Allikas: Vikipeedia
Mine navigeerimisribale Mine otsikasti

"Mina (ise)" on enesekohane väljend, mis viitab eneseteadlikkusele ehk teadlikkusele iseendast.

Kuna enesevaatluse puhul on vaatleja ja vaadeldav üks ja seesama, siis on iseenda uurimine, sellekohased väljendid ja järeldused paratamatult subjektiivsed ega saa olla objektiivsed, erapooletud ega neutraalsed.

Psühhopatoloogiliselt võib skisofreenia puhul esineda seisundeid, milles enda vaatleja ja vaadeldav ise teineteisest lahknevad, tekitades isiksuse lõhestumise. Alzheimeri tõve viimastes staadiumites võib teadlikkus iseendast kaduda.

Etümoloogiaid ja kasutusi[muuda | muuda lähteteksti]

  • mina ~ ma : minu ~ mu : mind
Ainsuse 1. isiku asesõna, mis pärineb uurali tüvisõnast *min.
  • ise : enese ~ enda : ennast ~ end
Enesekohane asesõnana rõhutatakse, tõstetalse esile (vahel juurdemõeldava) põhisõnaga väljendatut 'just see'.

Selle asesõna vormistik on eesti keeles segunenud 'enese' tüvega ning sõnad lähtuvad eri käändevormidest, neis on jälgi 3. isiku omastusliitest: enese < *henensäk, enda < *hentä. Enamikes soome-ugri keeltes ongi see tüvi kasutusel tähenduses 'tema'. Selle vastetes on reeglipäratuid arenguid, ka läänemeresoome keelte sõnaalguline 'h' on reeglipäratu.[1]

Järeltäiendina tõstab (vastandavalt) esile kõige olulisema, kesksema sisuliselt seotud asjade hulgast; toob esile mingi vastandlikkuse.
Määrsõnana tähenduses 'ilma abita, omal jõul'.
Käändumatu omadussõnana tähenduses 'erinev, teistsugune'.

Tegemist on soome-ugri tüvega, vrd lõunahandi is 'hingevari', mansi is 'inimese vari'. Häälikuliselt ja tähenduselt lähedane tüvi on ka jukagiiri eiďi 'hea vaim'.[2]

Tõlkevasteid[muuda | muuda lähteteksti]

Mina (ise) on kasutusel ingliskeelse self, saksakeelse Selbst, venekeelse сам, сама, ladina ego jt tõlkevastena.

Tuletatud vorme[muuda | muuda lähteteksti]

  • isekus ehk egoism kui isiksuse omadus.

Sünonüüme[muuda | muuda lähteteksti]

oma, enda , enese , omaenda , omaenese , iseoma, iseenesest

Teemasid[muuda | muuda lähteteksti]

enesehinnang, eneseteadvus, enesetunne, mina-tunne, tõeline mina, võlts mina, kõrgem mina

Bioloogia[muuda | muuda lähteteksti]


The biological basis of personality is the theory that anatomical structures located in the brain contribute to personality traits. This stems from neuropsychology, which studies how the structure of the brain relates to various psychological processes and behaviors. For instance, in human beings, the frontal lobes are responsible for foresight and anticipation, and the occipital lobes are responsible for processing visual information. In addition, certain physiological functions such as hormone secretion also affect personality. For example, the hormone testosterone is important for sociability, affectivity, aggressiveness, and sexuality.[3] Additionally, studies show that the expression of a personality trait depends on the volume of the brain cortex it is associated with.[4]

Antropoloogia[muuda | muuda lähteteksti]

Idamaiste õpetuste käsitlusi[muuda | muuda lähteteksti]

Aatman, ka atman (sanskriti keeles ātman; paali keeles attan, attā; tiibeti keeles bdag; hiina keeles 我 wo; jaapani keeles ga) on india õpetustes mõiste, mis tähistab inimese ning teiste olendite või nähtuste püsivat ja muutumatut olemust, "teda ennast".

