A few years ago I became interested in Buddhism. I read a short description of this “religion” somewhere on the internet.  Whatever the description said (I can’t remember now), it intrigued me; so I decided to learn more about the belief system.

I find Buddhism quite interesting.  I do not, however, call myself a Buddhist.  For Buddhism, like all religions, has nonsensical, unbelievable, outdated myth attached to it, which is one of the reasons I left Christianity.  The furthest I can go with Buddhism is to call myself either an agnostic Buddhist or an atheistic Buddhist, and that’s pushing it.

During this period in which I studied Buddhism, I kept coming across the word “ego” quite a bit.  I remembered the word from my study of Sigmund Freud in psychology classes back at Pellissippi State Technical Community College many, many years ago.  It was associated with two other words: id and superego.  I went back and reviewed the meanings of these three words but found that Freud’s definitions were somewhat complex and didn’t make that much sense to me.  Somehow though, I got the feeling that Freud was right and that the Buddha had intrinsically understood the same thing Freud had said, used a different vocabulary, and had incorporated his insights with the Hindu mythology that was a part of his life.

So it was that I began contemplating the subject of the human psyche and Freud’s id, ego, and superego.  I was determined to make more sense of the three terms and make them more understandable.   The results of this undertaking are the focus of this post.  I realize my explanations do not comport with standardized, textbook explanations; but that’s ok.  I will begin with the id.

The Id

According to Freud’s psychoanalytic theory of personality, the id is the part of the personality which is made up of unconscious psychic energy that works to satisfy basic urges, needs, and desires.  The id operates based on the pleasure principle, which demands immediate gratification of needs.  Freud went into more detail about the id. The following is my understanding of it:

The id is an unconscious, powerful, in-born survival instinct that has as its only concern the existence of the individual.  It demands survival of the individual at all costs and is oblivious to any ideas of restraint and morality.  This core survival instinct is purely self-centered and is not concerned in the least bit with how survival is attained just as long as it is attained.  Its ultimate goal is, I suppose, immortality – perpetual, unending existence.  That is not to say, however, that the id is evil.  On the contrary, it has no awareness of the concepts of good and evil, just survival at all costs.  It is absolutely necessary, and humanity would not have lasted without it.

The id provides the basic motivations for survival of both the individual and the tribe in the form of three survival instincts which are sub-instincts of a basic, primal, core drive to indefinitely maintain our existence: fight-or-flight, corporeal, and status-in-the-tribe.  It is these three instincts the ego seeks to accommodate through various thoughts, words, and deeds.

The fight-or-flight instinct is the urge to avoid that which poses a danger to survival by either neutralizing the danger by destroying it or by separating from it.  An animal being chased is a perfect example.  It tries its best to outrun its pursuer.  When it cannot, it will fight to the death to avoid it’s own demise.

The corporeal survival instinct is the urge to satisfy needs of the body such as shelter, food, water, etc., due to a perceived imminent possibility of death if said needs are not met.  This is seen in crying infants when their diapers are wet, they are hungry, thirsty, or are sick.  The baby’s discomfort is a message to the ego that there is a danger to survival, and it responds the only way it can in this early stage of it’s life – crying.

As weaker members of the tribes of early man were not able to fend for themselves and did not survive, a status-in-the-tribe survival instinct evolved as a part of the id.  It is still with us today and is a pre-wired, inborn instinct. Using this status-in-the-tribe sub-instinct, the id informs the ego of the following four basic rules concerning the nature of tribal status:

1. A high status in the tribe is mandatory for individual survival.
2. Whatever one’s status in the tribe, it is never adequate.  A higher status must always be sought after.
3. One’s place in the tribe can be and must be augmented by diminishing the status of others.
4. Since status can be diminished, it is necessary to defend one’s tribe status no matter what.

It is this status-in-the-tribe instinct, along with a strong, over-developed ego that gets us into so much trouble and causes so much human suffering.  Indeed, the combination of these two comprise that which is referred to as “human nature.”

As order, not chaos, is more conducive to survival and prolonged existence of the individual, in addition to these just-mentioned means of id-born drives for survival, the id also instinctively motivates us to create an ordered, definable, established sense of “self.”  It drives us to answer the question “Who am I?”.  This drive is the reason for our need of attachments.  An attachment is anything we cling to for the purpose of “anchoring” ourselves, if you will.  Attachments are a sort of foundation upon which we base our definition of self.  Attachments come in six basic flavors: other people, organized groups of people, objects, places, concepts, and philosophies.

