3T - Since I am not a medical person, may I ask a question? When one claims to be proud of being a selfish person, what does that mean?
Psychiatrist referral
- Thread starter petitelover
- Start date
To be both flippant and truthful that one is a follower of the philosophical system of the late Alisa Zinovyevna Rosenbaum a.k.a. Ayn Rand with all that implies.petitelover said:
First, I do not have medical training. My education and background is in clinical psychology and psychotherapy. I maintain a small practice, but use the education and experience to run a consulting firm which relies heavily on that background.petitelover said:
Having said that, it means virtually nothing. There's no pathology to it, nor is it indicative of anything more than mild neurosis, which we all have and display.
What Hank is trying to say is that because he is proud of being a selfish person his level of self-acceptance and self-esteem are higher than yours or mine, and he's someone who is able to cope in a more integrated and healthy way than you or me. In theory, he's right.
However, in practice he's just a cocky son-of-turd, and that's his way of avoiding intimacy and keeping others at bay. You don't need to have much training to realize this, and certainly others have called him on it. In fact, he's readily transparent.
My guess is that he's read a few books and has been told to be proud of being selfish, and that every human being needs to be somewhat selfish in order to survive. However, psychotherapists often refer to a "well-integrated" person, and this is where Hankeypoo falls down. He's not well-integrated or flexible. His behaviour is very rigid. He's swallowed this belief hook, line and sinker without mulling it over or interjecting his own personality or beliefs into it.
In order to be considered a well-integrated person, therapists often say that there are two sides to every behavoiur trait, and that a well integrated person has the ability to choose from both ends of the scale using a healthy ego or personality. So the opposite of pride is humility. A well integrated person will have experience with both, and have both available to choose from as the situation dictates. I think we can see that our friend is not humble.
Finally, I'll add it is a common technique for a therapist to often mimic one side of a personality trait in order to engage with their clients and help them. So his constant cockiness brings out a lot of feelings and emotions among people. However, since he doesn't know how to handle the attention, and since humility is not an option, he's a jerk.
3Tees, coming from two disciplines distant from psychology, in some ways this sounds like the old Secondary School "life-raft exercise" (there are x number of spaces in the life-raft and X+ people in the water who should get into the life-raft and why). Needless to say we all have a self survival instinct "selfishness", however, how is this in psychological terms a "higher value" than altruism or is it entirely about balance? It would seem from a theological and legal viewpoint that altruism is in fact the higher value.3Tees said:
"No greater love has a man than this, that he lays down his life for his friends." John 15:13
The answer is actually somewhat involved. I'm sure that Hankeypoo will disagree with everything I say, BTW... But in fairness to him, there are different points of view on the subject. What I'll discuss is the Freudian view, which though I don't practice it, it is the most easily accessible view and something that underpins many other therapies.Aardvark154 said:
In very broad strokes, you are referring to the Superego and Id functions, and I am referring to developing a strong and healthy Ego. They are different, but not mutually exclusive. The Ego is like the CPU of the personality, and it balances between different forces and needs (primarily the Id, environment and Superego). You are referring to real dilemmas that the Ego must solve between opposing forces. I am referring to strengthening the Ego function by allowing it to see different options to solve problems. The Ego contains defense mechanisms which prohibit it from seeing or pursuing alternative solutions (or different points on a spectrum). When we break-down those defense mechanisms, a person can see different ways of solving the exact problem that you pose - the difference between selfishness (an Id function) and the mores put on us by law, theology and society (a Superego function). The Ego actually has the power to reject and modify elements of the Id and Superego that it feels no longer serve it well.
Again, before I continue, the above is only a rough outline... and it is much more involved (my last sentence in the above paragraph, for example, is something that is part of the therapy that I learned, I do not know Freud's actual thoughts on whether the Ego can dissolve parts of the Id and Superego). There are issues of development of all these parts, classifying the struggles between them, and how the unconscious (or unaware mind) operates between them. Other theories place different emphasis on all of them, and even reject some. So I know that there is room for debate, criticism and retraction in what I wrote, but I believe it to be a basic overview to answer your question using a model that is easily understandable, and researchable on the internet. There are also philosophical issues that enter into play in terms of existentialism and humanism that dictate how the balance between these works.
Now, to bring your point home - I do not advocate "balance" between to extremes. I advocate and support the development of a strong ego function (or personality) by breaking down its unconscious defenses so that a client can make their own choice between Superego (altruism) and Id (selfishness). The issue after making a decision is then coping with the the consequences and more exactly the feelings that arise from it and how the client deals with those feelings. So, while I completely agree that many different forces argue that altruism is the higher value, we have to deal with the mess that following that decision creates.
Classic example - the person who comes in to my office and is proud of their altruism towards their extended family (e.g. aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents, etc...) because they are just carrying-on the family tradition of love, caring and support that is grounded in religious beliefs held by the family for years. However, it doesn't take long to have the client tell me that they hate the family, that they are leeches and hypercritical of everything, but he is acting altruistic because that's what he's supposed to do. A person in that situation needs to work through issues of guilt, anger, sadness and loss in order to either see that there are options available, OR to keep going on the path that they have, but finding proper coping mechanisms instead of repression.
Thanks very much 3Tees, that gives me a better insight into what's being discussed and was quite interesting.3Tees said:
3Tees
If you really had any training whatsoever ( which we both know you don't) your focus would be on re-reading our friends 1st post. You would have seconded my pov. As for your consultancy therapist firm or whatever that is.......uh, yeah !petitelover said:
It means that they are are actually honest , and not pretending like you to be something they ain't !petitelover said:
3Tees said:
Maybe you should change your handle to Lucy and open up a forum on TERB. Just remember to charge 5 cents, and to not let the bald headed guy kick the ball.
Ain't? You are an uneducated, depressed individual who seeks some type of sick pleasure from being controversial and trying to be a bully on Terb. The fact is you are probably some pathetic bitter man who is angry at the cards dealt to him in real life. Perhaps being less selfish might help but that is too much to ask a low life such as yourself. 3T has written some very interesting information about you - I think he has it right. Perhaps you might consider his words while you are home, by yourself, which I presume is the majority of the time.Hank Reardon said:
Wow, Hankeypoo. Thanks for the compliment! It's very generous of you to let me be right twice a day. That's 730 times a year, and this year it's a leap year... that's 732 times - oh happy day!Hank Reardon said:
So, if I get to be right twice a day, and I used up my first right today, my second right is that you're an asshole.
enabler
depressed .....no-not in the least !!!
bully ????? cause I don't agree with you who wishes to enable someone who clearly seeks no help !!!!
Home by myself-uh, no !
Uneducated..... yespetitelover said:
depressed .....no-not in the least !!!
bully ????? cause I don't agree with you who wishes to enable someone who clearly seeks no help !!!!
Home by myself-uh, no !
If rational equals asshole in your book, then yes !!!3Tees said:
And thank you.
What would bug me most is a compliment from you Mr.Clinician
And......
10,000 posts about nothing ,
might wanna change your handle to Seinfeld
......here he comes , Mr Funny with nothing to say about nothing !!!red said:
10,000 posts about nothing ,
might wanna change your handle to Seinfeld