Brahmanismis on see püsiv ja igavene individuaalne substants ehk hing, mis on identne brahmaniga[5] või tema kõrgeim mina, mis on brahmani avaldumine üksikisikus.[6]

Theravaada budismis on olulisel kohal isetuse õpetus, mille kohaselt moodustub isiksus vaid näilistest osadest ning on kõigi kannatuste allikaks. Hiljem laiendati seda õpetust. 'Hing' (jīva), 'ise' (ātman), 'olend' (sattva) ja 'isiksus' (pudgala) on mahajaanas neli väärvaadet, millele ei saa omistada iseseisvat olemist ega tähendust, nagu väidab «Teemantsuutra»: “Ei saa rääkida, et ta on bodhisattva, kui temas toimib mõiste ‘ise’ või mõiste ‘olend’ või mõiste ‘hing’ või toimib mõiste ‘isiksus’.”[7]

Historical development of concept[muuda | muuda lähteteksti]

The modern sense of individual personality is a result of the shifts in culture originating in the Renaissance, an essential element in modernity. In contrast, the Medieval European's sense of self was linked to a network of social roles: "the household, the kinship network, the guild, the corporation – these were the building blocks of personhood". Stephen Greenblatt observes, in recounting the recovery (1417) and career of Lucretius' poem De rerum natura: "at the core of the poem lay key principles of a modern understanding of the world."[8] "Dependent on the family, the individual alone was nothing," Jacques Gélis observes.[9] "The characteristic mark of the modern man has two parts: one internal, the other external; one dealing with his environment, the other with his attitudes, values, and feelings."[10] Rather than being linked to a network of social roles, the modern man is largely influenced by the environmental factors such as: "urbanization, education, mass communication, industrialization, and politicization."[10]

Euroopas hakkas 19. sajandil seisuslik ühiskond asenduma kodanike ühiskonnaga ning oluliseks said vabaduse ja võrdsuse ideed. Selles olukorras hakkas paratamatult arenema individualism, oluliseks sai indiviid, kujunes välja idee unikaalsest ja erilisest isiksusest.

Edward Bernays invented the public relations profession in the 1920s and was the first person to take Freud's ideas to manipulate the masses. He showed American corporations how they could make people want things they didn't need by systematically linking mass-produced goods to their unconscious desires.

Bernays was one of the main architects of the modern techniques of mass-consumer persuasion, using every trick in the book, from celebrity endorsement and outrageous PR stunts, to eroticising the motorcar.

His most notorious coup was breaking the taboo on women smoking by persuading them that cigarettes were a symbol of independence and freedom. But Bernays was convinced that this was more than just a way of selling consumer goods. It was a new political idea of how to control the masses. By satisfying the inner irrational desires that his uncle had identified, people could be made happy and thus docile.

It was the start of the all-consuming self which has come to dominate today's world.[11]

The words of Paul Mazur, a leading Wall Street banker working for Lehman Brothers in 1927, are cited: "We must shift America from a needs- to a desires-culture. People must be trained to desire, to want new things, even before the old have been entirely consumed. [...] Man's desires must overshadow his needs."[12] [13]

Edward Bernays: Sa ei pea ostma midagi sellepärast, et sul on seda vaja, vaid selleks, et ennast väljendada, oma isiksust esile tuua. [14]

Personology[muuda | muuda lähteteksti]

Personology confers a multidimensional, complex, and comprehensive approach to personality. According to Henry A. Murray, personology is

„The branch of psychology which concerns itself with the study of human lives and the factors that influence their course which investigates individual differences and types of personality ... the science of men, taken as gross units ... encompassing "psychoanalysis" (Freud), "analytical psychology" (Jung), "individual psychology" (Adler) and other terms that stand for methods of inquiry or doctrines rather than realms of knowledge.[15]

Ego death is a "complete loss of subjective self-identity".[16] The term is used in various intertwined contexts, with related meanings. In Jungian psychology, the synonymous term psychic death is used, which refers to a fundamental transformation of the psyche.[17] In death and rebirth mythology, ego death is a phase of self-surrender and transition,[18][19][20][21] as described by Joseph Campbell in his research on the mythology of the Hero's Journey.[18] It is a recurrent theme in world mythology and is also used as a metaphor in some strands of contemporary western thinking.[21]