The Ego

According to Freud, the ego acts according to the “reality principle”; that is, it seeks to please the id’s drive in realistic ways that will be of benefit in the long term rather than bring grief.  At the same time, Freud concedes that as the ego “attempts to mediate between id and reality, it is often obliged to cloak the unconscious commands of the id with its own pre-conscious rationalizations, to conceal the id’s conflicts with reality, to profess … to be taking notice of reality even when the id has remained rigid and unyielding.”

Well, that’s Freud.  Here’s my take on the ego: The ego is the semi-conscious [1] mechanism of the mind that executes or manifests the survival instincts of the id.  That is, it devises schemes and then acts as necessary to make successful the drives of the id.  The ego could be compared to a mid-level manager who, in a meeting with his superior, has an issue or problem brought to his attention and then told, “Make it happen.  Do whatever you have to.  I don’t care what.”

It is present at birth but only in regard to the ability of infants to cry when confronted with perceived threats to their existence such as sickness, hunger, thirst, or a general feeling of discomfort due to wet or poop-filled diapers.  It develops quickly in babies and is noticeable at the toddler stage.

Regardless of whatever else the ego does, for this discussion, the focus will be limited to how it is that the ego manifests the id’s drives of attachment and status in the tribe.  We will begin with attachment.

In accordance with the id’s demand for stability as opposed to chaos, which aids the possibility of survival, the ego attempts to create a sense of self.  It does this through attaching the consciousness to various material objects and non-material concepts and ideals.  That is, it seeks to answer the questions, “Who am I?” and “What is my purpose?” in relation to the physical world.  For example, we have all heard someone say in regard to the loss of a loved one (usually a deceased spouse) something like, “He was a part of who I am.”

As stated previously, an attachment is something we cling to for the purpose of “anchoring” ourselves.  Attachments are foundations upon which we base our definition of self.  There are six basic types of attachments: other people, organized groups of people who make up institutions or organizations, non-human life forms that serve as pets, objects, places, concepts, and philosophies.

We attach ourselves to other people and other life forms such as family members or pets.  We can then say, “I am Brenda’s husband” or “I am the father of three boys: Bill, Jason, and David”.  How many times have we seen an older couple with a small dog.  They call the dog their “baby” and refer to themselves as it’s “mommy” and “daddy.”

Sometimes when we find ourselves in agreement with concepts or organized belief systems shared with other people, we intentionally attach ourselves to both the concept or belief system and the members which comprise them.  “I am a free-market capitalist and a Republican,” we proudly say.  Or, “I am an Episcopalian because I reject the Papacy.”

Institutions and organizations are also objects of attachment.  We declare and take pride in the fact that we are an alumnus of this or that college.  Sports teams, linked to the college we claim as part of who we are, are also institutions we link ourselves to.  In Knoxville, Tennessee it is normal to see people wearing “big orange” hats and t-shirts.  The phrase, “My blood runs deep orange,” is heard quite often here.  This common attachment is referred to as “Vol Mania.”

And lastly, there are material, inanimate objects to which we attach ourselves.  Classic car collectors do so, not so much as a way of saying “This car is a part of me”, but rather as a way of saying, “The time period in which this old car was produced and sold is a part of who I am.  It this period of my life that I am most proud.”  Historic preservationists operate on the same principle. Here in Knoxville, we have a group called Knox Heritage.  This group seeks to keep around old, worn down buildings that were in use when its members were young.  That is, they have an attachment to a no-longer-existing past (nostalgia) which they wish had never gone away.  So they desperately seek to keep around relics of a time long past by getting local ordinances passed which establish historic designations for property belonging to others and mete out fines to punish those who might cause disruption to their attachments.

There are many other examples of ego attachment.  These will do for this discussion.

When one of our attachments is threatened, the ego instructs us to defend it.  Anger and violence are the two most common attachment defense mechanisms.  Occasionally, there will be a story on the local news of a dog attack.  The victim, defending themselves from the attack, will sometimes find themselves the object of harsh words, if not violence-anger-from the dog’s owner.  The owner couldn’t care less about the injured human; he or she is more concerned about protecting their own sense of self, because attacking one of their attachments-a dog in this case-is the same thing, in their mind at least, as attacking them, which is a misperceived threat to survival.  UK soccer riots are also an example of this.

In addition to defending our attachments, we seek to promote their value and importance.  In doing so, the ego cons us into believing that our value and worth our status-has been promoted.

