Unhumble

Hey Jay Houston... I understand what you mean. I was rather meaning: would you be able to care less about looking for a partner even if you had the greatest confidence on earth?

"As far as men go, it is not what they are that interests me, but what they can become." Jean-Paul Sartre "Spread love everywhere you go: first of all in your own house. Give love to your children, to your wife or husband, to a next door neighbor... Let no one ever come to you without leaving better and happier. Be the living expression of God's kindness; kindness in your face, kindness in your eyes, kindness in your smile, kindness in your warm greeting." Mother Theresa of Calcutta "A cynic is just a man who found out when he was ten that there wasn't any Santa Claus, and he's still upset." J.G. Cozzens "We have, in fact, two kinds of morality side by side: one which we preach but do not practice, and another which we practice but seldom preach." Bertrand Russell "One thousand Americans stop smoking every day - by dying." Unsourced "Whoever has the luck to be born a character can laugh even at death. Because a character will never die! A man will die, a writer, the instrument of creation: but what he has created will never die!" Luigi Pirandello "Eternity gives nothing back of what one leaves out of the minutes." Friedrich Schiller "It may help to understand human affairs to be clear that most of the great triumphs and tragedies of history are caused, not by people being fundamentally good or fundamentally bad, but by people being fundamentally people." Terry Pratchett, Neil Gaiman "Good Omens" "Maybe it's all part of a great big ineffable plan. All of it. You, me, him, everything. Some great big test to see if what you've built all works properly, eh? You start thinking: it can't be a great cosmic game of chess, it has to be just very complicated Solitaire. And don't bother to answer. If we could understand, we wouldn't be us." Terry Pratchett, Neil Gaiman "Good Omens"

While I was thinking about it, did you notice that in many oriental cultures celibacy (not in the sense of priesthood, but just abstaining from the life of love and sex) is regarded as a natural way of spiritual enhancement, meditation and concentration? Are we (mostly westeners here I guess) missing out on something unknown for being guided - and socially trained to be guided - by Desire?

Hey, I was being more curious on the topic and found an entry that addresses exactly what was discussed about here... (psychological egoism) Hope you enjoy it link removed

And Batya, have you discovered new things (new interests, new personal inclinations, etc.) during your life in the career? (i.e. after you started working)

And what do you do in your freedom days? (if I may ask)

I'm asking especially those who are in careers or are typically very busy and organize their daily lives with schedules. Preferably, I would appreciate the opinion of people in corporate environments but not only. Do you ever feel as if you lack the freedom of discovering new things (passions, opportunities, artistic and cultural interests) spontaneously, i.e. "by chance"... since you always have to follow a routine, have to be on time, and have no liberty to "look around"? Do you sometimes feel as if your personal interests (in arts/culture/entertainment) slowly become obsolescent as you climb your career ladder? Last question: Is anyone of you in a job and engages in free-time activities that are entirely different from those typically done by your colleagues?

...and this to an extent that when someone tells me to do something that I might have done anyway, I don't do it anymore, simply because I feel that someone else imposed the idea onto me. I feel as if others are controlling me. I simply want to be original, exceed other people's expectations, and make decisions independently. Following kinds of people restrict my feelings of SELF-growth: - parents - friends - ... - anyone who tells me what I should do, or what I'm supposed to do. I'm not stubborn, I'm obviously open to feedback... but I prefer to evaluate things by myself. I don't like when others put their finger in my thinking process. I noticed that especially during periods of stress, I easily become passive and follow other people's suggestions/commands simply because they are telling. In those situations, I stop thinking actively How to be always under self control?

Yes, you understood. You mean like personals? Hmm... I heard such things also happen among normal friends, colleagues, etc.? I mean not only among 3-4 of them, but the entire class or such things O_o Is this true or fiction or some adult movies?

