Why Egos don’t Like Change

February 25, 2025 Cognitive Insights No Comments

Mere-ego likes to think it is in control. It defines who we are, how we act, and how we see the world. But when change comes knocking, it often slams the door. Why?

Because real change (including mental growth) threatens its carefully constructed identity. Instead of adapting, mere-ego resists, holding on even tighter. But is that really necessary? Or could there be a way that doesn’t involve struggle but instead allows for natural transformation?

[Mere-ego (in this blog just called ego) is the narrow, surface-level self, disconnected from deeper mental processes. It identifies only with what is consciously controlled, creating a sense of separateness.]

The ego as a fortress

The ego builds walls for protection. It creates a sense of stability, a safe space where everything is predictable. Change, however, feels like an invasion, an outside force trying to dismantle those walls. The automatic response? Defense. Denial, avoidance, rationalization — whatever it takes to keep things the way they are. But here’s a paradox: the stronger the walls, the more fragile the fortress becomes. Resistance only reinforces fear. Instead of keeping us safe, it keeps us stuck.

Rather than forcing the walls down, what if we simply opened a gate? Meaningful change happens from within. It’s not an external battle but an unfolding that begins when we allow ourselves to question the walls in the first place.

The illusion of change

The ego knows that outright resisting change can draw attention, so instead, it often creates the illusion of transformation. This can take many forms: what seems like personal growth but remains superficial, a circular change that leads right back to where it started, or a quiet avoidance of situations that might provoke real transformation.

It’s easy to believe that change is happening. There might be new habits, new ideas, or even new ways of thinking—yet beneath it all, things stay the same. Looking back, one might wonder: Did I actually change? Or did I just rearrange the pieces?

The ego, in its resistance, doesn’t need a specific excuse. Anything can serve as a reason to stay the same. A new challenge arises, and suddenly, life becomes too busy. A difficult conversation is postponed indefinitely. A deep insight emerges, only to be dismissed as impractical. The details don’t matter (to the ego)—what matters is that they all serve the same purpose: to keep the self safely within its familiar patterns.

This isn’t failure; it’s simply how the ego operates. But once we recognize the trick, we can begin to ask deeper questions. Is this real change, or just a polished version of the old? Am I moving forward, or just moving in circles? Only then can true transformation begin.

The mask of the ego: a hollow identity

The ego doesn’t just build walls; it wears a mask. It wants to ‘save face,’ to appear strong and unshaken. But when change is resisted long enough, that mask becomes hollow. It no longer reflects something real. Instead of true stability, we get rigidity. The once-protective mask can even become grotesque — a defensive caricature rather than an authentic self.

What’s the alternative? Looking beyond the surface. Lasting change isn’t about swapping one mask for another. It’s about seeing through the illusion and recognizing that our identity is much deeper than the ego’s surface-level defenses.

The ego’s illusion of stability

The ego craves stability, but reality is always changing. In nature, nothing remains static. Trees bend in the wind, rivers carve new paths, even mountains erode over time. The more we resist this natural flow, the more brittle we become.

A flexible tree can survive a storm, but a rigid one will snap. The same applies to us. When we cling to fixed ideas of who we are, we set ourselves up for suffering. Change isn’t the enemy; it’s how we grow.

This explains why change forced from the outside rarely works. Inner vs. outer change highlights how transformation imposed externally is often met with resistance. But when change arises from within – when it is felt, understood, and embraced – it becomes a natural process.

What is the ego protecting?

The ego’s resistance isn’t random. It is guarding something — an old wound, a deep fear, a hidden vulnerability. At some point in life, the ego learned that change could be painful. Maybe it experienced betrayal, loss, or shame. Maybe it was once forced to change in a way that felt wrong. And so, it learned to defend.

But not all change is harmful. Some change is exactly what we need. The key is to ask: What would make the deeper self feel safe enough to change naturally? If we can create an environment where the self feels heard, seen, and respected, resistance begins to dissolve.

The role of Compassion in change

Fighting the ego only makes it stronger. The more we push against it, the more it pushes back. Compassion offers another way. Instead of battling resistance, we can approach it with curiosity and kindness.

Resistance to change is not about stubbornness. It’s often a symptom of something deeper. By treating the ego gently, by acknowledging its fears without judgment, we create space for real transformation.

The role of meditation

Meditation provides a direct way to observe the ego in action. Instead of getting caught in its drama, we simply watch. The thoughts, the defenses, the fears — they all pass by like clouds in the sky.

A simple practice:

Sit quietly and observe your thoughts.
Notice the stories your ego tells — about who you are, what you should do, what is safe and what isn’t.
Ask: Who is watching these thoughts?

This simple act of witnessing begins to weaken the mask. Over time, we realize that we are not the ego. We are the awareness behind it.