One of the most blatant examples is beauty contests for little girls.  Mothers dress their little girls up, make them up, and rehearse them in their talent for the purpose of winning a trophy.  The child’s victory is a means through which the mother’s ego falsely interprets worth as having been elevated.  Sometimes this leads to gloating, which is (1) the ego celebrating a perceived increase in worth and (2) yet another attempt by the ego to advertise this increased value to others through unnecessary words and behavior.

On the other hand, if the child loses the beauty competition, you see angry mothers.  These women go into attachment-defense mode because the ego has interpreted the daughter’s failure to win as an assault on both the worth of the child and the mother which has caused both to be diminished.  Sometimes you see angry mother’s fighting each other after these competitions.

The same is true for fathers who have boys on baseball teams.  If the kid’s team wins, then the dad’s status, according to his own ego, has been elevated.  If the team loses, however, the dad’s ego sees the loss as a lessening of his own worth; and his ego also goes into attachment-defense mode.  I personally know of incidents in which referees were attacked during or after a game because of a call that inhibited a child from doing better.  The dad’s ego saw this as diminishing both his and his son’s existential value, and he had to strike back at the source of this lowering of worth-the referee-for the purpose of regaining lost status in the tribe.

Oftentimes, when an attachment is removed from us, the ego creates a sense of despondency.  This is because the ego has no other alternative.  It can’t defend the attachment anymore because the attachment no longer exists.  It can, I suppose, drive us to promote the memory of the lost attachment; but that doesn’t override the despondency: it is more powerful.  This is most dramatically seen when a husband or wife dies, when our children grow up and move away, or when there is a breakup or a divorce.  The period of mourning is a necessary retreat in which the ego reevaluates its remaining attachments in relation to the sense of stability it seeks to maintain.  It is a state in which the ego is in shock and is trying to figure out what to do next.

As stated previously, besides attachment, the ego also engages in status-in-the-tribe maintenance.  That is, it employs thoughts, words, and behaviors in relation to other members of society (the tribe) to not only advance and defend status but also to denigrate other members of the tribe, which is yet another way of building up one’s position in said tribe.  It also uses these same three modes to promote one’s own tribe and degrade other tribes.

The ego uses thoughts such as hatred, prejudice, resentment, negative judgements, lust, anger, and gloating (all of which usually lead to fantasies) as an internal method of building ourselves up, degrading others, and defending against perceived assaults on our worth.  A man’s lust over a beautiful woman, for example, leads him to produce mental “videos”, if you will, in which he is having sex with her.  This is his ego’s way of taking control of her, subduing her, and by extension, lowering her worth and thus adding it to his own.  Hatred and resentment for someone who defeated us in some sort of contest is the ego doing its best to defend against a perceived lowering of our own status.

The use of curse words is simply an attempt to convey an image of power.  Sarcasm is nothing more than the attempt to make the object of the sarcastic remarks look inferior, which in turn, makes the one making the sarcastic remark, at least according to his or her ego, look superior in the eyes of others.  The ego’s use of sarcasm is basically a semi-conscious way of stating, “Well, that’s just stupid of you. Since I pointed your stupidity out, I must be brilliant.”  Ridicule and “joking around” are similar to sarcasm in that they also seek to point out (to ourselves and others) the faults of other people.  Since we pointed out their faults to others, we must, by extension, be faultless, which means we are on a higher level than the poor soul we ridiculed.  Some comedians are masters of putting down of others through sarcasm.  Doug Stanhope is a perfect example.

The ego also utilizes physical actions to both boost the individual sense of self-worth and also to defend it.

The practice of bullying is the most blatant example of the ego attempting to increase existential value.  By the word “bullying”, I don’t just mean kids picking on other kids as is common in public schools.  That is only one form.  Rape is also a more egregious form of bullying; and that includes rape of women, child rape, and rape of men in prisons.  The ego believes that, by taking control of other people, we can diminish their worth; and somehow the worth we have taken from them can magically be added to our own worth; and our status in the tribe is thereby elevated. Since victims of bullying also believe that their sense of worth has been diminished, they oftentimes enter a state of depression and require counseling.

Although not as blatant, obvious, or egregious, pranks that humiliate are also forms of bullying.  The ego seeks to accomplish the same goal with pranks as it does with rape.  Pranks are simply a milder form of bullying but with the same intent.