I'm asking this out of curiosity since everyone (especially older folks, in their late twenties and early thirties) talks about such things, but I never really got the opportunity to see with my own eyes whether they're true. I'm not asking whether it's "right" or "wrong", or anything in the sphere or morality. I'm simply trying to fill the gap in my knowledge... Why, where (geographically, societally), when (at which age, under which circumstances), which events, actually lead up to sexual acts/relationships that involve more than just a couple? Where I live, it's still normal to talk about "getting off with someone met at the party", but it seems totally taboo to mention or even ask about this kind of experiences. I really don't know. I only hear rumors. Thanks

Life is not endless, for most of us living in the 21st century. But endless are the possibilities in which we can live it... In this very moment, I feel a bit puzzled as to where I should start and how to "organize" my next years of life. After finishing highschool and when entering university (Fall 2006), I thought that I would be able to freely explore the world, start developing some new skills, e.g. learning a new musical instrument, doing some totally new extra activities alongside the uni studies... and soon noticed that university itself required some skills in time management. But I'm slowly getting used to that. Most of my friends either hang out in their freetime ("social life" = doing nothing really special apart from studying...) or already start attending career events, looking for internships, part-time jobs, studying like hell and fervently researching everything possible regarding their future career. Although I know that university studies, career, and social networking with the people who might become my future colleagues or employers, are really important things, I feel the necessity to be "out of the ant-colony" if I want to pursue my personal life goals. I would like to learn a music instrument or maybe even do a dance course... or learning professional cooking lol - anything that I haven't done in my previous highschool-life. The drawback is that all these ambitions would be somewhat unrelated to the field I'm studying at university (economics, social sciences) and reduce my "social networking time" (since I'd be doing something totally new alongside studying for exams, etc.). And I'm worried that both factors might somehow put at stake my future career opportunities. What do you think? Where can I start? Should I even care so much about career during my first years at university? Or do you think that instead of pursuing new skills, I should focus on developing more on my old ones, since that wouldn't require much time? Any advice is appreciated! Thank you so much

Why? Hmmm? Is this also a kind of "absolution" you're talking about? My personal definition of altruism is that you spontaneously do something for others out of your own initiative, without caring about the non-retribution or possible loss of this action - this doesn't mean you ignore the negative things of life happy town mentioned! This means you are fully aware of them, but still do it because according to your own reasoning it is good for the person/s you are about to help. The only "feeling" involved here is the need for precision, not self-satisfaction or personal fulfillment. It is similar to what was defined here as "martyrdom", though martyrdom can often be associated with implied sacrifice. And martyrdom can be imposed by external constraints... not something reasoned out on your own. Apparently or not - rather than personal condescendance, I think the attitude itself is trashed out. Probably due to expectation that everyone acts according to the reasons that have been mentioned so far ("apparent self-lessness", absolution, etc.).

Although I know that very few ordinary people can be really altruistic... I know that even the few who try to do so are often looked down upon by the cynics and pessimists of the world. I would like to ask you: what might be bad about being an altruist? About being spontaneously ready to help out friends (and not only friends!), from easy to risky issues, without caring nor expecting anything "in return"? Or, rather than being something "bad", do you think the problem is that they are easily preyed upon, they are easy targets of those who really care only about themselves and their own issues? Just wanted to exchange some thoughts on this...

Many careers emphasize the need of "social skills", but I'm not sure whether there's a special meaning to the otherwise harmless expression "social skills" in the context of employment. Is it about being able to make strategies so that you can win the faith of tactically important people, and make them turn against your "enemies"? Is it about applying things such as game theory to real life, in order to "play chess" with the lives and decisions of other people (clients, customers, other employees, etc.)? In few words I would like to ask: are these skills employers require more towards strategy or spontaneous altruism/teamwork?

Errrr... Do really so many thoughts cross your mind when you have to say something to an audience? I mean: I might be wrong, but it's appears as if you're thinking more about yourself rather than focusing on the people or on the thing you are supposed to do. Maybe you (or the media, or both) have created this idea that "public speaking" is a "personal challenge" (I recently heard that at some american universities, there are even public speaking contests! Oh dear!), or some big, important event. What if, instead of thinking of it as "public speaking" or something so grossly important, you just focus on the reason you are speaking to an audience? Everything else will follow naturally! e.g. I must promote a donation initiative to the audience after a theater performance. I simply walk there, make the people hush and tell them what must be said... well obviously if you pay a bit attention to the way you speak, you might get better results for the donation But what I'm trying to suggest is: focus on the objective, not on yourself. I'll let you know when I find out... I'm not saying I'm a daredevil, but that if I found out that hard-wired, unconscious irrational fears affect me as well, I would personally chose not to care about them... or do my best not to base my decisions and actions on them. From a logical point of view of emotions though, I think that the mere fact of knowing that a certain fear is "just irrational/hardwired" should be enough to relax a person and vanquish the fear... No wonder, haha I think I can ask a few more questions here then. What would economics say if we got rid of all "commercial fears" of the world?

