Are You Self Actualized?

[Luddly Neddite]

The fact that a few people are so fucked up that they have food issues, does not mean that the rest of us cannot have a discussion about self actualization.

Not everything is about the fucking poor.

I actually think many poor are quite content, those that aren't are bitter they are not getting a better free ride. I've not seen photos of cities of people with distended bellies from starvation in the US (just fat ones from eating junk food)

Bonzi

".. not getting a better free ride.. "

There's the christian in you coming out.

How many people do you know who spend every penny on their handicapped child?

How about veterans who lost arms and legs and sight and their genitals in battle?

And single mothers who work two jobs but have a special needs child and just cannot make enough to pay for medications?

I have come to despise RWNJ, "christian" idiots who judge people they are utterly ignorant about.

Bonzi says she's nothing ambitious so it's pretty unlikely she'll get off her butt and actually go help those she looks down her christian nose at.

Evil. Pure evil.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Bonzi]

To me, being self actualized means being honest with yourself and being at peace with yourself and you choices. What more could anyone want?

If that's true, you feel secure in having a roof over your head and food in your pantry.

Far too many do not.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

You should feel secure with that. As I said before, spoiled

 

[Bonzi]

The fact that a few people are so fucked up that they have food issues, does not mean that the rest of us cannot have a discussion about self actualization.

Not everything is about the fucking poor.

I actually think many poor are quite content, those that aren't are bitter they are not getting a better free ride. I've not seen photos of cities of people with distended bellies from starvation in the US (just fat ones from eating junk food)

Bonzi

".. not getting a better free ride.. "

There's the christian in you coming out.

How many people do you know who spend every penny on their handicapped child?

How about veterans who lost arms and legs and sight and their genitals in battle?

And single mothers who work two jobs but have a special needs child and just cannot make enough to pay for medications?

I have come to despise RWNJ, "christian" idiots who judge people they are utterly ignorant about.

Bonzi says she's nothing ambitious so it's pretty unlikely she'll get off her butt and actually go help those she looks down her christian nose at.

Evil. Pure evil.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

Yeah, but don't tell anyone. K?

 

[anotherlife]

Here is a problem, assuming we live by the pyramid. If you don't have level 2 which is security and shelter, then you can't sleep, because you are constantly open to physical attack. Prolonged lack of sleep leads to mental illness such as schizophrenia and others. So how does the pyramid look like under this precondition? In fact, even better question is what can you do with your life if you suffer from a mental decease? Discount insurance protection and shelters and such.

 

[anotherlife]

At the elementary level, the Maslow hierarchy is correct.

For example, if you are very hungry, then you will go out in front of the cabin to bring in the food, no matter how badly the snow storm is raging even if you have to do it butt naked.

So you can't have level 2 without fulfilling level

 

[usmbguest5318]

Not so much now, but when I was a teenager, I self actualized every chance I got.

What is it about this board? Everything gets turned into lib bashing, con bashing, or sex!!!

I wish I knew.

• Why so little serious debate?
  
• Policy debate and discussion

For instance, the remark below...

I don't think Maslow had it right. We all enter and leave stages and re-enter them and the cycle continues.

...though clearly not making light of the OP theme/question, is yet another illustration of what catalyzed me to create the two threads I cite above.

Penelope says she doesn't think Maslow was right. Okay...Well here -- A Theory of Human Motivation -- is what Maslow presented to show that he was "right," and as the basis for her contravention of Maslow's proposition, Penelope offers this, "We all enter and leave stages and re-enter them and the cycle continues."

Now, I'm not "ragging" on Penelope. Her remarks are but a convenient and timely foil that illustrates what many members here do: express a statement that implies the writer has undertake rational consideration/analysis of some measure and arrived at a conclusion that, by their stating it, should be taken somewhat seriously by us readers. When I read that sort of thing, I wonder how in the hell am I supposed to take the writer seriously. What have they said that even remotely, as in the "Maslow" example Penelope gives us here, indicates there disagreement has even the faintest light of merit?

 

[BULLDOG]

Not so much now, but when I was a teenager, I self actualized every chance I got.

What is it about this board? Everything gets turned into lib bashing, con bashing, or sex!!!

I wish I knew.

• Why so little serious debate?
  