Physical violence (assault and murder) are oftentimes methods through which the ego seeks to defend one’s status or worth.  In most cases, assaults and murder are a reaction to something someone else did to the person committing the act.  A 1950’s actor (I cannot remember his name) killed his wife and then himself after she ridiculed him for having erectile dysfunction.  I guess they had other problems as well, but he saw her harsh words as a major insult and degradation to his worth-his status in the tribe-and his ego informed him that he had to strike back; and so he did.

There are other more-innocuous, less-dangerous ways the ego seeks to boost status as well.  By possessing material objects that advertise one’s worth, what we refer to as “status symbols”, the ego says to the rest of the world, “Hey, look at me.  Look what I’ve got.  This object I own is top-of-the-line.  That must mean that I too am top-of-the-line.”  It has been an axiom since cars were invented that expensive cars are status symbols; and the owners of said vehicles show them off to declare their supposed higher level of worth in relation to the worth of the lower-status individuals who cannot afford such an expensive automobile.  If ya want to get the girls, get an expensive car they say.

Good looking, hot women are also status symbols.  Since we place more value on attractive women as opposed to ordinary, normal-looking females, when a male keeps company with such a woman, he is semi-consciously saying to the world, “Hey look here.  Look what I got! I must be pretty important for a girl like this to associate with me.”

Inborn physical traits are sometimes thought of as signs of higher status, and the ego uses them to the individual’s advantage.  Physical attractiveness is supposedly an obvious sign of greater worth.  As stated in the last paragraph, attractive women are valued more so than ordinary looking women.[2]

Conversely, unattractive people are considered to have less worth.  Overweight people are a perfect example: they are often the objects of ridicule.  Short people are thought to have less worth than tall people.

Those with better-than-average cognitive abilities also are thought of as superior.  I’ve known more than one smart, supposedly well-informed person who knew it and had an arrogant attitude because of it.  When Joe Biden debated Paul Ryan in the 2012 vice presidential debates, he falsely believed he was more intelligent than Ryan.  He exhibited an arrogant laugh along with a smirk which were ways of proclaiming to the world his higher intellect and worth.

Tattoos, makeup, large muscles through body building, having a tan, breast implants, and hair alterations such as permanent waves and coloring – we engage in these physical modifications for one reason: We believe that if we can improve the appearance of our bodies in the eyes of other members of the tribe, we have attained a greater degree of worth because we think that a superior, better-looking body equals greater existential value.  This physical-body-alteration dynamic is a two-way street: We believe it works, and so do others.  The very premise of this game is a delusion, but we accept it as truth.

Sometimes the ego accomplishes augmenting one’s worth on an internal level with no one else in the tribe even being aware of it.  This is achieved through the process of daydreaming.  We all know the content of daydreams: being the hero who saves the day; being the guitar god who can do all kinds of amazing things on his axe and, thus, impresses the masses; and being the girl/guy some handsome man or beautiful woman desires and is in love with.  These are but a few examples of mental imaging the ego uses to fantasize about a possible-but-not-actually-realized worth that we can have, at least in our own minds anyway.  It may be the case that the ego cannot differentiate between reality and fantasy, so it proceeds with daydreams.

The term “status in the tribe” has been used throughout this discussion and is simply another way of referring to what we call “the pecking order.”  Generally speaking, one’s place in the pecking order is determined by three basic criteria: one’s physical appearance, one’s occupation and level of wealth, and one’s age. There are, of course, others.

How one’s physical appearance is judged is based on overall body and facial feature proportions.  That is, that which we call “good looking” is simply a balanced ratio of curvature and straightness.  Too much, too little, or just the right balance of either of these traits will cause us to be deemed attractive or unattractive (fat or ugly), which means we have a higher place in the tribe or we’re at the bottom of the scale in the opinions of the rest of the tribe and in our own judgement.

Another way our ego and the egos of other members of the collective judge ourselves is by the degree to which an individual is able to contribute to the overall status of the collective.  That means we place different levels of value on different occupations.  Heart surgeons are, therefore, held in high regard because they save people’s lives.  On the other hand, people who collect trash provide a service that we don’t judge to be as important; so we don’t consider these people to be as important.  Fixing hearts is more important than collecting trash, so the heart surgeon has a high status. This means the trash collector is at the bottom of the totem pole so to speak.

A third criteria for pecking order placement is one’s age.  We believe that the more years one has, the greater his or her value; and the fewer years one has, the lesser his or her value.  So the very young don’t get much respect; whereas the elderly do.  This principle works on an ascending scale.  First graders, for example, have very little value; a man in his fifties has more value; and an eighty-year-old has even more.  I know the argument could be made that we as a society don’t value our elderly as much as we should; and I know that there are exceptions to this general principle;  but these exemptions are different issues for a different post.

