2 Unclinging from Paradigm Fixation
In this section, we will address a problem often ignored in education (or even academia): the problem of overidentification with ego. What does ego have to do with teaching and learning? Everything. But let us first define the term itself.
What is Ego?
In educational psychology, ego refers to an individual’s mental construction of self or identity. It is often conceptualized as the part of the psyche responsible for self-awareness, self-regulation, and mediating between internal desires and external social expectations. Rooted in psychoanalytic theory, ego significantly influences how individuals approach learning, motivation, social interactions, and personal development. Many motivational theories hinge on the concept of ego and self-identification.
Put simply, ego filters how you perceive yourself and how you believe others perceive you. It encompasses your beliefs about yourself, others, relationships, and the principles governing your emotional and physical world. Ego shapes confidence, the desire for respect, and the need for recognition.
In educational settings, ego directly impacts students’ sense of self-worth, ability to succeed, identity, and belonging. Because ego determines a person’s sense of self, its quality influences both internal experiences (thoughts, emotions) and external interactions (relationships, academic performance).
For example, a person experiencing depression may face recurring patterns of negative thoughts. Over time, these repeated thoughts can become core beliefs—assumptions about reality that form the foundation of one’s worldview. Beliefs help us interpret experiences and guide our thoughts, feelings, and actions. Negative core beliefs, when internalized, can lead to a negative ego identity characterized by low self-efficacy, negative self-concepts, and diminished self-worth. Conversely, a healthy ego reflects balanced self-worth, fostering self-confidence and a sense of competence. This balance enables individuals to feel recognized and valued, contributing to healthier personal and social experiences.
Thus, ego reflects who you believe you are, encompassing your strengths, weaknesses, and perceived role in the world. Beliefs, self-identity, and ego are shaped through personal experiences, social interactions, and environmental influences. For instance, you might believe regular exercise is important for health because of its observable positive effects on yourself and others. These beliefs inform your decisions and actions, contributing to your self-identity as someone who values health and well-being—perhaps as a fit, athletic, or health-conscious individual.
Ego as a Social Construction
One common misconception about ego is the assumption that it is solely an individualistic construct, arising entirely from cognitive processes. In reality, ego is both a mental and social construction. All mental constructs, including ego, are deeply influenced by social interactions and cultural contexts. These constructs are encoded as neural patterns in the body and brain, shaping how we perceive ourselves and the world. Cognitive psychologists refer to these mental frameworks as schemas, which are dynamic, adaptable systems for interpreting and navigating our experiences.
No human mind begins as a blank slate (tabula rasa). At birth, individuals inherit genetic predispositions and are immediately immersed in lived experiences filled with sounds, symbols, and cultural narratives. These stimuli are interpreted differently across cultures, resulting in a rich diversity of languages, art forms, traditions, and ideologies. Such cultural artifacts serve as intergenerational transmissions of knowledge, continuously shaping human identity and understanding. Through participation in these cultural practices, individuals learn to interpret and assign meaning to the world in ways that align with their societal norms.
For instance, foundational beliefs such as theism (“God created the world”) or atheism (“There is no God”) are constructed through social interactions and cultural narratives. These contrasting worldviews demonstrate how ego, and by extension identity, is shaped by the psychosocial exchange of cultural artifacts and symbolism. A person raised in a fundamentalist Christian culture may view a devout Muslim as sinful, while the reverse may also hold true. Such perceptions are deeply rooted in the cultural conditioning of ego and belief systems.
In simpler terms, people develop unique understandings of the world through observation, participation, and lived experience. These understandings are reflected in their internal schemas—neural models that guide thoughts, emotions, and behaviors. Encountering new information can challenge these schemas, creating tension between assimilation (fitting new information into existing frameworks) and accommodation (revising schemas to incorporate new information). The latter often proves difficult, especially when core beliefs about controversial topics like race, capitalism, or duality are involved. Altering such deeply ingrained schemas can disrupt personal and professional dimensions of life, requiring profound psychological adjustment.
Although ego centers on self-perception, it is also shaped by how others treat us. External validation, or lack thereof, can interfere with one’s sense of self. When individuals internalize negative feedback from others, they may develop unhealthy self-concepts, damaging their ego. A wounded ego may manifest in attempts to impress others as a means of seeking recognition and validation. For example, a person who identifies as health-conscious may overexert themselves at the gym, motivated more by the desire to impress others than by genuine self-care. This behavior reflects an ego overly reliant on external approval rather than an intrinsic sense of self-worth.
