"The Egg" is a variation on a very old spiritual idea — that everyone is god, and god is everyone. I suppose it's an interesting alternative to more mainstream conceptions of god, but it runs afoul of the "Haitian test". "What if you were a Haitian?" supposes that there is some core of you that is traitless, and wholly separable from every single one of your traits, but still identifiably you. "What if you were god?" really isn't any different. Questions like this are all syntax and no semantics, like the tree falling in a forest with no one to hear. Does it make a sound? Well, what's your definition of the word "sound"? What's your definition of "identity"? How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? We manipulate symbols everyday in order to think at all. But if we confuse those symbols with the actual objects they represent, then we risk creating questions, and answers, which follow our rules for symbols (syntax), but don't correspond to any real meaningful configuration of the objects they represent (semantics). Many questions or ideas which seem profound are really just exploitations of symbol-object confusion. What happens to your lap when you stand up? What is the sound of one hand clapping? Unless you can unpack the symbols "lap" and "clap", notice what they contain, and how they represent verbs as nouns, or vice versa, for syntactic convenience, you're going to end up being impressed by a whole lot of stoner wisdom that doesn't really tell you anything useful. There are two key phrases that you can use as mental tools to avoid going down these rabbit holes. "What does that even mean?" "How could that be disproven?" What does it even mean for you to be god? (Or a Haitian.) How could someone prove that you weren't god?
