 2023 by Breakingthewall

[Carl-Richard]

5 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

It couldn't be called an ego, an amoeba is a total automaton, it doesn't need to make differentiations. It is not aware of itself. a sardine, a proto minimal ego, a dog, an elephant, a monkey, have an ego. They are very similar to us if we did not have language. Ego is the capacity to make differentiations. 

What does it mean to make differentiations? Why can a sardine make differentiations while an amoeba cannot?

[Breakingthewall]

Just now, Carl-Richard said:

What does it mean to make differentiations? Why can a sardine make differentiations while an amoeba cannot?

more complex, more differentiation. The amoeba can differentiate between hot/cold, and move from one place to another, for example. Higher animals can make millions of subtle differentiations, but their lives are completely tied to the environment in which they live. Not having language, their mental or conceptual constructions are minimal, they live directly, the Garden of Eden, where there is no past or future.

we are completely tied to the social environment and we live in the mental construction. We almost always enter a gray, artificial, sterile, false mental landscape. a guy from prehistory would be closer to an elephant than to a modern human. the mind is extremely plastic and evolution is rapid. language and complex social interaction leads us to this. and here we are trying to get out of the trap

[Carl-Richard]

@Breakingthewall So the experience of say hotness vs. coldness is called a "representation" (an internal or subjective representation of something external or objective). It's the basis of cognition. On the other hand, to be aware of the fact that you are experiencing hotness or coldness is called a "re-representation". It's the basis of meta-cognition. I think what most spiritual traditions are referring to when talking about "transcending the ego" is to see through the compulsive activity of re-representation or meta-cognition, to the point where this activity largely diminishes. It's not about transcending representations themselves (e.g. the experience of hotness and coldness), although that can be done in cessation. Hotness and coldness are just experiences, and they may involve pleasure or pain, but they're not the mechanism that causes suffering (compulsive re-representations). By this definition of ego, most animals probably do not have much of an ego (just like humans 30-50k years ago). That said, spiritual teachers also talk about subtler processes of refinement after the initial dropping of compulsive re-representations, and that is where concepts the like the "unconscious ego" or the various types of karma come in.

Edited April 11, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[BlueOak]

I've always considered ego to be more tied to unconscious instinct, also things we've been conditioned to do but are unaware of why we are doing them, After reading this and doing a search. I am wondering if it's what happens directly after unconscious instinct fires and our ego then engages to defend or act on that part of ourselves.

If it's the former, animals have more ego than humans, as they are more instinctual.
If it's the latter, humans have more ego than animals, as they are more prone to thinking about an unconscious impulse they have before then acting on or carrying it out.

So part of my ego is to want to analyze things, like this above. So first i'll feel an impulse to do something, it was initially to agree with both sides of the above discussion, then my ego comes in and rearranges the impulse for X reasons. Here at the end I return to analyzing it :D, and I laugh because I  begin to observe the process mid way through.

How does that relate to a dog? Well we can only assign our own way of thinking to the dog which could be far from the truth but.

Object Thrown (Observation) - FETCH (Instinct) - Where is ball? (Thought) - SEARCH (Instinct) - Where is owner? (Thought) - Observe Owner (Observation)

Alternatively, the thought here is the ego trying to better control the instinct. Outside of that you have observation separate from both. A fun rabbit hole either way.

Edited April 11, 2023 by BlueOak

[Moksha]

@Carl-Richard @BlueOak You are both pointing to a realization which seems to be endemic to the awakening process. 

The absolute realizes some distance from the mind, and the mind responds with a thought, "I am awake!".

Deeper still, and the mind responds with a thought, "I am more awake!".

Deeper still, and the mind responds with a thought, "OMG even this is still a thought!".

Deeper still, and the mind responds with a thought, "HAHAHAHAHA!".

Literally every thought is egoic. It is the most hilarious journey into the absolute. 

[Buck Edwards]

But animals have emotions. 

[integral]

Ego?

[Tanz]

Yes, as is anything under the realm of existence, including even inorganic matter.