You're welcome Lisa. If I recall, it was 84 (in one of his many, marvelous incarnations) who started that Self-Esteem thread to which you refer. Though it did not end gracefully, it was a valuable conversation for many of us.
Since we've lost so much time, I think we'll have to go back and review.
For those who want to bring Hitler (or any other similar characters) into the conversation, please stay away, this discussion is not for you. The same applies to hair splitting about rights and such. I want this to be about how you feel the questions apply to YOU. That being said, let's begin.
The first question is, Do you feel you have a right to exist ?
The artist formerly known as Kaiserverbalsushikint. (I've lost track..........)
I think it's immediately obvious why the first tragi-heroic self-esteem thread failed to achieve the pinnacle of thread-hood, biting the dust in the mosh pit of Greasespottian angst. Someone can't seem to handle the topic. My diagnosis is that he suffers from low self-esteem.
What luck! Maybe that person will turn his life around (finally), based on the eternal truths and verities about to be revealed on this very promising thread. Rarely does life afford such a golden opportunity for someone so undeserving, yet so painfully needy.
I almost think we should make people sign green cards and fork over some of their hard-earned cash if they want to participate. Otherwise they may not be able to appreciate the fullness of the greatness of the magnificent tapistry of the revelation of the fullness of the...
Hmm, well where do "rights" come from? Are they mere corollaries to the arbitrary social contracts of human communities?
Did they descend from Heaven like the Ten Commandments? Or do the Commandments themselves define rights?
Does "Thou shalt not kill" mean "Thou hast the right not to be killed?" Do the Big 10 C's define rights before our fellow mens and womens, or only our duty to God Almighty?
Yes, I have the right to exist. But from whence did it come? Thither, or yonder?
**
cor·ol·lar·y (kôr-lr, kr-)
n. pl. cor·ol·lar·ies
A proposition that follows with little or no proof required from one already proven.
Why, yes I am, Zixar . Seems to me I have the 'right' to do so. Just as you have the 'right' to make an *** of yourself all over again (I'm sure you won't need my help). I would just hope you do it somewhere else.
This is just like a television or radio station, if you don't like what's being played, you don't HAVE to listen. We have that freedom here in America. I suspect though, you would have one nation under GAWD, and you wouldn't mind being the head spokesperson if you don't think you are already.
The artist formerly known as Kaiserverbalsushikint. (I've lost track..........)
No, I don't have a problem with self-esteem per se, my problem is with that ridiculous first question. If the rest of the list of questions from 84's book is predicated on that null argument, any conclusions reachable through them are highly suspect. As your examples illustrate, either everyone has an equal "right to exist" granted by, and revocable by, the Creator, or everyone has zero "right to exist", they're just peculiar random coincidences of the Universe.
Regardless of the quantity, zero or one, the value is invariant ab initio. It's debatable whether a person's life actions can change the value. Osama bin Laden probably has ....loads of self-esteem, but I think he's forfeited his "right to exist".
Why, yes I am, Zixar . Seems to me I have the 'right' to do so. Just as you have the 'right' to make an *** of yourself all over again (I'm sure you won't need my help). I would just hope you do it somewhere else.
This is just like a television or radio station, if you don't like what's being played, you don't HAVE to listen. We have that freedom here in America. I suspect though, you would have one nation under GAWD, and you wouldn't mind being the head spokesperson if you don't think you are already.
The artist formerly known as Kaiserverbalsushikint. (I've lost track..........)
Temper, temper... It's not that I'm not glad you've found a book to give you some more self-esteem. I merely put it to you that the concepts upon which the author places so much stock are debatable.
So, I'm debating them. Why does that threaten you so much?
Actually, going over the thread from last May, satori brought up quite a few good angles on the rights issue, but I was just too busy being pi$$y with him over another argument we were having on another thread at the same time.
satori: For what it's worth, I wrongly accused you of some things you really weren't doing/didn't do. (I know, you knew it all along...) Sorry I was needlessly belligerent with you on that occasion.