In descriptions of psychedelic experiences, the term is used synonymously with ego-loss[22][23][16][24] to refer to (temporary) loss of one's sense of self due to the use of psychedelics.[25][26][16] The term was used as such by Timothy Leary et al.[16] to describe the death of the ego[27] in the first phase of an LSD trip, in which a "complete transcendence" of the selfMall:Refn occurs. The concept is also used in contemporary spirituality and in the modern understanding of Eastern religions to describe a permanent loss of "attachment to a separate sense of self"[web 1] and self-centeredness.[28] This conception is an influential part of Eckhart Tolle's teachings, where Ego is presented as an accumulation of thoughts and emotions, continuously identified with, which creates the idea and feeling of being a separate entity from one's self, and only by disidentifying one's consciousness from it can one truly be free from suffering (in the Buddhist meaning).[29]

The concept of "ego death" developed along a number of intertwined strands of thought, especially romantic movements[30] and subcultures,[31] Theosophy,[32] anthropological research on rites de passage[33] and shamanism[31] Joseph Campbell's comparative mythology,[19][20][21][18] Jungian psychology,[34][18] the psychedelic scene of the 1960s,[35] and transpersonal psychology.[36]

Vaata ka[muuda | muuda lähteteksti]

Viited[muuda | muuda lähteteksti]

  1. Eesti Keele Instituut. Sõnaveeb.[1]
  2. Eesti Keele Instituut. Sõnaveeb.[2]
  3. Funder, David C. (February 2001). "Personality". Annual Review of Psychology 52 (1): 197–221. PMID 11148304. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.197.  Kontrolli kuupäeva väärtust kohas: |date= (juhend)
  4. DeYoung, Colin G.; Hirsh, Jacob B.; Shane, Matthew S.; Papademetris, Xenophon; Rajeevan, Nallakkandi; Gray, Jeremy R. (30 April 2010). "Testing Predictions From Personality Neuroscience". Psychological Science 21 (6): 820–828. PMC 3049165. PMID 20435951. doi:10.1177/0956797610370159.  Kontrolli kuupäeva väärtust kohas: |date= (juhend)
  5. Ida mõtteloo leksikon: ise.[3]
  6. Ida mõtteloo leksikon: aatman.[4]
  7. Ida mõtteloo leksikon: hing.[5]
  8. Greenblatt (2011). The Swerve: how the world became modern. lk 3, 16. 
  9. Gélis (1989). "The Child: from anonymity to individuality". peatükis Ariès, Philippe; Duby, Georges. A History of Private Life III: Passions of the Renaissance. lk 309. 
  10. 10,0 10,1 Inkeles, Alex; Smith, David H. (1974). Becoming Modern. ISBN 978-0-674-49934-8. doi:10.4159/harvard.9780674499348. Mall:Pn
  11. The Century of the Self - Part 1: "Happiness Machines"[6]
  12. Note: the quote is from a 1927 article by Mazur in the Harvard Business Review.
  13. The Century of the Self - Part 1: "Happiness Machines", 16:10 - 16:45.[7]
  14. The Century of the Self - Part 1: "Happiness Machines", 19:00 - 20:10[8]
  15. Explorations in personality. Murray, Henry A. (Henry Alexander), 1893–1988., Harvard University. Harvard Psychological Clinic. (trükk: 70th anniversary). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2008. ISBN 978-0-19-804152-8. OCLC 219738947. Mall:Pn
  16. 16,0 16,1 16,2 16,3 Johnson, Richards & Griffiths 2008.
  17. Ventegodt & Merrick 2003, p. 1021.
  18. 18,0 18,1 18,2 18,3 Taylor 2008, p. 1749.
  19. 19,0 19,1 Plotkin 2010, p. 467, note 1.
  20. 20,0 20,1 Rosen 1998, p. 228.
  21. 21,0 21,1 21,2 Atkinson 1995, p. 31.
  22. Leary, Metzner & Alpert 1964, p. 14.
  23. Merkur 1998, p. 58.
  24. Dickins 2014, p. 374.
  25. Merkur 1998, p. 60.
  26. Harrison 2010.
  27. Leary, Metzner & Alpert 1964, p. 12.
  28. White 2012, p. 7.
  29. Tolle 1999.
  30. Merkur 2014, p. 211.
  31. 31,0 31,1 Merkur 2014, p. 212.
  32. Reynolds 1989, p. 72-73, 78.
  33. Taylor 2008, p. 1748-1749.
  34. Rosen 1998, p. 226.
  35. Merkur 2014, p. 219-221.
  36. Grof 1988.

