Two definitions of avatar courtesy of Wikipedia follow.

• An avatar is a computer user’s representation of himself/herself or alter ego, whether in the form of a three-dimensional model used in computer games,^[1] a two-dimensional icon (picture) used on Internet forums and other communities,^[2][3] or a text construct found on early systems such as MUDs. It is an “object” representing the embodiment of the user. The term “avatar” can also refer to the personality connected with the screen name, or handle, of an Internet user.^{[4]  )http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avatar_(computing))}
• Avatar or Avatara (Sanskrit: अवतार, IAST Avatāra), often translated into English as incarnation, literally means descent (avatarati) and usually implies a deliberate descent from higher spiritual realms to lower realms of existence for special purposes. Descents that are of importance are mainly those of the Supreme Being which are plenary and marked with superhuman qualities. Other types of descents are limited expansions of Ishvara, and some that are descents of lesser empowered divinities. The term is used primarily in Hinduism for descents of Vishnu whom Vaishnava Hindus (one of the largest branches of Hinduism)^[1] worship as the Supreme God, a distinctive feature of Vaishnavism. While Shiva and Ganesha are also described as descending in the form of avatars, with the Ganesha Purana and the Mudgala Purana detailing Ganesha’s avatars specifically, the avatars of Vishnu carry a greater theological prominence than those of Shiva or Ganesha and upon examination relevant passages are directly imitative of the Vaishnava avatara lists.[2  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avatar)

I see a connection or relationship between the two versions of the word.  And no doubt there is a web of meaning dancing between them. So (let’s jump right into sacreligious area here) does that mean Jesus was God’s avatar? Can’t you just see the parallels:  video game, major religion?

I’m just starting to get into Rosanne Stone’s book The War of Desire and Technology at the End of the Close of the Mechanical Age, but her discussions of multiple personality disorder are going to be very interesting, I can see.  MPD is a brilliant disease….and a terrible one for many…but you have to wonder at the ingenuity of those who can develop themselves by breaking themselves into fragments.  It is indeed like turning yourself into either a)  a religion or b) a video game, each being a very potent metaphor for self-expansion.  The problem with MPD is that the primary subject expands without self-awareness unless an interventionist can facilitate it (think Sybil).  It’s like creating avatars that you don’t know about, and they’re off doing stuff that you haven’t authorized.  (Now if a video game does that, I’m not aware of it.  But I’m not aware of a lot of things.)

So now the Internet allows us to essentially experience a state somewhat like MPD without losing self-awareness (ideally, anyway).  It allows us to develop fragments of ourselves independently of each other.  This might be to the benefit of the whole personality, or not, depending on whether the selves complement each other or work against each other.  It is possible to imagine someone with multiple avatars in an online game or virtual world that plot and scheme against each other, although it’s not the norm as far as I can tell.  Ultimately, though, this could lead to a benefit to the whole personality, the same way that children, playing with dolls, act out conflicts.