“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

What you have here is an attempt to objectify, or stand apart from action in such a refusal. This is not the fault of the subconscious, but a fault of the ego, which refuses to assimilate or accept a given action. As you know, it is the ego who exists as a result of such objectivity. All the qualities that make up the ego are objectified to that degree, but they are collected about the ego with the ego as center. When the ego however refuses to accept an emotion as a part of itself, it tries one of two actions.

The rejected emotion, in other words, will express itself in any case, but it will do so then as a rebel, outside of the organizational directives of the ego itself. Hence for example, actions that appear senseless to the ego are often the results of such unassimilated or denied emotions. At one time or another such emotions were acceptable to the ego. There was an attraction, or the emotion would not have been permitted to enter into a realm close to ego control.

It could still do this and retain its own nature, merely by allowing into its awareness the reality of other actions as a part of its self-image. There is for example no basic reason why the subconscious and the ego cannot communicate to a much larger extent than is now usual. Such communication would result in the acceptance of additional energy and action by the ego, and an expansion of the ego’s self-image.