Eckhart Tolle once said, “Wherever you are, be there totally. If you find your here and now intolerable and it makes you unhappy, you have three options: remove yourself from the situation, change it, or accept it totally.”

Actions that cause us and others suffering are in the past and cannot be undone or changed.  A woman who becomes a drug addict, for example, and loses her husband through divorce and her children to a judge’s decision to give her kids to the ex-husband cannot step into a time machine, go back to when she began using heroin, decide not to start shooting up, alter the chain of events from that point in her past, and thereby undo the fact that the judge separated her from her children.  It is simply not possible.

Nor can she remove herself from the situation.  The fact that she lost her family to her own bad decision to start shooting heroin follows her around wherever she goes day after day after day without end.  When she does manage to sleep at night with help from modern pharmaceuticals, she inevitably wakes the next morning to this realization: My babies are gone.  And the anguish begins again.

This is suffering for her because the knowledge that she destroyed herself and caused others great suffering as well, produces an enormous amount of discontent within her ego which channels and manifests this feeling of discontent into a negative, depressed, doom-and-gloom state of mind we call guilt.  Guilt is the ego having no options available to fix that which lowers our sense of self-worth, our existential value, our place in the tribe.  Becoming a drug addict and losing one’s husband and children, after all, is a counter-productive thing to do which harms the tribe at large and one’s smaller personal tribe in particular.  The status of such an individual is demoted in the eyes of everyone-herself, her children, other family members, and close friends.

As this mess she has gotten herself into cannot be fixed and she cannot in any acceptable way remove herself from it, the ego has one last choice – accept the fact that it (she) is worthless and of no value in both the tribe at large and her own close, personal tribe.

Many times this option is simply not an option at all, so the ego goes back to the option of removing one’s self from the guilt and comes up with alternative methods of removal.  It is at this point that the ego instructs her to either begin using substances again to dull the realization of her worthlessness or commit suicide which will permanently remove it (her) from this realization and resulting guilt.

Guilt can come about from other behaviors besides drug addiction and its karma, which means people use substances and commit suicide for numerous reasons all the time.

A much milder example of the ego seeking an escape from the pain of believing one’s existential value has permanently been demolished and can do nothing about it is introversion.  People who have been made to feel worthless and inferior by others often keep to themselves and don’t socialize in order to avoid any possible experiences that could produce more feelings of inferiority.  This is the basis for that which we often refer to as “shyness.”

The Superego

Freud said, “The super-ego aims for perfection. It comprises that organized part of the personality structure, mainly but not entirely unconscious, that includes the individual’s ego ideals, spiritual goals, and the psychic agency (commonly called “conscience”) that criticizes and prohibits his or her drives, fantasies, feelings, and actions.”

In other words, the superego is the awareness aspect of that which we call the human “mind.”  It is an evolved safety mechanism, designed to keep the ego in check and under control.  It has the ability to objectively look at our thoughts, words, and deeds, consider these, and then make judgements as to whether they are either constructive or counterproductive to both the individual and others.  In essence, it is our conscience.

Based on its own judgements and how developed it is, it will dictate either action or restraint in regard to some stimulus, whether that stimulus is an internal thought or some external word or action committed by another person.  If it is strong enough, it will stop us and say, “Hey now, hold on there just a second!  Let’s stop and think this through.”

In order to do this, the superego must be sufficiently developed and strong enough to deny the instincts of the id and the recommended impulsive actions of the ego.  Ideally, the superego becomes strong and in control from teachings of morality, discipline, and first-hand experiences.

That is how it is supposed to work, but this is not always so.  There are some people who live their entire lives as slaves to the id and ego and never have a clue otherwise.  They never develop a strong superego; and their existence is similar to that of a drug addict – always controlled by their addiction, their ego.  Serial killers and pedophiles are the two most extreme examples of people who are totally controlled by their ego and have almost-non-existent superegos.

It is enticing to forget about the superego and simply give in and follow the motivations of id and ego because it is the easy way out and seems natural to do so.  Self-discipline is a difficult task to both initially undertake and then to follow through with in the long run.  Intellectual laziness, on the other hand, comes natural to us.