84/kaiser/verbal/whoeverelsefromusualsuspectsyouwanttobetoday: Do you really think it's possible to start a thread with a "here's what I think, and I only want to hear from you if you don't disagree with me", and NOT get called on it? Grow up.
and do I FEEL I have that right. Not at all a ridiculous question because it is a question about how I FEEL. It is not a debate about where the right to exist comes from.
Some days I feel like, "Hell Yeah, I have a right to exist and anyone who wants to tell me otherwise better get out of my way!". Other days I feel like, "why the heck do I exist? what's the point?". And a lot of days I don't particularly feel one way or the other about it. More along the lines of, "I am here and I do exist so you're just gonna have to learn how to live with it if ya don't like it."
Zix, 84 didn't express an opinion one way or another so he can hardly be accused of taking issue with someone who disagrees with him. What he did do is request that people stick to the topic, which is do you feel you have the right to exist? If you find the topic offensive, boring, or beneath you, it is not necessary to put down or belittle those of us who want to discuss it.
BTW - it was pretty cool of you to apologize to Satori.
So anyway, back to the original topic. If we can stick to how we FEEL, I think we will have a much more productive discussion on self-esteem then we will if we get sidetracked with arguments over from whom or what that right was granted.
Abigail: No offense, but a lot of kids FEEL Santa Claus brings them toys every year.
From satori's post of 6/5/01
quote:Here are Verbal's five points so far. (If there is a 6th, I missed it.)
1. I have a right to exist.
2. I am of high value to myself.
3. I have a right to honor my needs and wants, and treat them as important.
4. I am not here on earth to live up to anyone else's expectations - my life belongs to me. This is true of every other human being. Each person being the owner of their own lives and are not here to live up to my expectations
5. I BELIEVE I am lovable (and this is not just wishful thinking or insincere assent).
**
1. I feel a lot more like I have a "right to exist" now, than I ever used to. I think that comes with age and maturity, if you aren't just raised that way. You might look around and think, "He's the President of the United States and I could beat him in Scrabble with my eyes closed." It's the wisdom that comes with perspective, and vice versa.
2. I am of high value to myself? I don't know how to measure that. The life insurance policy is impressive, but it won't do me much good because I have to check out before I can cash in. (That was a joke, sort of.) Do I demand respect? Not really. Do I live with the discipline I should to make the most of my life? Not really. I think I start out valuing myself highly, but after numerous "discounts" (compromises), I end up selling myself short. But... but... I will change! (Tomorrow.)
3. Honoring my "needs and wants"... That should be a hell of a lot easier than trying to maneuver them into "parallel," whatever that meant. I probably do too good a job at honoring needs and wants. Instant gratification is too big a temptation. I've managed to keep my credit cards paid, and money in the bank, but I may not be honoring my long-term needs and wants in the way I jump at meeting those of the short-term.
4. Not here to live up to others' expectations... I wish I could live up to those expectations. Some of 'em, anyway. Only because they might reflect my own, I guess. Living "down" to people's expectations is more of a problem than living up to them. The temptation to compromise is always saying, "That's plenty good enough." I work hard, but I could do better. Much better.
Then again, how many of us, myself included, have cut short our dreams to be "reasonable" about them? I work for a huge corporation, something I never intended to do. I really enjoy it too, something I also never expected to do. Playing the electric guitar somehow failed to make me rich, but life has a way of opening new doors when others close.
5. I BELIEVE I am lovable... That's a tough one. I've begun to realize I was not held as an infant as much as they say you should. Really. All that bonding and physical contact is a big deal in early development, we found out much later on. Wouldn't you know it?
My parents have told me in a roundabout way. "You never cried like your younger brother. No one ever knew you were in the room. You were always quiet and happy." With one of my own on the way, the parental confessions are more earnest and candid lately, as in, "don't do what we did." By way of sound and solid parental advice, they are apologizing.
