Egos

11 posts

Flag Post

Is it okay to have an ego? I have an ego when it comes to writing and knowledge.

ITT: Discuss your egos.

 
Flag Post

Having an Ego is not a problem. Its when you show it off to everyone’s face that its a problem.

 
Flag Post

If it’s not justified, no.

If it’s justified, only if you want to be unbearable.

 
Flag Post

Ya’d be a rather “screwed up” individual if ya didn’t have one

Ego: “In modern English, ego has many meanings. It could mean one’s self-esteem, an inflated sense of self-worth, or in philosophical terms, one’s self. Ego development is known as the development of multiple processes, cognitive function, defenses, and interpersonal skills or to early adolescence when ego processes are emerged.:

Not used all that much today, “back when” the term shrink your ego was something considered to be done by sessions at a psychiatrist’s office…..“needed” because of and over-inflated ego Hence, the term “shrink” became synonymous w/ a psychiatrist. I haven’t heard the term used in years.

 
Flag Post

Brotip, karma, the whole id, ego, super-ego idea is based on Freud’s pseudo-science intellectual bullshit that has very little (if any) quantitative evidence to support it. Sure some of the shit Freud threw out there over his long career may have had some grounding, but try asking a neurologist to point out where those parts are in your brain. They’ll tell you to keep pretending using your thought experiments, there’s real science to do.

 
Flag Post

“Leggo my ego.”

Pride comes before a fall. Better to just do what you’re good at and let your actions speak for themselves.

 
Flag Post

“Brotip” right backatchya, onlineidiot.
I’m 66 and ya’re 18….
I might have a lot more experience on which to base a “perspective” on this.
Tell me, just how do YOU come to believe that Freud was a “pseudo-science intellectual bullshit” at such a “tender age”?

I give a shit who said what and the words they chose to do it….
I give a shit what a bunch of critics have to say about the work of a predecessor.
The same will (likely?) be said of their work….
and on&on&on

Sure, there ARE NOT 3 SEPARTATE entities of the human mind…there is a huge amount of “bleed over”.
BUT, for me, 3 is a “magical” number.
We live in a world of three’s…3 dimensions, top-bottom-middle, hot-cold-lukewarm, etc.
Our psyche has: basic, unconscious instincts//drives (id)….rational, conscious “thinking”(ego) ….something much deeper called soul//love, “gut-feeling”, etc.(super-ego).

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by onlineidiot1994:

Brotip, karma, the whole id, ego, super-ego idea is based on Freud’s pseudo-science intellectual bullshit that has very little (if any) quantitative evidence to support it. Sure some of the shit Freud threw out there over his long career may have had some grounding, but try asking a neurologist to point out where those parts are in your brain. They’ll tell you to keep pretending using your thought experiments, there’s real science to do.

Psychology isn’t a science?
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:I’m 66 and ya’re 18

Well, after 66 years, you still can’t form a complete written sentence without grammatical errors. The content of what you say is also pretty immature. Even though I feel that that is a self qualifying assertion, I’ll cite your usage of “3” as a magical number as my qualifier. Oh, and Appeal to Authority Fallacy.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:I’m 66 and ya’re 18

Well, after 66 years, you still can’t form a complete written sentence without grammatical errors. The content of what you say is also pretty immature. Even though I feel that that is a self qualifying assertion, I’ll cite your usage of “3” as a magical number as my qualifier. Oh, and Appeal to Authority Fallacy.

Dood, what is it w/ YOU in this forum?
Attacking HOW I write rather than WHAT I write is of ad hominem nature…..if ya wanna go “fallacy” on me.
AND, since ya do, let me clarify a few thing for ya:

Appeal to Authority Fallacy:

The strength of this authoritative argument depends upon two factors: 12
1.The authority is a legitimate expert on the subject.
2.There exists consensus among legitimate experts in the subject matter under discussion.

1) When it comes to having lived nearly half a century LONGER than someone—and those years being an adult rather than one shitting his diapers & not having even the MATURITY to legally driver until 16 & vote until 18—there is a strong likelihood that (ya did notice I said “might” & “perspecitve” rather than “authority”?) such ELDER does have some degree of “authority”. Does not the phrase, “mind your elders”, come to mind?

2) YOU find me ppl over the age of 50 that don’t think one’s accumualted years don’t give them a degree of “consensus among legitimate experts in the subject matter under discussion.” I didn’t say my age made me an “authority”. I said it MIGHT afford me a “a lot more experience on which to base a perspective” on the issue

We’re NOT having a fucking high school DEBATE, wel’re DISCUSSING issues in an INFORMAL manner. Discussions in which I FIND YOUR CONTENT TO ALSO BE PRETTYIMMATURE”. As in not yet having the merit of AUTHORITY….rather than just OPINION.

OH…since a lot of YOUR “authority” seems to stem from Christianity, I like how ya “insult” the number three……Father, Son, & Holy Spirit.

3

Since YOU & I differ greatly in ideology, I well understand this spleen YOU display….AND, I merely see it as petty, childish arrogance. BUT, thanks for “thinking” of me….LOL.

NOW, to answer YOUR question of: “Psychology isn’t a science?”
It SEEMS it isn’t

“Conclusion”
“At this point it must be clear to the intelligent reader that clinical psychology can make virtually any claim and offer any kind of therapy, because there is no practical likelihood of refutation – no clear criteria to invalidate a claim. This, in turn, is because human psychology is not a science, it is very largely a belief system similar to religion.”

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by onlineidiot1994:

Brotip, karma, the whole id, ego, super-ego idea is based on Freud’s pseudo-science intellectual bullshit that has very little (if any) quantitative evidence to support it. Sure some of the shit Freud threw out there over his long career may have had some grounding, but try asking a neurologist to point out where those parts are in your brain. They’ll tell you to keep pretending using your thought experiments, there’s real science to do.

Psychology isn’t a science?

Huh? Of course it is. It is one of the sciences that helped push science as a whole and still is doing so. And from a scientific point of view Freud’s theories are very weak. The only reason why there are people specialising in it for therapy is that it simply is proven to work. We just don’t fully understand how. So, instead of leaving people with problems on their own it has been decided that it would be better to help them, even though the basis of that therapy method may not be correct.

 
Flag Post

I think psychology is a science, to be sure. I just think Freud was full of bullshit, and felt he could justify wanting to bone his mom by saying everyone was like that. It’s kind of sad that his thought experiments were so universally accepted, yet there’s not much actual data to ground him as a brilliant scientist.

But anyway, only psychology/sociology that has measurable figures and/or applications outside the realm of research are really important or relevant to human progress.