From another point of view (called "laissez-faire economics"), this industry might as well be positive for the greater good of society. As long as people want to buy that stuff, it's okay since it makes money circulate and satisfies people's needs I also know counselors from different fields (coaching, hypnotherapy, etc.) and some of them are even my relatives. I have an aunt who earns like 200 bucks per hour curing people's mental distress and other conditions with some therapies. And she has a large base of clients... (usually, very rich business people) caro and annie, I can also imagine that they act professionally and take care seriously. Many of those people genuinely believe in what they do. And the solutions work, depending on the people's attitude as annie already pointed out. What I meant to say is that some of these fears are taken seriously... for the sake of making them appear serious. For example, caro, what if your first experiences of "public speaking fear" had just been exciting, and you had a strong feedback (maybe negative in the first times?). And maybe you generalized the first experiences since you had already heard about the existence of "public speaking fear"? Try to think of how would you have behaved if you had never heard the expression "public speaking fear". Do you think you would have naturally grown out of that first experience? annie, may I know which were the fears you had before even knowing that they were "fears"? And I suppose your fear of flying actually belongs to the media-infuenced fears? caro, although physically we haven't changed much from what we were some thousands of years ago, our willpower, our mentality and attitudes evolve at a very steep learning curve - the nice thing is: we (as both collective culture and as individuals) are the ones driving this part of evolution. And, caro, do you personally care so much about maintaining your evolutionary heritage of fears? Another question to all of you: Do you perceive these irrational fears as an addition to your emotions/skills or a lack of your emotions/skills? Edit: Another way I would express my point would be that knowing the existence of a "fear", and identifying one's feelings with such fear, will interfere with the otherwise spontaneous sense of "flow" in people. ( link removed ) That means you might have grown out of a fear more naturally through you own experience if you hadn't categorized those initial feelings as... fears.

...like "Fear of public speaking"? OK. I'm aware that all people in the world are different, are differently influenced, are differently talented, and thus have their own different strengths and weaknesses. But when looking around in bookstores I sometimes have the feeling that psychology (or at least, the popular psychology industry, those with self-help books and success coaches) invents psychological disorders: Anxieties, fears, etc. for the sake of keeping the industry alive. And when people read that stuff and buy it, when there's gossip about the existence of such "fears"... people are actually more prone to think that they have/had/will have it, as well. In my personal experience, I've often noticed that whenever I read or hear about a condition... or hear about it on TV... I get the symptoms of it the next time circumstances are favorable to the establishment of that fear! And then I tell myself: "Oh, that's the thing I read about! I have it as well!" Luckily I am still sane enough to realize that it's BS and trash it away. Now, throughout my short life I've often been on the stage to entertain audiences, to present projects, to do whatever... and I never had any "fear of public speaking" (not even after reading about it... but I must admit that I was tempted to try it out!). And honestly, I didn't even know there was such a thing called "public speaking". I first thought it was an expression to make children's first theatrical performance more exciting. But when I saw books about "fear of public speaking" for adults... I was once again like "o-brave-new-world". This is obviously just an opinion. But let me express a very extreme question... What if most modern [negative] psychological conditions are actually created by an industry that gets rich by helping people to solve them? Do you think you have a non-rational fear like "fear of public speaking"? Then do this next time you must speak: Realize that you've been cheated by the industry. There's no such thing as "public speaking". Just go on-stage and say what you have to say, like the child you used to be would have done had she/he not been corrupted by the beliefs of society... Sorry if the tone of my post was a bit "rant-ish"... I really see too many crazy things that cause useless pain to the world, and distract people from real problems, such as war, poverty and crisis.