I should have been more of the squeaky wheel I guess. (Maybe I'm making up for lost time on Greasespot?) Dr. Spock was big back then too. Didn't he have some kind of incubation/isolation room to keep his own baby? (She killed herself in later life, I believe.) At least my parents knew he was nuts.
So I have just not expected to be loved, throughout my life. It has always surprised me that I have been loved, and that I am today. Maybe that was part of TWI's appeal to me. The exuberant, unconditional affection (in the early days, anyway) was such an appealing, but unique, experience because I'd never sought it.
Loving, and loving back, are no problem for me. I just don't envision love as a 2-way street, unless it happens. I have to see it, to understand it. Somehow.
It's not about being deserving, or undeserving, worthy, unworthy, lovable or unlovable. If this makes any sense, there's a part of me that doesn't realize that being loved is even "relevant" until it happens. And then I think, "Do people know about this? They need to find out."
I must have grown very comfortable, very contented, confined in my crib, amusing myself with those solipsistic soliloquies of spontaneous sound, or mulling in mumbled monologues over the pros and cons of apple mush, or counting colored, plastic butterflies (by political affiliation), or only drooling peacefully to my heart's content, as babies do.
Regards...
A good post. Not how I would have put it, but a well thought-out position nevertheless.
Without getting into minutiae, the first three pillars are bogus because they deal with immeasurable rights and values. They are logically null, if not semantically null.
If you really want to explore self-esteem, I'd think beginning with Pillar #4 would be a good start. The first 3 are crap.
Sheesh Zix - you are such a guy! Leave it to a man to totally miss the point when it comes to talking about how he FEELS!
No Zix. A lot of kids FEEL excited because they BELIEVE Santa Clause will bring them toys every year. What we think or believe philisophically does not always match/agree with how we FEEL. This isn't a discussion about philisophical views on the right to exist, it is a discussion about how we FEEL! Can I state it any more clearly????
I saw the original thread, but basically missed out on it because it had died before I knew it existed.....(btw did it have a right to exist??? )
Thanks for the cut and paste, but I would prefer to take each "pillar" one at a time rather than trying to discuss them all at once. BTW the cut and paste from Satori's thread - were those his responses or yours? I couldn't tell for sure.
Zix - "Without getting into minutiae, the first three pillars are bogus because they deal with immeasurable rights and values. They are logically null, if not semantically null.
If you really want to explore self-esteem, I'd think beginning with Pillar #4 would be a good start. The first 3 are crap."
Zix, I don't think you meant to sound condescending and arrogant, but you really did here. I for one do NOT believe the first 3 are crap. I find the first pillar to be a little vague, but not impossibly so.
The second pillar speaks directly to self-esteem in that it is a very good measure of it. The third, likewise measures it because there are many of us, me being one of them, who has tended to NOT honor my needs and wants and treat them as important. As a result, I have allowed people to walk all over me and push my boundaries back beyond recognition. In fact, I would dare say that most anyone who has been in a cult has done that, no?
The questions may appear logically null to you and perhaps if one was speaking strictly of logic you would be right. However, what we are discussing here are EMOTIONS and EMOTIONS are not necessarily based on logic. Hehehe, in fact in my case they are probably RARELY based on logic and I 4.0'd my logic class - LOL. We aren't trying to measure our rights we are trying to discuss how we FEEL about them - (one last time, in case that point was missed).
So again Zix, if you truly want to partake in this discussion................
The question is not do you believe intellectually or philisphically that you have the right to exist, nor is the question about where that right comes from. The question is do you FEEL (human emotion) that you have the right to exist. Are you brave enough to tell us how you FEEL and not what you THINK?
Practically speaking, the first 3 "pillars" (are they pillars?) are not "crap."