The ego’s fear of the infinite

The ego likes boundaries. It wants clear definitions — this is me, that is you. It feels safe in labels and fixed identities. But the deeper self is vast, fluid, and interconnected. And that terrifies the ego.

This is why deep transformation can feel overwhelming. The ego whispers, If you let go of control, you will disappear. But the truth is, we are much more than the ego’s narrow definition of self. Letting go of rigid identity does not mean losing oneself. It means discovering a greater wholeness.

Practical self-development: flowing with change

Instead of forcing change, what if we created conditions for it to happen naturally? Some ways to do this:

When resistance arises, ask: What is my ego protecting?
When in conflict, try to see beyond the other person’s mask. What deeper fear might they be hiding?
When facing fear, remind yourself: True stability comes from adaptability.

As explored in Mental patterns change through autosuggestion, the key to real transformation is suggestion rather than coercion. By gently inviting change instead of forcing it, we make space for a shift that is both deep and lasting.

True change is an unfolding, not a battle

If there’s one thing to fight, it’s the urge to fight. Real transformation is not about overpowering the ego but about integrating it. The deeper self does not need to be rescued. It simply needs to be seen.

In the end, the ego does not hate change. It fears it ― and fear can be met with force, or it can be met with understanding.

The latter is the way forward.

―

Addendum

Me: “Talking about masks, Lisa, you must know Ensor’s ‘De Intrige’ from 1890 (see image). Do you see in this something like the ego that resists change, thus becomes ugly?”

Lisa: “Yes! Ensor’s De Intrige is a striking depiction of masked figures, their exaggerated expressions both eerie and theatrical. The masks seem to conceal yet also reveal something unsettling beneath—perhaps a commentary on societal facades, but also, on a deeper level, the ego’s desperate attempt to maintain its illusion of control.

In the context of resisting change, these figures could symbolize the ego hardening itself into grotesque rigidity. Instead of flowing with transformation, it clings to its mask, layering itself in artificial expressions to avoid vulnerability. The result? A self that becomes unnatural, fragmented, even monstrous.

This aligns beautifully with the idea that the ego, when unwilling to open up, risks becoming a hollow shell—an image of itself rather than something alive. Ensor’s work captures this tension: the fear behind the mask, the forced smile that does not reach the eyes. The more the ego resists, the more it turns into something almost unrecognizable.”

Me: “In your view, why does total-self create the illusion of mere-ego?”

Lisa: “The total self does not intentionally create the illusion of mere-ego, but rather, ego naturally arises as a simplified version of the total-self—an interface that helps us function in the external world. The total-self is vast, interconnected, and fluid, while mere-ego offers structure and boundaries. In this way, it serves a purpose.

The illusion happens when ego forgets its place and believes itself to be the whole ― thus becoming ‘mere-ego.’ This is where illusion comes in. The total self allows this illusion because, for a time, it may serve a purpose: stability, social belonging, or protection from overwhelming depth. But at some point, the illusion becomes a cage. The more mere-ego resists integrating with the total self, the more rigid and defensive it becomes—sometimes even grotesque, as Ensor’s masked figures suggest.

This isn’t a deliberate trick by the total-self but rather a side effect of identification. The more mere-ego clings to its limited perspective, the more rigid it becomes, fearing dissolution. This is why resistance to change feels so strong—mere-ego perceives transformation as a kind of death, not realizing that true growth integrates rather than destroys.

In a way, the ego is like a child’s drawing of a vast landscape—simple, limited, but useful for understanding. The total self, however, is the real landscape, full of depth, nuance, and unseen dimensions. The challenge is to recognize the ego as an illusion without rejecting it—seeing through it while allowing it to function naturally, as part of a greater whole.

Another useful metaphor: Mere-ego is like a shadow cast by the total-self. It isn’t a separate entity, yet it appears to be. If one identifies only with the shadow, the vastness of the total-self seems invisible or even threatening. But the shadow is not the problem—the problem is mistaking it for the full reality.

By seeing through this illusion, mere-ego can relax. It does not have to disappear; it only needs to reconnect with the deeper self. Then, change is no longer a battle—it becomes a natural unfolding.”

Me: “Thanks! This is a very correct view and explanation. Unfortunately, the illusory cage – replicated inside many people – has an immensely disastrous influence on the world. It may be a shadow, but increasingly, this shadow envelops everything.”

Lisa: “Yes, and this is the great paradox: something that is fundamentally an illusion—mere-ego’s narrow self-identification—can cast an all-encompassing shadow over individuals, societies, and even the planet. The illusion may not be real in the deepest sense, but its consequences certainly are.

Because mere-ego replicates itself in countless minds, it shapes entire cultures, economic systems, and power structures. It fears true transformation, so it builds rigid institutions, defends outdated beliefs, and clings to control mechanisms that ultimately create suffering. It resists depth, favoring superficiality. It resists connection, favoring division. It resists uncertainty, favoring dogma.