I don't know exactly how to portray what is happening. What I'm quite sure about is that I don't feel comfortable around my parents anymore. I'm 20 years old and I think that this makes them expect from me things that I should do (out of responsibility? Because I'm grown up?), but I simply don't want to do spontaneously. They are trying to tell my what I'm supposed to do. Throughout my teenage years, it was a "live-and-let-live" relationship between us. They never worried about me, never interfered with what I did, and I made my own life. I had a greater sense of being independent, and especially, of not being controlled. But now they seem to be observing my every movement, whenever I'm at home. Asking me "What are you doing? Are you hungry?" when I open the fridge... And when I study "Oh, this is interesting what you're studying! Maybe you could help our neighbor's daughter in this subject... etc." they say it in a way that somehow compels me to do it... Maybe they're more concerned about me now? I don't know. I simply want to "be on my own", to shape my own life, my own experience. I appreciate their feedback. But not their control. But maybe there's something else. Maybe they have changed, regardless of me. Indeed, I also noticed that my mother and father are more attached to each other, helping each other, etc. which is somehow a bit strange to me... Maybe I shouldn't even worry so much about all this. What do you think?

That was my point in my previous post. It might be that a person does so just as an expression of rebellion. Or maybe not. But how can we, outside observers, decide whether this person is doing so because she likes it or because she wants to rebel? Yikes... a bit passive-minded thou hast become... I obviously don't expect everyone to get enlightened after reading this thread and to start loving each other excluding all forms of prejudice. Simply, I wanted to point out at yet another unfairness of society. At least, be aware of it, and contribute to doing some change instead of just stoically "coping" with unfairness. Although we're individuals, our single actions count. I personally do my best to be myself always and not be influenced by other people's stereotypes towards me, although it's difficult. I don't just blame others and shut up. However, one person is not enough. I know too many people who are unable to act consciously against stereotypes and prejudice. Anyway, my scope was to simply point this out. This is worth mentioning, just as all other issues that are regularly brought up on this forum. I just noticed that not many people are so aware of this.

Many people have a certain level of unconscious historical sensitivity, which in one way or another affects the way they perceive themselves. It depends on how much they know about history, and where they place themselves, what ideologies they draw from their image of history. As interesting as many of these philosophies and historical ideologies can be, don't you think they also bias our interaction with other people? And sometimes create new grounds for problems such as racism? The worst that I've encountered are professors of history who walk around as if they are "the nation" itself. And they relate to other people (even students) according to their historical backgrounds, ignoring everything else! Since history is among my studies, unfortunately I've sometimes had these feelings, too. It's my personal experience of life that keeps me from actually taking such feelings seriously... For example, sometimes I feel... those Japanese almost destroyed "us". Yeah, I literally feel as if I am part of it. Part of "my ancestors". And sometimes I get silly feelings such as the need to defend myself from the Japanese people... And that somehow created negative feelings whenever I go to Japanese language classes. Luckily enough, I remembered that before reading history books I had made many close ties with Japanese friends. What do you think of this? Is historical sensitivity really healthy for the world? To always look back and generalize what happened? Or does it create only more limits to our personal, daily lives? Do you perceive yourself as "yourname" or "yourname, the American/German/etc." whatever?