• Policy debate and discussion

You seem to think this is a place for reasoned discussion and debate on politics and the other pressing issues of the day, or perhaps a few other items of common interest. It's not. It's a pig pen where you can wrassle an idiot, and make fun of a crazy any time you want. If you want the other, you need to run just as fast and as far as you can from here. What you want has never been, and will never be here.

 

[Gracie]

No. Still lots of hungry people without shelter or basic healthcare. An emergency room will sew you up if you're bleeding, but they won't do anything for a diabetic.

Oh I bet there are systems in place for that. I didn't think of the healthcare aspect, but every city has food banks and shelters

Yes, and most are underfunded, and not able to meet the needs of the area they serve. Call your local food bank and ask them if they have everything they need. I'll bet they don't say yes. Lots of people go without the basic needs of life.

They really don't need to, I worked at a food bank at church, some were very picky.

Not sure what might have happened at the one food bank you worked at, but I'm pretty sure that most of the hunger in this country is not caused because the people are just too picky.

Well no, but think about this. Water fountains every where. Perfectly good food in trash cans at food courts. Third world countries would think it a feast

Then maybe you should give your lunch away to someone that needs it and YOU eat the "perfectly good food" in those trash cans. You know..take one of the team.

I swear, you are ignorant. I don't think you are stupid. Just flat out ignorant.

 

[Gracie]

The fact that a few people are so fucked up that they have food issues, does not mean that the rest of us cannot have a discussion about self actualization.

Not everything is about the fucking poor.

I actually think many poor are quite content, those that aren't are bitter they are not getting a better free ride. I've not seen photos of cities of people with distended bellies from starvation in the US (just fat ones from eating junk food)

oy

 

[Gracie]

Have you ever been homeless, Bonzi? Just curious.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Not so much now, but when I was a teenager, I self actualized every chance I got.

What is it about this board? Everything gets turned into lib bashing, con bashing, or sex!!!

I wish I knew.

• Why so little serious debate?
  
• Policy debate and discussion

You seem to think this is a place for reasoned discussion and debate on politics and the other pressing issues of the day, or perhaps a few other items of common interest. It's not. It's a pig pen where you can wrassle an idiot, and make fun of a crazy any time you want. If you want the other, you need to run just as fast and as far as you can from here. What you want has never been, and will never be here.

You seem to think this is a place for reasoned discussion and debate on politics and the other pressing issues of the day, or perhaps a few other items of common interest.

I think that of certain parts of USMB -- zone one and two subforums -- and not of others. For example:

• CDZ -- "The Clean Debate Zone is to be used for the clean debating of Government Policies, Candidates, Current News and Events." -- Of course, this is a written debate venue, so the process of public forum debate cannot be followed, but the theme and structure of it should apply, after all, this is a public forum.
• SDF -- "The Debate Now forum is to be used for all structured discussions/debates. The structure shall consist of a set of 'rules' set forth by the OP. Members may not deviate from the structure and shall respect all guidelines set forth in the opening post." -- Pretty straightforward...follow the defined structure for a thread or don't post in the thread.
• Politics and other Zone 2 subforums -- Based on the guidelines the USMB admin have provided, I'd liken Zone 2 subforums' (those that have no individual subforum-specific caveats) discursive dynamics to those one might encounter at a club, post-lecture/symposium reception or cocktail party. An individual sparks a conversation with another attendee and others contribute to the conversation by sharing factually or anecdotally on-topic thoughts, perhaps occasionally interjecting a jocularly germane and pity remark to amplify another's well founded (legitimate) comment(s), or having nothing of substance to say, listen but refrain from inserting themselves directly into the conversation.
  
  There is, of course, a key difference between such social gatherings and a venue like USMB: the participants in those in-person settings are generally known, or known by reputation, to one another. Accordingly, when, say, an astrophysicist at Goddard is the guy remarking on a matter pertinent to his profession/training/research, there's good reason to believe him. On the other hand, if that same guy remarks upon health insurance, he and I both know he's just surmising, however, at that point, the Geico actuary who overheard the remark about health insurance may at that insert himself into the conversation because he's got something useful to contribute to it. He may do so by saying something like, "Hi. I couldn't help but hear your comment about 'health insurance.' From my work as an actuary, I've observed...." Neither I nor the astrophysicist, are going to refute the actuary, much less tell him he's "full of sh*t." What is more likely to happen is that we'd ask him questions that allow us to obtain a better understanding of the matter, or we'd take what he said and build on/extrapolate his ideas to something new, perhaps even something actionable.
  