The superego is outnumbered.  It is constantly in a two-against-one struggle with the id and ego.  Oftentimes it loses because most people (1) don’t have a clue about the whole id-ego-superego dynamic, and (2) don’t have-and probably wouldn’t have even if they were informed-the resolve to follow the superego anyway.  In other words, most of us have strong ids and egos but weak superegos.  It takes determination and discipline to strengthen and follow one’s superego; and well, that’s just too much work for most folks.

The Id, Ego, Superego, and Religion

The core of both Christianity and Buddhism is about overcoming the id and ego with a strong superego.  Though Jesus and the Buddha did not have the insights of Sigmund Freud at their disposal, they essentially understood Freud’s teachings on a gut level and preached this message to their disciples.

Jesus said, “Enter through the narrow gate.  For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.” (Matthew 7:13-14)

He says that the road to destruction is the wide gate and the broad path.  He means that being a slave to the id and ego is an easy thing to do; and it is the way of life that most people choose because, again, intellectual laziness comes easy, requires no understanding, and seems natural to us.

By “destruction” Jesus is referring to the results of ego-inspired words and behavior we say and commit and the resulting state of mind we find ourselves in by giving in – loss, anxiety, depression, guilt.  “Destruction” is the ravaged body the drug addicted girl is left with after turning to heroin to dull the pain of the worthlessness she feels from something that was done to her or the guilt of some action that she herself committed and cannot undo.  It’s the loneliness felt by the old man who, as a young man, spent his free time drunk in bars chasing women instead of staying at home with his wife and children, who are now no longer a part of his life and have absolutely nothing to do with him.

Jesus spoke many other wise words that had the same meanings as the insights of Sigmund Freud.

Whereas Jesus of Nazareth spoke in general terms and allowed the hearer to contemplate and reach their own understanding, Siddhartha Gautama-the Buddha-taught more specifically.  He taught the nature of suffering and the end of suffering in the Four Noble Truths and The Eightfold Path.

The Four Noble Truths are as follows:

1. Life is suffering.
2. It is because of our ignorance of the nature of desire that we suffer.
3. Suffering can come to an end.
4. It is through the Eightfold Path that we can end our suffering, which is:
   right view, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.

The whole intent of the above Buddhist teachings is to make the student of Buddhism understand the underlying reasons for his desires and actions (the id and the ego) and to develop a disciplined state of mind that has control over desire and action (superego).

That is how the Buddha explained his way of achieving what he referred to as “Enlightenment” (which is another subject altogether).  His explanation is much more in-depth than what I have offered here as a summary of his philosophy.  I have a different take on the Buddhas basic teachings:

Life is suffering because we are ignorant of the dynamics of the id, ego, and superego.  Because we are ignorant of this dynamic, we are slaves to desire (the ego’s manifestation of the id’s primal urges and instincts) which oftentimes has negative consequences (negative karma) attached to it.  Once we understand this whole dynamic and begin strengthening our superegos through contemplation and self-control, we can become free of suffering.  That’s not to say the past will be undone and the consequences (karma) of previous actions will magically go away, but we can begin to have a better life and experience contentment rather than strife.

This is easier said than done.  Indeed, the gate is small and the road narrow that leads to life; and without a doubt, there are few who find it because consciously living in accordance with the wise counsel of the superego instead of acting on the ego’s orders is very difficult.

The Wrap-Up

Human existence is difficult.  It is a rat race just simply trying to make a living, raise children, and stay employed.  Some people have to deal with poverty, war, drought, and famine.  Yeah, life is suffering.  The Buddha was right.

On top of all this, we have the never-ending, ego-conceived pissing contest we engage in with each other, to some degree, of our own ignorant volition, which doesn’t help matters at all.

We will only know personal contentment and peaceful co-existence when we come to understand the dynamics of the id, ego, and superego.  Only when we take control of the id and ego by strengthening the superego will we end war, child abuse, domestic violence, drug abuse, inferiority complexes, etc.  Sure, we can end suffering; but its a long, rough road to get there.  Maybe one day we will actually decide to begin the journey.

Endnotes

1. I say “semi-conscious” because the only reasons we are unaware of it is because (1) we are ignorant of its very existence , which means that (2) we don’t recognize it when we see it , which is because (3) most of us don’t undergo the self-discipline required to develop an awareness of the ego and the determination not to acquiesce to its instructions.
2. I never really cared much for having a super-hot, attractive girlfriend for two reasons: (1) other males are always trying to be with them, which is annoying and (2) good looking women know they are good looking and have an attitude about it.