Ego, then, is not merely an internal phenomenon but a dynamic construct shaped through interpersonal relationships, cultural narratives, and social structures. By recognizing the interplay between the individual and the collective in shaping ego, we can better understand how identity evolves and how it can be nurtured to support healthier self-perceptions.
Understanding How Our Identities Can Affect Our Egos
Now, if you understand the role of ego and its connection to our sense of self (including the many “self-adjacent concepts”), you can further this understanding by looking at different types of identities that impact our egos. These identities—such as nation, race, and religion—shape how we see ourselves and interact with others. When people overidentify with these identities, they may perceive certain aspects of their identity as fixed and unchangeable, leading to inflexibility in thought and behavior.
National Identity: Take national identity, for example. Many people are proud of their country and see it as a key part of who they are. This pride can create a strong sense of belonging and community. However, when national identity becomes the main source of a person’s self-worth, it can lead to exclusion and conflicts with people from other countries. For instance, in the Israel-Palestine conflict, criticism of the state of Israel can sometimes be mistaken for a critique of Judaism itself. For someone who strongly identifies both as Jewish and as a supporter of Israel, it can be hard to separate legitimate concerns (like criticizing government actions) from feeling personally attacked or facing anti-Semitic remarks. Similar tensions can be observed in nationalist movements across the globe, where criticism of governmental policies is often conflated with attacks on cultural identity. This makes it difficult to have calm, intellectual discussions about important topics like decolonization, as ego gets in the way.
Racial Identity: Similarly, racial identity is a powerful part of many people’s sense of self. Celebrating one’s race can build solidarity and cultural pride. However, when racial identity is emphasized too much, it can create divisions and prejudices. For example, someone who overidentifies with their race might develop negative attitudes toward other races, seeing them as fundamentally different or inferior. This reinforces stereotypes and makes it harder to recognize our shared humanity. It can create an “us versus them” mindset, where the ego focuses on protecting and elevating one racial group while disregarding others. Specifically, overidentifying with European or White heritage can lead to artificial separations based on arbitrary physical traits. In a society where ego-driven racial beliefs are strong, racism can continue without needing explicit ideas of superiority. By continuing to identify with these artificial race categories, we miss the chance to see our similarities and celebrate our differences as part of a united humanity.
Religious Identity: Religious identity is another area where ego overidentification can cause problems. Religion often provides a moral framework and a sense of purpose, which can be very fulfilling. However, when people tie their ego too closely to their religious beliefs, it can lead to intolerance and conflict. For example, someone who strongly identifies with their religion might dismiss or condemn other belief systems, seeing them as wrong or threatening. This lack of openness prevents meaningful conversations between different faiths and mutual respect. History shows how religious missionary work during colonization imposed one religion on others, often leading to conflict. When someone’s ego is tied to their religion, they may believe their religion is the only correct one. To be truly inclusive, the ego would need to recognize that multiple religions can be valuable. This means seeing the fundamental similarities between different faiths and being open to how science and religion can coexist. Achieving this requires questioning the parts of our identity that we hold too tightly and being willing to let go of ego-driven attachments.
Why These Examples Matter
These examples show how overidentifying with national, racial, or religious identities can create barriers to understanding, cooperation, and empathy. When people see these identities as fixed and separate, their egos can prevent them from appreciating the fluid and interconnected nature of human experiences. This makes it difficult to move beyond rigid classifications and embrace a more inclusive view of identity.
Understanding that nation, race, and religion are social constructs means recognizing that these identities are created by society and can change over time. When our ego clings too tightly to these constructs, it resists flexibility, leading to conflicts and misunderstandings. By acknowledging the constructed nature of these identities, teachers and individuals can start to see beyond surface differences and foster a more inclusive and empathetic environment. This requires humility and a willingness to let go of ego-driven attachments to specific identities, allowing for a more unified and compassionate approach to teaching and learning.
In the classroom, this awareness helps teachers create a space where all students feel valued beyond their national, racial, or religious backgrounds. It encourages educators to celebrate diversity while emphasizing our common humanity. By reducing ego overidentification with these social constructs, teachers can promote a more inclusive and collaborative learning environment where students are encouraged to see themselves and others as part of a larger, interconnected community.
