Philosophy has had an answer all along;

One should become aware of one’s deluded notion in which one thinks that ‘I belong to these objects of the world and my life depends upon them. I cannot live without them and they cannot exist without me, either.’ Then by profound enquiry, one contemplates ‘I do not belong to these objects, nor do these objects belong to me’. Thus abandoning the ego-sense through intense contemplation, one should playfully engage oneself in the actions that happen naturally, but with the heart and mind ever cool and tranquil. Such an abandonment of the ego-sense and the conditioning is known as the contemplative egolessness.

-- from "Vasistha's Yoga" translated by Swami Venkatesananda.

▲

zkmon 17 hours ago | parent [-]

Such ego and delusions are results of mind wandering outside of the context provided by the instincts and senses.

▲

rramadass 8 hours ago | parent [-]

No.

The ego-sense is the Mind in its capacity/function as self-identification. Its is called Ahamkara (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahamkara) and is an aspect of Antahkarana - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antahkarana. It is fully capable of creating delusions from external (i.e. objects through the senses) or internal (i.e. objects through its own imagination) means.

▲

zkmon 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Looking at biological evolution, purpose and functioning of instincts and senses is more useful and more grounded than abstract philosophies, in my opinion. We don't need to analyze mind and thoughts in a manner that is fully disconnected from biology.

Mind is just an orchestrator of responses by processing of sensory information, memories and instincts. Actually, such processing and response can happen throughout the body as well to a limited extent.

	▲	rramadass 8 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		This sort of reductionist approach has long been discarded. Philosophizing is as old as mankind with even the most primitive tribe developing a "Worldview" within which it placed itself i.e. gave meaning to its existence. "Modern Science" itself was birthed from Philosophy in order to study "Objective Reality" separately from our "Subjective Perception" of it. But the fact that we "live in our Mind" only via subjective perceptions (i.e. experiences/feelings/emotions/thoughts/memories/etc.) has not gone away and hence the problems engendered by this must be faced. The need for a study of this through a Philosophy is nicely stated by the opening verse of Samkhya Karika (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samkhyakarika) which is a seminal text from the Samkhya (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samkhya) school of philosophy; Because of the torment of the three-fold suffering, arises this inquiry to know the means of counteracting it. If it is said that such inquiry is useless because perceptible means of removal exist, we say no because these means are neither lasting nor effective. (See the "Contents" section of Samkhya Karika webpage linked to above for a detailed understanding) So what Philosophies give us is a way to orient our psychology through a appropriate worldview which promises the removal of all suffering and unhappiness which Biology by itself cannot.