Secondly, I have not said that rights are endowed by a Creator. I think that adopting this premise settles an otherwise difficult philosophical question, because the answer flies in the face of most dogmas, religious, political, or social. I did pose a question in hypothetical terms which may have led to that impression. But we are not here to avoid the difficult question, but to address it.
The answer is that the individual is the least common denominator of society, and the cornerstone of our humanity. There are no rights but individual rights. There are no people but individuals. Jesus was an individual. Now that's an endorsement if ever there was one.
"Civil rights" for example is a cliche, a meaningless one at that. What is a "civil?" Civils don't have rights. Individuals ONLY have rights.
Next, rights must be derived from nature, but not "mother nature" - man's nature. Man at his best is a thinking, reasoning creature. For society therefore to become its best, its foundation must be built upon a philosophy which recognizes man at his best, and conveys, bestows, endows him with rights commensurate with that "best" within him.
Love is nice, but love is not the best we're talking about here, unless it is the love of life, and self-love. Self-respect. Self-"esteem."
"I am a worm, worthless and insignificant, but I LOVE ya, really I do!"
That sentiment should make you sick. Who wants the love of someone who does not value him or her "self?"
"I am the greatest living specimen of human magnificence on this wretched and undeserving planet, and I love YOU! Aren't you thrilled?"
Likewise, this should make you sick. This is not self-love but pure narcissism. Self-infatuation and worship.
Self-love is not a balance between self-hate and self-worship. It is entirely different. It is the recognition that you began with something valuable (like the parable of the talents) and you made something more valuable of it, or you at least STROVE to make something more valuable of it, with courage, with tenacity, with the best you could muster against the odds.
Self-respect is not some badge of approval, given by others. That may be the result, sometimes, but never the source.
Self-respect is the inner glow from knowing you've done well, you've done very well, if not your very best, you've made something wonderful. The more proud you can be of your effort, the more you will respect yourself.
It's all about your own heart. Some with great accomplishments might know they only did half of what they were capable. Others with humble efforts might know they did their utmost. Who will have more self-respect, do you think?
It might be a beautiful child, or a prosperous business, or a happy home, or an adventurer's life, or a body of work which makes you proud, but it is something which takes the blank slate of life and creates good.
[This message was edited by satori on August 15, 2002 at 13:21.]
Did any of y'all hear Paul Harvey the other day, quoting a long-term study on self-esteem/real accomplishments?
It was found that, long-term, people who consider themselves to have high self-esteem, and those who consider themselves to have low self-esteem, accomplish and perform statistically at the same level. No difference...
Zix - I understand that you missed the feel part and perhaps it was not in the old thread. Why not leave the old thread where it is, dead and buried? This is a new thread and it does include the word feel. It is a very important thread to me because it does include that word.
Arguing about doctrines and philosophies can be interesting, fun, and even educational at times. However, when we talk about how we feel and most specifically about self-esteem, there is an opportunity for some true growth and learning, IMNSHO. When I think about all the years I wasted and spent NOT liking myself, all of the decisions I would have made differently if I HAD liked myself.........
You didn't hurt my feelings, I've grown a bit thicker skinned over the years. I suppose one must to survive being in and then getting out of TWI. Likewise, I would hope I didn't hurt yours. I was simply trying to make a point.
BTW - you didn't answer the question.
Satori - You made some excellent statements. I would like to quote a couple and pose some questions.
"Self-love is not a balance between self-hate and self-worship. It is entirely different. It is the recognition that you began with something valuable (like the parable of the talents) and you made something more valuable of it, or you at least STROVE to make something more valuable of it, with courage, with tenacity, with the best you could muster against the odds."
1. What about those who do not recognize that they began with something valuable, as I am sure would be the case with children who come from abusive or neglectful families?
2. What about those who do not believe that they have "Strove.....with the best they could muster?
Another quote "Self-respect is the inner glow from knowing you've done well, you've done very well, if not your very best, you've made something wonderful. The more proud you can be of your effort, the more you will respect yourself."