First, Merriam-Websters defines self-awareness as: “an awareness of one's own personality or individuality” This is pseudo self-awareness. This means you consider your body and mind to be you. Similarly, you take your thoughts, feelings, speech and behaviour as signs of who you are. The self-image in the mirror of consciousness is not-self: drop the self-image and you are (formlessly) free. An empty mirror is there then, devoid of any form, reflecting what is, impeccablely. Therefore, self-awareness as defined in the dictionary is actually identification with form. The forms identified with are body, speech, behaviour, mind, thoughts and feelings. As long as you are identified with form you are limiting what you are, to form. This is what produces the sense of limitation, impotence, and duality humans typically experience! Worse. Being a limited form, experiencing yourself as a limited form, independent and separate from other forms, trigger the body's primordial fight-flight-freeze-fawn survival responses. This form that you are would like to exist for as long as possible. Can you appreciate that being a limited form assures a life of fear, suffering and limitation? This is so because form is limited, with a beginning and end. There are so many things in life that can threaten and harm this form that you identify with and confuse with yourself. The significance and importance of self-awareness is therefore to renounce identification with all forms whereby you have limited yourself. This is accomplished not by paying attention to the forms you have identified with as per the dictionary, but by withdrawal of attention from this fake form self. Attention is withdrawn by a process of substitution. You substitute your awareness of your body and mind (objects) for you (subject). When you withdraw your attention from what you think, feel and experience, turning attention around to attention's apparent source (you), you for the first time notice your own mental reactions. When you observe your own mental reactions, you realise your own mental reactions is how you escape from reality, from what is, into what should be. You now realize that your own mental reactions cause all your suffering, not whatever happens to be. When you see this, you stop running away from what is. You stop escaping into what should be through your own mental reactions. You stop reacting mentally, and therefore the artificial separation between yourself and what is, maintained through all your subtle mental escapes from what is, ends. Thusly you realize that reality is perfect. Reality is love. Reality is freedom. You are now free, no longer being artificially separated, through your mind, from what is. Eckhart Tolle became enlightened when he realized there is only one of him, not two. Before the fateful night of his full awakening, he experienced himself as a dualistic, split being, in accordance with the nature of thought. He experienced himself as subject. He also experienced himself as an object: what he is aware of (body, mind, thoughts and feelings). Thus he was two, and being two, he was divided, in contradiction, within himself. When he realised the object self is an illusion, not who he (subject) is, his ego collapsed completely, revealing the real, effulgent true, formless Self of all. The empty formless mirror of consciousness reflects reality with utter and complete perfection The technique of true self-awareness - substituting awareness of your body, mind, thoughts and feelings (objects), with you (subject), enabling you to actually observe your own mental reactions as the source of all human problems - has no stages. Either you observe yourself this way, or you don't. In the beginning it takes effort and many mental reminders to turn attention from what you see, think, feel and experience, to you. However, once your brain has learned this new way of paying attention, it becomes entirely automated, natural and unconscious. No conscious thought is then involved in this amazingly simple self-awareness. The process is then entirely non-verbal, comprised of non-verbal attention without any movement of your mind away from what is. In time, your body and brain's responses become utterly transformed. You become a Light Being, radiating love and joy. The body and mind therefore do pass through stages, in which you increasingly learn not to react mentally to anyone or anything, learning not-doing, which brings absolute, unconditional freedom from all form, and by extension, all suffering.

Viitamistõrge: Olemas on <ref>-silt rühma "web" jaoks, aga puudub vastav silt <references group="web"/>.