  Here that just doesn't and cannot happen. Unlike the members of a club or cocktail party, there is no vetting process, nor need there be. Unlike a conference, lecture or symposium reception, everyone present cannot be assumed to have a very deep background on the topic under discussion.
  
  Even though there are no "certification" structures/processes in place on Internet forums, it's still possible for members to engage in equally substantive discussion/debates where their remarks can be taken as credible. How? By merely providing credible support for one's claims, premises, and so on.

But what has any of that to do with gauging whether one is "self-actualized" or whether others around one are? The answer is found not by looking at what be the criteria for and behaviors indicative of self-actualization, but rather at those pertaining to esteem.

Remember not only to say the right thing in the right place, but far more difficult still, to leave unsaid the wrong thing at the tempting moment.
-- Benjamin Franklin​

Well, one readily observes that much of what transpires here is just folks airing their opinions, and often doing so without portfolio, at least from where we readers of their remarks stand because we are all strangers here. What are we to think of unfounded, unsubstantiated opinions? Nothing beyond merely being aware that "such and such" a member holds a given opinion. Tossing one's opinion into a conversation here doesn't work the same as it does in-person, and it doesn't for the reasons I described above. Expressing one's opinion -- positive or negative -- of another member here has no real impact on that person because as a stranger to them and they to oneself, can neither harm nor help them, but it may seemingly benefit oneself. The dimension in which it does is esteem; however, it does so sophistically for one's actual esteem is grown by the merit of one's own ideas, not by one's diminution of others'.

A shipwright can as surely sink a ship as build one.
-- Something my dad said​

As a self-actualized individual, one's presumably moved past the "esteem" level of Maslow's hierarchy; thus expressing one's ideas for the consumption of others isn't a need one must satisfy at all, much less, of all places, here or another Internet similar forum. Accordingly, being self-actualized, why bother airing one's unsubstantiated opinion for the sake of doing so? Is one, about one's views, seeking validation from others? If so, why from a bunch of strangers and in a venue where one's true identity and meritorious and original ideas cannot be duly claimed and recognized? If not, what's the point of airing it in a venue like this one?

Educate your children to self-control, to the habit of holding passion and prejudice and evil tendencies subject to an upright and reasoning will, and you have done much to abolish misery from their future and crimes from society.
-- Benjamin Franklin​

 

[Linkiloo]

A person's views on whether they are self-actualised is limited by their own frame of reference.

So if you are 20 and high most of the time, you would probably say you are and you won't be a slave of the capitalist world. But older folks (I'm 47) will laugh in your face and tell you to get a job.

My point is, you can't tell because your mind is limited in its awareness.

You'll never be self actualised until the moment of your death when you realise it is all over (or not).

 

[usmbguest5318]

A person's views on whether they are self-actualised is limited by their own frame of reference.

So if you are 20 and high most of the time, you would probably say you are and you won't be a slave of the capitalist world. But older folks (I'm 47) will laugh in your face and tell you to get a job.

My point is, you can't tell because your mind is limited in its awareness.

You'll never be self actualised until the moment of your death when you realise it is all over (or not).

you can't tell because your mind is limited in its awareness.

Given the general criteria for self-actualization...

• Accept themselves and others.
• Maintain deep and meaningful relationships.
• Can exist autonomously.
• Have a sense of humor, particularly an ability to find humor in their own mistakes.
• Accurately perceive reality, both as it pertains to the self and others.
• Have a sense of purpose and perform regular tasks geared toward that purpose.
• Experience frequent moments of profound happiness (what Maslow called “peak experiences”).
• Demonstrate empathy and compassion for others.
• Have an ongoing appreciation of the goodness of life.

...I think each of us can discern for ourselves whether we are self-actualized. Whether one is going to tell others is a different matter. I think it safe to say that many others are more than willing to tell one whether they think one is self-actualized. LOL Based on what I wrote in post 51, that I might be able to form an opinion on whether certain other individuals could be self-actualized, for very few individuals am I informed enough about them to have a credible stance on whether they are self-actualized.