1. Zix posed a good question, are self-respect and self esteem the same thing? Or perhaps more directly do YOU think they are?
2. Even when the individual knows they have done their best, how well can one hold up against the assaults of peers and societies that would like to convince them otherwise?
BTW Satori, you didn't answer the question either
The Evan - interesting fact. Honestly though, I am not interested in raising my ability to accomplish anything via self-esteem, at least not in terms of societal standards of output, career performance, or monetary/social status. I am simply interested in self-esteem from the standpoint of living a happier, healthier life.
I would like to clarify these questions are not the 'pillars' of self esteem. They are the general beliefs that support it.
I don't think self love and self respect are necessarily the same thing. You can still love yourself without being too thrilled with some of the things you may have done. This will become evident as we progress.
The artist formerly known as Kaiserverbalsushikint. (I've lost track..........)
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
7
9
13
7
Popular Days
Aug 15
18
Aug 20
9
Aug 12
6
Aug 17
5
Top Posters In This Topic
satori 7 posts
Abigail 9 posts
84 13 posts
Zixar 7 posts
Popular Days
Aug 15 2002
18 posts
Aug 20 2002
9 posts
Aug 12 2002
6 posts
Aug 17 2002
5 posts
satori
You might try Nathaniel Branden's books. There may be no better writer on the subject. There are several titles, all good:
How To Raise Your Self-Esteem
Honoring The Self
Six Pillars Of Self-Esteem
Raise Your Self-Esteem
The Art Of Living Consciously: The Power Of Awareness To Transform Everyday Life
Taking Responsibility: Self-Reliance And The Accountable Life
Nathaniel Brandens Self-Esteem Every Day: Reflections On Self-Esteem And Spirituality
Self-Esteem at Work
A Woman's Self-Esteem
Power Of Self-Esteem
The Psychology of Self-Esteem
Link to comment
Share on other sites
84
Thanks Satori, I finally get a hit that isn't a hair splitting diatribe about what about Hitler, and YOU steal my thunder....
The artist formerly known as Kaiserverbalsushikint. (I've lost track..........)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lisa Benavides
Thank you Satori!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori
You're welcome Lisa. If I recall, it was 84 (in one of his many, marvelous incarnations) who started that Self-Esteem thread to which you refer. Though it did not end gracefully, it was a valuable conversation for many of us.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
84
You are correct, Satori, in that it was me who started that ill-fated thread of long ago. I may make one more attempt to resurrect said thread.
Give me a day or so to think about it, and I'll get back to youse on it.
The artist formerly known as Kaiserverbalsushikint. (I've lost track..........)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
84
Since we've lost so much time, I think we'll have to go back and review.
For those who want to bring Hitler (or any other similar characters) into the conversation, please stay away, this discussion is not for you. The same applies to hair splitting about rights and such. I want this to be about how you feel the questions apply to YOU. That being said, let's begin.
The first question is, Do you feel you have a right to exist ?
The artist formerly known as Kaiserverbalsushikint. (I've lost track..........)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
You're not honestly going to start with THIS crap again, are you?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori
I think it's immediately obvious why the first tragi-heroic self-esteem thread failed to achieve the pinnacle of thread-hood, biting the dust in the mosh pit of Greasespottian angst. Someone can't seem to handle the topic. My diagnosis is that he suffers from low self-esteem.
What luck! Maybe that person will turn his life around (finally), based on the eternal truths and verities about to be revealed on this very promising thread. Rarely does life afford such a golden opportunity for someone so undeserving, yet so painfully needy.
I almost think we should make people sign green cards and fork over some of their hard-earned cash if they want to participate. Otherwise they may not be able to appreciate the fullness of the greatness of the magnificent tapistry of the revelation of the fullness of the...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oneluckymutha
Yes.
Next question?
How do I work? I grope. - Albert Einstein
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori
D'oh! I missed the question.
Do I have a right to exist?