Conclusion
By understanding how our egos are tied to different aspects of our identities, we can work towards creating more inclusive and supportive environments both inside and outside the classroom. Recognizing and addressing overidentification with national, racial, and religious identities helps us move beyond ego-driven conflicts and fosters a sense of unity and shared humanity. This shift is essential for building respectful and cooperative communities where everyone feels valued and understood.
These examples illustrate how overidentification with national, racial, or religious identities can create barriers to empathy, cooperation, and inclusive thinking. When people see these identities as fixed social constructs rather than dynamic and multifaceted aspects of their identity, their ego can become overly attached to maintaining these distinctions. This attachment can blind individuals to the fluidity and interconnectedness of human experiences, making it difficult to move beyond rigid classifications and embrace a more holistic view of identity.
Understanding that nation, race, and religion are social constructs means recognizing that these identities are created and maintained by societal norms and can change over time. When the ego clings too tightly to these constructs, it resists this flexibility, leading to conflicts and misunderstandings. By acknowledging the constructed nature of these identities, educators and individuals can begin to see beyond the surface-level differences and foster a more inclusive and empathetic environment. This shift requires humility and a willingness to let go of ego-driven attachments to specific identities, allowing for a more unified and compassionate approach to teaching and learning.
In the classroom, this awareness can help teachers create a space where all students feel valued beyond their national, racial, or religious backgrounds. It encourages educators to celebrate diversity while also emphasizing our common humanity. By reducing ego overidentification with these social constructs, teachers can promote a more inclusive and collaborative learning environment where students are encouraged to see themselves and others as part of a larger, interconnected community.
Idolizing figures is a common practice in academia, at least in education. While acknowledging the contributions key figures have made, the practice of idolizing figures, like John Dewey in education, also raises critical concerns about promoting the individual over the (epistemological) process. Western education has long prioritized the ideas of thinkers such as Dewey often essentializing their contributions and limiting the scope of inquiry to Western paradigms. Dewey’s focus on experiential learning, democracy in education, and the link between thought and action undeniably laid the foundation for contemporary education. However, the constant citation and idolization of such figures reflect broader academic practices that prioritize the human ego over the process of knowing.
Idolization not only constrains the diversity of ideas in the academic discourse but also promotes a meritocratic culture of exclusivity. The centralization of Western figures often marginalizes non-Western thinkers, whose contributions may challenge or expand the dominant paradigms. Often, in cases of theoretical foundations of epistemology where non-Western ideas predate, we do not see efforts in tracing the lineage of human knowledge beyond the Western Sphere. These limitations reinforce the Eurocentric narrative, where the work of certain individuals is elevated to universal significance, often at the expense of alternative ways of knowing. The process of knowledge creation, in essence, becomes secondary to the celebration of human achievement.
Such cultural practices of elevating individual figures reinforce hierarchies in knowledge production, where authority is centralized in individuals rather than being shared collectively (see: The Role of Women in the Life of John Dewey). Further, there is rarely an acknowledgment of the interdependence of humans and the posthuman in any creative action (which is ironic because John Dewey did acknowledge this in his work). We argue that this dominant approach in academia reflects a deeper issue within–the prioritization of established names over the epistemological multiplicity. Knowledge is dynamic, evolving through collective, intercultural dialogue, and rooted in humility rather than the glorification of any one thinker.
Challenging the idolization of figures can open up the space for more inclusive, collaborative, and decolonized approaches to learning. By focusing on the process of knowing, rather than on individual contributions, education can shift towards an equitable and diverse epistemology that is respectfully inclusive of multiple voices and traditions. Multiple epistemologies contribute to the larger, ever-evolving fabric of human understanding. This shift is needed to foster critical reflection and inclusivity, both in academic spaces and in broader societal contexts.
nonduality
As an example of alternative frameworks, nonduality offers a radically inclusive approach to teaching and learning by challenging the traditional dualistic thinking that is normative in Western educational paradigms and practices. Dualistic thinking often manifests in binary oppositions such as teacher/student, individual/collective, knower/knowledge, and expert/novice, which perpetuate hierarchical structures of knowledge production and dissemination. nonduality disrupts these binaries, fostering a holistic and interconnected view of the learning process, where distinctions between teacher and student are blurred. This approach opens up space for shared knowledge creation, where all participants are co-learners engaged in collective inquiry.
NOTES
Beliefs are recurring thoughts that are the foundational ideas you assume to be true about reality. Beliefs help us understand and interpret the world around us. They influence other thoughts, feelings, and actions by providing a framework for making sense of our experiences and the information we receive.