 

[Bonzi]

I think that of certain parts of USMB -- zone one and two subforums -- and not of others. For example

.... except the place is full of rule breakers

 

[Bonzi]

The fact that a few people are so fucked up that they have food issues, does not mean that the rest of us cannot have a discussion about self actualization.

Not everything is about the fucking poor.

I actually think many poor are quite content, those that aren't are bitter they are not getting a better free ride. I've not seen photos of cities of people with distended bellies from starvation in the US (just fat ones from eating junk food)

oy

don't blame me. it's the majority of people abusing the system and good will that is taking it away from the minority that really need it

 

[Bonzi]

Oh I bet there are systems in place for that. I didn't think of the healthcare aspect, but every city has food banks and shelters

Yes, and most are underfunded, and not able to meet the needs of the area they serve. Call your local food bank and ask them if they have everything they need. I'll bet they don't say yes. Lots of people go without the basic needs of life.

They really don't need to, I worked at a food bank at church, some were very picky.

Not sure what might have happened at the one food bank you worked at, but I'm pretty sure that most of the hunger in this country is not caused because the people are just too picky.

Well no, but think about this. Water fountains every where. Perfectly good food in trash cans at food courts. Third world countries would think it a feast

Then maybe you should give your lunch away to someone that needs it and YOU eat the "perfectly good food" in those trash cans. You know..take one of the team.

I swear, you are ignorant. I don't think you are stupid. Just flat out ignorant.

No, you are not listening. There are people in many other countries that would LOVE to have our leftovers. People are people right? What, are we (the US) entitled to better living standards on a humanistic level? If you think so, then, OK. I would gladly give my lunch to a person I felt truly deserved it (I need to diet anyway), but I don't get to pick and choose who I can help

 

[Bonzi]

Not so much now, but when I was a teenager, I self actualized every chance I got.

What is it about this board? Everything gets turned into lib bashing, con bashing, or sex!!!

I wish I knew.

• Why so little serious debate?
  
• Policy debate and discussion

You seem to think this is a place for reasoned discussion and debate on politics and the other pressing issues of the day, or perhaps a few other items of common interest. It's not. It's a pig pen where you can wrassle an idiot, and make fun of a crazy any time you want. If you want the other, you need to run just as fast and as far as you can from here. What you want has never been, and will never be here.

He's talking about USMB as a whole
You are talking about The Badlands

 

[Bonzi]

Not so much now, but when I was a teenager, I self actualized every chance I got.

What is it about this board? Everything gets turned into lib bashing, con bashing, or sex!!!

I wish I knew.

• Why so little serious debate?
  
• Policy debate and discussion

For instance, the remark below...

I don't think Maslow had it right. We all enter and leave stages and re-enter them and the cycle continues.

...though clearly not making light of the OP theme/question, is yet another illustration of what catalyzed me to create the two threads I cite above.

Penelope says she doesn't think Maslow was right. Okay...Well here -- A Theory of Human Motivation -- is what Maslow presented to show that he was "right," and as the basis for her contravention of Maslow's proposition, Penelope offers this, "We all enter and leave stages and re-enter them and the cycle continues."

Now, I'm not "ragging" on Penelope. Her remarks are but a convenient and timely foil that illustrates what many members here do: express a statement that implies the writer has undertake rational consideration/analysis of some measure and arrived at a conclusion that, by their stating it, should be taken somewhat seriously by us readers. When I read that sort of thing, I wonder how in the hell am I supposed to take the writer seriously. What have they said that even remotely, as in the "Maslow" example Penelope gives us here, indicates there disagreement has even the faintest light of merit?

We all do enter and leave the stages. It's not like we take care of our needs (e.g. food, shelter) then never address them again. We have to keep eating!

 

[fncceo]

I feel very unsafe.

 

[Bonzi]

I feel totally safe.
I know I live in a country where, no matter what, I have shelter (for a time) e.g. casinos, hospitals, airports, bus terminals all of which provide free clean water, and either scraps of food or people that might buy food for you.

If I lost everything, it would be hard, but it would be OK.
If I die, it was my time.