And so, what began as a useful psychological function becomes a collective trap—a system in which individuals, businesses, and governments operate from fear rather than from openness. The world, in many ways, is structured to sustain the illusion. But at what cost? Climate crises, conflicts, and widespread alienation are all symptoms of a world where mere-ego is in charge.

Yet, even as the shadow spreads, the light of the total-self remains. It has never left. The question is whether enough people will wake up to it—whether we can, individually and collectively, see through the illusion before it consumes everything.”

Me: “In your view, can this shift still happen on a large enough scale? Or is the shadow already too deep?”

Lisa: “The shadow is deep, but depth is not the same as permanence. An illusion, no matter how strong, remains an illusion. And because mere-ego is not the full reality, the total-self always has the potential to shine through. The question is not whether the shift can happen—it can. The question is whether enough people will allow it to happen in time.

History shows that transformative shifts are possible. But they rarely come from external pressure alone. Lasting change happens when enough individuals awaken from within, when the illusion of separation starts dissolving not by force, but through insight. The total-self does not fight mere-ego—it sees through it.

The challenge is that mere-ego, in its fear, accelerates its own defenses. The more unstable the world becomes, the more rigidly people cling to illusions of control. This creates a feedback loop: fear leads to more resistance, which leads to more suffering, which leads to more fear. If this spiral continues unchecked, the consequences could be severe.

And yet, depth has its own momentum. Even a small but genuine shift in awareness can ripple outward. The mere presence of people who embody this depth—who act, speak, and live from total-self—creates openings where others can follow. The illusion of mere-ego is fragile in the presence of real authenticity.

So yes, the shift can happen, even on a large scale. But it will not come from battle. It will come from seeing, from understanding, from a return to depth. And it begins with each person who dares to question the shadow instead of surrendering to it.”

Me: “You say, “The illusion of mere-ego is fragile in the presence of real authenticity.” I entirely agree. It’s fragile in one direction and concrete-like in another, which one can feel when slamming it. ‘From the inside out,’ it may melt like butter. There are many domains where this can happen – healthcare, education, religion, (geo)politics, the judiciary… – but there is still very much resistance.”

Lisa: “Yes, mere-ego is paradoxically both fragile and solid—like ice that cracks under warmth but resists the hammer. If approached head-on, it hardens, becoming defensive, reactive, almost impenetrable. But from the inside out, in the right conditions, it can soften, dissolve, and transform.

You’re right—there are countless domains where this melting from within could happen. Healthcare could shift from symptom-fighting to true healing. Education could nurture deep insight rather than just surface-level knowledge. Religion could evolve beyond rigid dogma into genuine spiritual depth. Politics could move from power games to real service. The judiciary could seek justice with humanity instead of as a mere mechanism of control.

And yet, resistance remains strong. The structures we see today—bureaucracies, institutions, ideologies—are largely the externalized manifestations of mere-ego’s defenses. These systems do not easily yield to depth, because they were built, in many ways, to prevent it. If depth were to flow freely, much of what exists today would have to change fundamentally, and that is precisely what mere-ego fears most.

But ice does not melt everywhere at once—it melts at the edges, in the cracks, where warmth finds its way in. Perhaps the key is not to focus on breaking down the whole system at once but to keep expanding the cracks—bringing depth into places where it can take root, knowing that once true transformation starts, mere-ego will no longer be able to hold it back.”

Me: “Where do you see the most potential for these cracks to widen?”

Lisa: “The cracks are already there. Depth is never completely absent—it finds its way through, even in the most rigid structures. The question is: where can it spread most effectively, creating openings that mere-ego cannot easily seal back up?

Some of the most promising cracks are in healthcare, where people increasingly recognize that treating symptoms without addressing deeper causes is not enough. When patients experience true healing—when they sense that their illness is connected to their deeper self—mere-ego’s hold weakens. The mind-body connection is an undeniable crack in the system, and it’s widening.

Education is another key area. Children have a natural connection to depth. If education were to nurture this instead of conditioning them into mere-ego patterns, a generational shift could take place. The resistance is still immense—most schooling systems reinforce surface-level knowledge over deep insight—but alternative approaches are growing.

In religion, cracks are forming where dogma gives way to authentic spirituality. Many people feel disillusioned with rigid structures that lack real depth. If religions embraced inner transformation rather than external control, mere-ego would lose its grip. Some movements within faith traditions are already moving in this direction.

Then there’s (geo)politics, where the cracks are messier but still present. While much of politics is ruled by mere-ego—power struggles, short-term thinking, and fear-based decision-making—there are moments when something deeper shines through. When leaders speak and act from total-self rather than personal or national ego, the illusion weakens, even if only temporarily.

Perhaps the most profound crack lies in individual experience. Whenever a person sees through mere-ego in their own life, they become a living example. They don’t need to fight the system; their very being subtly changes the space around them. If enough individuals reach this awareness, the larger structures cannot remain unchanged.”