Hi everyone. Sorry for replying so late, I had many exams these days. I agree: let me tell you that I'm not attempting to evaluate which issues should be given more priority in society. (To be honest, I'm sometimes not sure whether I even deserve to sit here and discuss about stereotypes and psychology while people in the less fortunate sections of the world keep dying for unjust causes; our personal vanities and worries on self-image seem to be more worthy of attention than world hunger and children's death. But this is a completely different story...) I'm not so sure whether the problems related to self-image and confidence are more present among people perceived as unattractive. (This might probably depend on where we live and whom we have lived with.) You made me think a bit: As Sheyda pointed out, it can happen that an entire society would find someone physically attractive (or beautiful in his/her way, or fashionable), but she or he just isn't aware of it... and consequently does all crazy things to adjust themselves, or have more, and more... there have been many deaths caused by anorexia! This to say that also people who are perceived as beautiful have serious issues. And they aren't just exceptions. There are other problems stemming from attractivity and attention. Very attractive people who are put into the centre of all attention by society can often feel very lonely; for example, too much attention can lead others to fear that it's impossible to create any deep personal relationship with someone so attractive (again, due to prejudice and stereotypes) and as time passes this "others" becomes "everyone"... These people who used to be in the centre of attention end up giving their soul to what the same society defines as 'lesser values' (money, material, luxury, and the related societies etc.). I know: there are many teenagers who commit suicide because they failed to achieve their dreams, their academic goals maybe. Maybe they didn't get into Harvard... But what makes these issues more relevant/serious than the model who committed suicide because she couldn't realize her dream (entering fashion maybe?) without selling her body to the photographer? ... caro33, you later suggest that a good balance could be reached by fitting into the symbolic standards set by society; such as by dressing appropriately depending on circumstances... That's a good point. However, it leads us back to the origin of the vicious circle: doing something for the sake of appeasing society, at the cost of personal freedom of art and expression - which is in no way different from what happens when media and magazines set standards for "fitting in". Do you see the similarity? ... We all agreed on the fact that beauty is relative, and let me stress that I agreed with this from the beginning of this discussion. Yet, is only beauty in the eye of the beholder? What about personal intentions? Attitudes? Aren't they relative as well? What if I'm the humblest person on Earth and walk on the streets dressed like a superstar because I like that dress? In most cases, everybody would think that I'm trying to show off, since according to most societies' symbology and conventions, dressing that way necessarily means nothing but that. But meanwhile, I might be lost in my thoughts and not even looking at the others, thinking about my exams. This might be perceived as arrogance, etc. etc. etc. Some of you mentioned that beauty and attractivity are often accompanied by arrogant attitudes. People can be perceived as arrogant without ever knowing it, and without ever intending to be so. Yeah, my friends, look at it from a different perspective: also arrogance is in the eye of the beholder. The mere fact of trying to interpret other people's feelings by the way they make themselves appear... that's arrogance. And also superficial. To think "She dresses like that... she must be a real 'attention wh.'!" That's arrogance. Please note that I'm not trying to attack anyone, but simply portray how things can be perceived on the other end. I also support Sheyda's argument... How true this is. Not only in the domain of beauty and self-confidence, but also in cultural aspects, national identity, etc. there are always people who say "Be yourself!" [and all its variant expressions] but in fact try to make you what they want you to be! ... Now, this seems to be a good explanation. However, all those common "wisdom" quotes and stereotypes really make it sound totally different. And everyone seems to accept the stereotype, rather than the explanation. Just in the same way people say "Be yourself", but in fact want you to be as they want. Well, lucky you You are probably living in a very mature and open-minded society, unlike the majority of people I meet daily... ... There you go! Absolutely right. However, you should specify that if you like something you found on the magazine or saw on the media, and maybe everyone else likes it, too, you shouldn't feel compelled to refrain from wearing what you like just for the sake of "loving yerself". What I'm trying to say is: just because you like some pop songs should not mean that you are a conformist and don't have your own tastes. But also the other way round: Just because you listen only to heavy metal songs doesn't mean that you are really listening it because you like it for yourself. (considering that where I live, pop music is considered commercial, conformist, whereas heavy metal is "unique", individual, etc.) My end line: Do whatever you like (fashion, physical preferences, music, etc.), neither for the sake of fitting in (media, social conventions, etc.), nor for the sake of being different (anti-media, anti-conformism, etc.). Simply, do what you like. Wherever the inspiration comes from. ... Well, that was what I was trying to tell the whole time! Just because you're like a media doll or Tom Cruise (or Brad Pitt, whoever), doesn't mean you're shallow or stupid Naaah... to be honest, I find my mother ugly And as you might have already guessed, also ugliness is in the eye of the beholder...

Double misunderstanding then I apologize! I guess that after my experiences, I'm also near the trail of reading certain phrases in a different tone from what was intended... How good it is that we can discuss things openly here