Hmm, well where do "rights" come from? Are they mere corollaries to the arbitrary social contracts of human communities?
Did they descend from Heaven like the Ten Commandments? Or do the Commandments themselves define rights?
Does "Thou shalt not kill" mean "Thou hast the right not to be killed?" Do the Big 10 C's define rights before our fellow mens and womens, or only our duty to God Almighty?
Yes, I have the right to exist. But from whence did it come? Thither, or yonder?
**
cor·ol·lar·y (kôr-lr, kr-)
n. pl. cor·ol·lar·ies
A proposition that follows with little or no proof required from one already proven.
A deduction or an inference.
A natural consequence or effect; a result.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
84
Why, yes I am, Zixar . Seems to me I have the 'right' to do so. Just as you have the 'right' to make an *** of yourself all over again (I'm sure you won't need my help). I would just hope you do it somewhere else.
This is just like a television or radio station, if you don't like what's being played, you don't HAVE to listen. We have that freedom here in America. I suspect though, you would have one nation under GAWD, and you wouldn't mind being the head spokesperson if you don't think you are already.
The artist formerly known as Kaiserverbalsushikint. (I've lost track..........)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
satori: That's more like it.
No, I don't have a problem with self-esteem per se, my problem is with that ridiculous first question. If the rest of the list of questions from 84's book is predicated on that null argument, any conclusions reachable through them are highly suspect. As your examples illustrate, either everyone has an equal "right to exist" granted by, and revocable by, the Creator, or everyone has zero "right to exist", they're just peculiar random coincidences of the Universe.
Regardless of the quantity, zero or one, the value is invariant ab initio. It's debatable whether a person's life actions can change the value. Osama bin Laden probably has ....loads of self-esteem, but I think he's forfeited his "right to exist".
What was the next question, again?
Cordially,
Zix
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
Temper, temper... It's not that I'm not glad you've found a book to give you some more self-esteem. I merely put it to you that the concepts upon which the author places so much stock are debatable.
So, I'm debating them. Why does that threaten you so much?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
Actually, going over the thread from last May, satori brought up quite a few good angles on the rights issue, but I was just too busy being pi$$y with him over another argument we were having on another thread at the same time.
satori: For what it's worth, I wrongly accused you of some things you really weren't doing/didn't do. (I know, you knew it all along...) Sorry I was needlessly belligerent with you on that occasion.
84/kaiser/verbal/whoeverelsefromusualsuspectsyouwanttobetoday: Do you really think it's possible to start a thread with a "here's what I think, and I only want to hear from you if you don't disagree with me", and NOT get called on it? Grow up.
God bless,
Zix
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
and do I FEEL I have that right. Not at all a ridiculous question because it is a question about how I FEEL. It is not a debate about where the right to exist comes from.
Some days I feel like, "Hell Yeah, I have a right to exist and anyone who wants to tell me otherwise better get out of my way!". Other days I feel like, "why the heck do I exist? what's the point?". And a lot of days I don't particularly feel one way or the other about it. More along the lines of, "I am here and I do exist so you're just gonna have to learn how to live with it if ya don't like it."
Zix, 84 didn't express an opinion one way or another so he can hardly be accused of taking issue with someone who disagrees with him. What he did do is request that people stick to the topic, which is do you feel you have the right to exist? If you find the topic offensive, boring, or beneath you, it is not necessary to put down or belittle those of us who want to discuss it.
BTW - it was pretty cool of you to apologize to Satori.
So anyway, back to the original topic. If we can stick to how we FEEL, I think we will have a much more productive discussion on self-esteem then we will if we get sidetracked with arguments over from whom or what that right was granted.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
Abigail: No offense, but a lot of kids FEEL Santa Claus brings them toys every year.
From satori's post of 6/5/01
A good post. Not how I would have put it, but a well thought-out position nevertheless.
Without getting into minutiae, the first three pillars are bogus because they deal with immeasurable rights and values. They are logically null, if not semantically null.
