----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Minettte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Killer Bs Discussion'" <brin-l@mccmedia.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 9:22 AM Subject: RE: Got Brains?
> > I've been having email problems with the switch to Comcast. I think > this > will be a workaround. Things have been pretty normal for me, but I haven't tried to use a Comcast address yet. I plan to ride my RR address for a while longer. But I do note that I am noticing some service degradation of the type I was warned of when it was announced Comcast was taking over. HTTP is very slow, data over port 110 is slow, but my P2P is about the same, And Comcast is supposedly upgrading our d/l side from 5Mb/s to 6Mb/s. Go figure! > > -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> On Behalf Of Robert Seeberger >> Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2007 10:15 PM >> To: Killer Bs Discussion >> Subject: Re: Got Brains? >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "jon louis mann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <brin-l@mccmedia.com> >> Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2007 9:52 PM >> Subject: Got Brains? >> >> >> > Everyone tries to compensate for poor self esteem, the ones who >> > don't are sociopaths.<G> >> > >> > Some are more obvious about it than others, though. >> > >> > -- Ronn! >> > >> > a lot of people have low self esteem and are not sociopaths; they >> > are the quiet, unassuming people you see everywhere, who may have >> > a >> > lot to say but lack the assertive nature to speak up. you will >> > see >> > their thoughtful insights more, online. there are many high >> > dominant, alpha plus, type a personalities who can often have >> > sociopathic tendencies. >> > judicious jon >> > >> >> I think you are misunderstanding what I've said here. >> What I'm saying is that people who have no doubts are sociopaths. > > I would tend to differ with this. I've lived with a guy who was a > paranoid > schitzo, and he had tremendous self esteem issues. I've also been > around > very spiritual people who knew their own value as a human being in > their > heart. They didn't have to prove themselves because they accepted > themselves. Now, they weren't perfect, and so may have had some > issues. > But, I never saw them compensate for it with their actions. I've been giving this a good deal of thought due to the feedback I've received and I haven't changed my mind, but I do think that what I've said bears some clarification if one is to understand what I have stated so nebulously. I started to respond with a detailed response a few days ago, but what I wrote then was so scattered and unclear (even for me) that I deleted it in favor of waiting 'til some moment of clarity appeared. When I said "no doubts", it has to be taken as an absolute statement. I don't mean few doubts, I'm thinking "zero doubts". (Or close enough to zero to make the point) And when I said "sociopaths", that should be taken to include the full gamut of sociopathic behaviors, but more generally (for the purpose of this discussion) the a-harmonic behaviors one sees exhibited on a daily basis. (lies, cheating, manipulation...) Mentally and emotionally healthy people do not live without doubt. Healthy people remain aware of their limitations and that it is not possible know everything or immediately understand every situation as it is encountered. Most of us are also aware that we are given false information from time to time in our lives and will experience shame/embaressment when we recall passing on that false info to others. This is perfectly normal and healthy people learn to live with a reasonable and appropriate amount of doubt, and learn to react with a healthy amount of skepticism when encountering information that is contrary to what one has learned or experienced. It is unhealthy to live in denial and just as unhealthy to be so doubtful one cannot choose or act. It is a balancing act and healthy people have a good sense of balance in that regard. > > So, from what I've seen, those folks who are most comfortable with > themselves are the least likely to act out to compensate for poor > self > esteem. > I suppose what I say next is the most "interesting" thing I will say on this subject. One cannot "see" another compensating for poor self-esteem in most instances. Sure, we all see the most obvious situations where a person commits some flub or gaffe, or their embarrassment is blatant. But I contend that people are so good at hiding their innermost thoughts that most of the time (almost all of the time) any compensation stays below the radar. It is so completely casual that no one notices. More than that, it is consensual. It is written into our social fabric. I expect that cooperation/competition strategies require that some level of [not absolutely honest and not full disclosure] be ignored in order to maintain social harmony between individuals and groups. Part of human consciousness is modeling and predicting the mind of other individuals. Much of this occurs below the conscious level. As ones model of another will always be less than complete, the degree of certainty when interpreting another's actions, words, and demeanor will always have limitations. One only becomes consciously aware of deviations from the expected model when a threshold of certainty has been surpassed. And the threshold of certainty will vary with the situation, the relationship between individuals, and ones expectations based on experience. Some of the variables such as vocal tone and body language may never even impinge into ones conscious thoughts. So even if one is intent upon observing such compensation, one may never notice it. And in most situations people do not think about these things consciously. I would think there are still variables to be discussed, such as how does one define "low self-esteem", and I have intentionally set the bar fairly low there. But I think this is a pretty large chunk to consider thus far. xponent Models Of Intent Maru rob _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
