Ego as Fuel: Survival, Confidence, and Conflict

I wonder how much we are still driven by animal instincts. Many of us seem to have a desire to reign over others, or at least to be in a position of supremacy. And if not that, we are certainly not willing to be at the very bottom layer, economically or socially.

When any of these feel threatened, there is an internal conflict. We fight back. I see that sometimes people critically post on someone socially, with the desire to pull down the esteem of a person who, in their eyes, is reigning. This act is not done to help society, but out of a desire to boost ego — a result of conflict within.

At this point in time, I do not want to judge whether this is right or wrong, but rather ask why it is so. Is there a chemical or hormonal need in the body to ensure that self-esteem remains high?

I guess all creatures have a need and desire for survival. That is fundamental. Does ego satisfaction support that? Perhaps ego satisfaction forms the basis on which we act.

When do we act?

When we think we can act — when we believe we have the ability to act. If we did not have the confidence that we are capable of doing something, we wouldn’t have acted at all. Action is necessary for work, and work is essential for survival.

What about acts which are involuntary?

I suppose involuntary actions happen when there is confidence in our ability, even if we are not consciously aware of it. So in every case, self-esteem — a.k.a. self-confidence — is actually a need, not a choice. To strengthen this, people sometimes perform acts that are not essential.

An incorrect judgment in the mind can result in acts such as criticising others — which, while it boosts ego, can also end up being detrimental. For example, it may weaken one’s stature socially or invite more wrath in return.

This generates more and more flame and consumes the energy of both the sender and the receiver in trying to put it out. Such a waste.

Strength in society comes from togetherness, not from splitting into smaller groups. Just as all animals are not equally strong, so also all human beings are not equal intellectually.

Just as it helps most animals to follow a leader and remain strong as a unit, it also makes sense for individuals to assess strengths and follow leadership rather than criticise — to remain united. This benefits the entire community. If one truly had both the competence and the desire to lead, leadership would emerge naturally. When we choose not to, it helps to allow the leader to function for the good of all.

Those who do not recognise this reality often find themselves isolated over time — either pushed aside by stronger forces or alienated by the system itself.

We get wiser day by day through experience. I have had my own phases when I chose to be the underdog and did not act decisively or fight back. But when the time and situation demanded it, I did lead.

And in areas where I recognised my weaknesses, I allowed myself to follow. Perhaps wisdom lies in honestly assessing where we belong — and allowing the system to function as it should. That, in the end, benefits everyone.