Ego question

"I see myself as a person fighting for survival, that is all I see myself as."

Person who thinks this way, is his ego big or small?

Does your earning power define your ego?

"I see myself as a person fighting for survival, that is all I see myself as."

Person who thinks this way, is his ego big or small?

I'm going to be the devils advocate and go with big

Seeing their self as a description  (person fighting for survival) they attempt to set a humbleness with the latter part of the sentence. "I am a person fighting for survival" has less ego attached to seeing and defining ones self.

I'm confused ;]

Quote from: Piotr on May 18, 2016, 01:08:41 PM

"I see myself as a person fighting for survival, that is all I see myself as."

Person who thinks this way, is his ego big or small?

I'm going to be the devils advocate and go with big

Seeing their self as a description  (person fighting for survival) they attempt to set a humbleness with the latter part of the sentence. "I am a person fighting for survival" has less ego attached to seeing and defining ones self.

As the person adds the last "that is all", the person tries to belittle the prior statement. That could be in an attempt to make himself be seen as having less of an ego.

However, if a person has a big ego, it follows that his self confidence is such that he does not feel the need to belittle himself to others. This is what I do, this is who I am. Look at me in awe (if the ego is big enough).
The self-brlittlement will sooner stem from a misguided sense of modesty, coming from a small ego. You could be proud of what you do, yet don't want to enlarge it because, well, it's just what you do..

I say big from the angle they acknowledge the self and their ego

The one who makes this statement does not operate from a a a place of id

So would this quote fit Hillary or Trump more likely?

So would this quote fit Hillary or Trump more likely?

I doubt either of them would be foolish enough to be heard saying that. No matter how, "I'm just fighting for survival" makes for a poor politician, since those should be worrying about the nation, not their own survival.

So would this quote fit Hillary or Trump more likely?

Ross Perot

Quote from: Piotr on May 20, 2016, 04:19:43 PM

So would this quote fit Hillary or Trump more likely?

Got political
I'm out guys

Lol have a great life, it was good having you on my forum, the entirety of which is a political experiment. Have fun otherwise, ROFL!

No matter how, "I'm just fighting for survival" makes for a poor politician, since those should be worrying about the nation, not their own survival.

White should be black and 0 should be 1. How? Are you for real? Have you ever found a politician or a human being who will prefer nation over their survival? *sigh*

Small wonder when liberals elect politicians the whole show turns into a total .loving. disaster. The naivety of your thought processing is unbelievable.

/rant over.

The key to making progress in this discussion is understanding what kind of human brain can prefer nation over their own survival. Suicidal only.

 To the people who get confused by liberal definition of ego: replace it with 'will to live' or 'free will' and perhaps a number of cognitive dissonances in your brain will decrease.

Quote from: Noblellama on May 20, 2016, 04:39:32 PM

Quote from: Piotr on May 20, 2016, 04:19:43 PM

So would this quote fit Hillary or Trump more likely?

Got political
I'm out guys

Lol have a great life, it was good having you on my forum, the entirety of which is a political experiment. Have fun otherwise, ROFL!

Quote from: Kaylesh on May 20, 2016, 06:36:21 PM

No matter how, "I'm just fighting for survival" makes for a poor politician, since those should be worrying about the nation, not their own survival.

White should be black and 0 should be 1. How? Are you for real? Have you ever found a politician or a human being who will prefer nation over their survival? *sigh*

Small wonder when liberals elect politicians the whole show turns into a total .loving. disaster. The naivety of your thought processing is unbelievable.

/rant over.

The key to making progress in this discussion is understanding what kind of human brain can prefer nation over their own survival. Suicidal only.

 To the people who get confused by liberal definition of ego: replace it with 'will to live' or 'free will' and perhaps a number of cognitive dissonances in your brain will decrease.

I never said they would choose nation over survival. I said they wouldn't SAY it.
You decided to take the sentence in which I explain WHY it would be viewed poorly by general populace and take that as my statement. The question I answered was

So would this quote fit Hillary or Trump more likely?

in the sense of who would be saying it. The answer to that is that no politician will ever admit, though it is true that self-preservation will have a higher priority then nationalism in a human's mind.

Regarding your definition of ego as "will to live", by the time all you do is fight for survival and caught saying that, I'd argue that your will to live is lessened, according to Maslov. www.simplyps...../maslow.html

I'd dare to state that your degree of 'will to live' gets greater functioning at the top of the pyramid, rather then at the bottom.

I see. The reason people relate so strongly to Trump is because he speaks the truth, unlike typical politician you describe.

Lol

I see. The reason people relate so strongly to Trump is because he speaks the truth, unlike typical politician you describe.

He doesn't *always* speak the *full* truth, as proven by

"Hillary Clinton wants to abolish the Second Amendment," Trump said May 7 at a rally in Washington. "Hillary Clinton wants to take your guns away, and she wants to abolish the Second Amendment."

among others.

Unless you have confirmation of the opposite, the facts as mentioned on the site seem to check out rather well. If desired I could do a review paper on it..

If desired I could do a review paper on it..

I for one think that would be splendid.

A lot of people agree that behaviour displayed by Hillary over many many years in regards to gun control can be explained by her wanting to abolish the 2nd Amendment.

 Donald Trump said Hillary Clinton wants to abolish the 2nd Amendment, but I see it as example of him using the same weapon liberals used for years. He claims to know what the intent of the other party is, and he reveals this intent to be malicious. Lots of people agree, but it cannot be proven or disproven.