If you really want to explore self-esteem, I'd think beginning with Pillar #4 would be a good start. The first 3 are crap.
God bless!
Zix
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Sheesh Zix - you are such a guy! Leave it to a man to totally miss the point when it comes to talking about how he FEELS!
No Zix. A lot of kids FEEL excited because they BELIEVE Santa Clause will bring them toys every year. What we think or believe philisophically does not always match/agree with how we FEEL. This isn't a discussion about philisophical views on the right to exist, it is a discussion about how we FEEL! Can I state it any more clearly????
I saw the original thread, but basically missed out on it because it had died before I knew it existed.....(btw did it have a right to exist??? )
Thanks for the cut and paste, but I would prefer to take each "pillar" one at a time rather than trying to discuss them all at once. BTW the cut and paste from Satori's thread - were those his responses or yours? I couldn't tell for sure.
Zix - "Without getting into minutiae, the first three pillars are bogus because they deal with immeasurable rights and values. They are logically null, if not semantically null.
If you really want to explore self-esteem, I'd think beginning with Pillar #4 would be a good start. The first 3 are crap."
Zix, I don't think you meant to sound condescending and arrogant, but you really did here. I for one do NOT believe the first 3 are crap. I find the first pillar to be a little vague, but not impossibly so.
The second pillar speaks directly to self-esteem in that it is a very good measure of it. The third, likewise measures it because there are many of us, me being one of them, who has tended to NOT honor my needs and wants and treat them as important. As a result, I have allowed people to walk all over me and push my boundaries back beyond recognition. In fact, I would dare say that most anyone who has been in a cult has done that, no?
The questions may appear logically null to you and perhaps if one was speaking strictly of logic you would be right. However, what we are discussing here are EMOTIONS and EMOTIONS are not necessarily based on logic. Hehehe, in fact in my case they are probably RARELY based on logic and I 4.0'd my logic class - LOL. We aren't trying to measure our rights we are trying to discuss how we FEEL about them - (one last time, in case that point was missed).
So again Zix, if you truly want to partake in this discussion................
The question is not do you believe intellectually or philisphically that you have the right to exist, nor is the question about where that right comes from. The question is do you FEEL (human emotion) that you have the right to exist. Are you brave enough to tell us how you FEEL and not what you THINK?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori
Practically speaking, the first 3 "pillars" (are they pillars?) are not "crap."
Secondly, I have not said that rights are endowed by a Creator. I think that adopting this premise settles an otherwise difficult philosophical question, because the answer flies in the face of most dogmas, religious, political, or social. I did pose a question in hypothetical terms which may have led to that impression. But we are not here to avoid the difficult question, but to address it.
The answer is that the individual is the least common denominator of society, and the cornerstone of our humanity. There are no rights but individual rights. There are no people but individuals. Jesus was an individual. Now that's an endorsement if ever there was one.
"Civil rights" for example is a cliche, a meaningless one at that. What is a "civil?" Civils don't have rights. Individuals ONLY have rights.
Next, rights must be derived from nature, but not "mother nature" - man's nature. Man at his best is a thinking, reasoning creature. For society therefore to become its best, its foundation must be built upon a philosophy which recognizes man at his best, and conveys, bestows, endows him with rights commensurate with that "best" within him.
Love is nice, but love is not the best we're talking about here, unless it is the love of life, and self-love. Self-respect. Self-"esteem."
"I am a worm, worthless and insignificant, but I LOVE ya, really I do!"
That sentiment should make you sick. Who wants the love of someone who does not value him or her "self?"
"I am the greatest living specimen of human magnificence on this wretched and undeserving planet, and I love YOU! Aren't you thrilled?"
Likewise, this should make you sick. This is not self-love but pure narcissism. Self-infatuation and worship.