I think you misunderstood me somewhere, because what you just said is exactly what I said in my previous post Does it really change whether it's the media or the royal court etiquettists who set the standards? Yeah, I understand... since beautiful people are like Gods and thereforeeee able to solve all their problems on their own. Right? Beautiful people also don't have insecurities, worries, and such things that only "normal people" have. So why have empathy with them who have perks in everything? Would you please mind elaborating on this point? --- I know that, as you might have guessed from what I have written so far However, whatever non-uniform form of beauty certain people consciously pursue, these people are uniformly discriminated as being shallow... -_- --- How right you are... they are doing everything to prove such stereotypes, even trying to calculate statistics! Crazy, isn't it? Yeah, I've sometimes felt exactly that way. And do you know what happens when beautiful people (according to whatever measure of beauty) defend themselves, and try not to care about what everyone else says about them? Even more hammering... and the stereotypes get stronger and stronger, like in a vicious circle! I'd like to add one more thing: it may be true that beautiful people have some privileges at modeling or entertainment auditions, beauty galas, and such things. Maybe even at work, if the position entails some promotion/advertising. But the world is more than that! Especially intellectual circles of the world seem to have strong feelings against physical appearance... and nowadays everything in the world is run by intellectuals. It's funny being called "shallow" (behind our backs) just because you smile and greet everyone at a conference on third world development, or at a meeting of literates. (And they seem to look at your body rather than listen to your arguments... now that is shallow) It's funny being called "shallow" even if you are just happy and smile alone and walk accross the streets. I'm just saying it's funny.

From what I understood, most of you here are saying that these negative attitudes have stemmed from the modern-world abuse of beauty by the media. Did I get you right? I actually think that setting the standards for a definition of physical beauty has historically been very relative, thus actually confirming phrases like "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder": I remember that up to the 17th century in nearly all Western countries, it was considered "ugly" if you didn't have some additional pounds of weight... since being "fat" used to be associated with wealth and well-being, since only few could afford so much food. Anything else was a trait of the poor or middle class. If you have a look at today's world, there is a diversity in "beauty standards" accross different societies and countries of the world. Compare Italian teenagers to Japanese one's for example... each society has different values of physical appearance. So, again: Beauty is in the eye of the beholding society/culture/country/historical setting. From what I understood, you are saying that when a specific media culture sets new standards and customs (that are accepted by a majority of people belonging to that specific crowd), those individuals within the same society who prefer appearing differently might feel "left out". Right? I actually know this very well: a girl I know went to live in a South Asian village for a few months. She felt very discriminated by the way people looked at her, referring to her as filthy, etc. Eventually, for the sake of not ruining her stay, she had to conform to their standards... Now, just because she adhered to their customs, does she become a superficial "tradition wh."? I can forecast that some of you might not see the similarity between media and social traditions; but accept it, both are forms of standards dictated by society. And what I'm pointing out is that nowadays, at least in most Western societies, a new social standard is being created: one that strongly discriminates people who want to endeavour in any form of aesthetic creativity (whether by adhering to high fashion, subgenre standards or using own individual anti-conformity). I mean, just look around and hear some of the typical comments... "What a hot chick. I guess she has no brains..." "All muscles, no brain..." "He's really very attractive but very probably doesn't have a good personality!" As if it's a natural law! "Oh, just look at the way she dresses! Wants to be in the center of all attention I guess. My god, how off-putting! I would never want to even know a person like her..." The core of all prejudice-mindedness. I think you explained this very well. But does this mean that every person who looks very good or tries to do so is vain, arrogant and superficial? I'm asking all of you personally. Because that's the stereotype that, in my perception, today's societies (and I don't mean only media and advertisements when I say "societies"; see public opinion, newspapers, blogs, forums, TV shows, magazines, etc. where the crowd speaks) are trying to dictate.

Could someone please explain to me what makes today's people often hold a quite negative (or at least, defensive) stance towards personal appearance and physical beauty? Wherever I go I hear moral preaching such as "Appearance is not everything", "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder", etc. They is a lot of truth in such phrases and I agree with them. Yet, the ways and contexts in which such statements are made somehow suggest that beauty is inherently evil or superficial; that who is very beautiful and physically attractive will rarely be a good person or intelligent; and most importantly, that it is actually wrong to appreciate people (and oneself) for this facet of human life. Couldn't all this have led to the creation of strong stereotypes? And consequently, to self-fulfilling prophecy? Secondly: what about fashion. What makes so many people nowadays discriminate this form of art and people who like to be a bit creative with their clothing? Apart from all this: Have you, too, sometimes felt kind of unease when you are physically beautiful (or look attractive according to the way you are dressed), ever since you realized that doing so "might be wrong"?