Self-love is not a balance between self-hate and self-worship. It is entirely different. It is the recognition that you began with something valuable (like the parable of the talents) and you made something more valuable of it, or you at least STROVE to make something more valuable of it, with courage, with tenacity, with the best you could muster against the odds.
Self-respect is not some badge of approval, given by others. That may be the result, sometimes, but never the source.
Self-respect is the inner glow from knowing you've done well, you've done very well, if not your very best, you've made something wonderful. The more proud you can be of your effort, the more you will respect yourself.
It's all about your own heart. Some with great accomplishments might know they only did half of what they were capable. Others with humble efforts might know they did their utmost. Who will have more self-respect, do you think?
It might be a beautiful child, or a prosperous business, or a happy home, or an adventurer's life, or a body of work which makes you proud, but it is something which takes the blank slate of life and creates good.
[This message was edited by satori on August 15, 2002 at 13:21.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
satori: Hmm. I hadn't thought about that. Are the terms "self-respect" and "self-esteem" synonymous? Or is SR a subset of SE?
abigail: In the original, "feel" wasn't part of it. Sorry if I hurt your feelings!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheEvan
Did any of y'all hear Paul Harvey the other day, quoting a long-term study on self-esteem/real accomplishments?
It was found that, long-term, people who consider themselves to have high self-esteem, and those who consider themselves to have low self-esteem, accomplish and perform statistically at the same level. No difference...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Zix - I understand that you missed the feel part and perhaps it was not in the old thread. Why not leave the old thread where it is, dead and buried? This is a new thread and it does include the word feel. It is a very important thread to me because it does include that word.
Arguing about doctrines and philosophies can be interesting, fun, and even educational at times. However, when we talk about how we feel and most specifically about self-esteem, there is an opportunity for some true growth and learning, IMNSHO. When I think about all the years I wasted and spent NOT liking myself, all of the decisions I would have made differently if I HAD liked myself.........
You didn't hurt my feelings, I've grown a bit thicker skinned over the years. I suppose one must to survive being in and then getting out of TWI. Likewise, I would hope I didn't hurt yours. I was simply trying to make a point.
BTW - you didn't answer the question.
Satori - You made some excellent statements. I would like to quote a couple and pose some questions.
"Self-love is not a balance between self-hate and self-worship. It is entirely different. It is the recognition that you began with something valuable (like the parable of the talents) and you made something more valuable of it, or you at least STROVE to make something more valuable of it, with courage, with tenacity, with the best you could muster against the odds."
1. What about those who do not recognize that they began with something valuable, as I am sure would be the case with children who come from abusive or neglectful families?
2. What about those who do not believe that they have "Strove.....with the best they could muster?
Another quote "Self-respect is the inner glow from knowing you've done well, you've done very well, if not your very best, you've made something wonderful. The more proud you can be of your effort, the more you will respect yourself."
1. Zix posed a good question, are self-respect and self esteem the same thing? Or perhaps more directly do YOU think they are?
2. Even when the individual knows they have done their best, how well can one hold up against the assaults of peers and societies that would like to convince them otherwise?
BTW Satori, you didn't answer the question either
The Evan - interesting fact. Honestly though, I am not interested in raising my ability to accomplish anything via self-esteem, at least not in terms of societal standards of output, career performance, or monetary/social status. I am simply interested in self-esteem from the standpoint of living a happier, healthier life.
did the survey mention which group was happier?
BTW, you didn't answer the question either.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
84
I would like to clarify these questions are not the 'pillars' of self esteem. They are the general beliefs that support it.
I don't think self love and self respect are necessarily the same thing. You can still love yourself without being too thrilled with some of the things you may have done. This will become evident as we progress.
The artist formerly known as Kaiserverbalsushikint. (I've lost track..........)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
phnx84: My mistake, I was assuming the six points were Branden's "Six Pillars Of Self Esteem".
I stand corrected.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
i feel i have a right to exist
even more than just exist, if you mean the minimum level of living, is that what you mean ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.