Tectonic Velocity

[ehowton]

Plato vs. MaslowPlato taught that the attachments and defining illusions & behaviors that human beings conventionally rely on for security, respect, affection, social identity, and other needs must be questioned and abandoned in their original form, whereas Maslow's view apparently was that the meeting of such needs (by whatever mechanism) was

Comments

[ehowton]

Anyway, kudos for recognizing self mastery. That's pretty huge.

Thanks. Only...I didn't. Not really. While these are traits I acknowledge in myself, I assigned no value to them; it was michelle1963 who stated it as such, and I simply attempted to prove her wrong.

"I have attained self-actualization, and that's what fucking everything up."

It did, however, all become CRYSTAL CLEAR as to why I was experiencing certain issues which seemed far beyond the experience of pretty much everyone else. Mind you, I'm fairly certain many of my close friends are already there, if not close.

I still have trouble with it...

As an INTJ I would expect nothing less.

Anyway, kudos for recognizing self mastery. That's pretty huge.

Thanks! Were such a thing important to self-actualized people, I'd be thrilled! My mother used the term, "Red-Letter Day" and I told her the same thing :P Isn't life funny?

[michelle1963]

Interestingly enough only my T tends to waver. Scores around 80% when I'm happy. However, I took the test again during a period of stress and upset, and my T was only 12%. Interesting. My other values tend to stay pretty steady.

[michelle1963]

It would seem that managing emotions is a prerequisite for self-actualization. If one is constantly at their mercy, can't see beyond what s/he feels, it's impossible to consider other viewpoints, reconcile conflict, perceive the facts of a situation.

That said, part of management is determining what the emotion is trying to tell you. Emotions are a tool, not an end point, not merely a form of self-expression, but a reaction to something ~ whether it's a strong reaction to an immediate event or a nagging feeling. I find them most useful when they don't correlate with my logic. In that case, it either means that I have some underlying problem that needs to be addressed or perhaps, just perhaps, my emotional mind has read the data and perceived something my logic has not. When a decision is at hand under these circumstances, I often go with my emotions. Most of the time they have been proven right.

But again, I use them; they are a means to further understanding.

[ehowton]

And I always go with my logic. I must. It is a perquisite as head-of-household. If I fall, so does that which I support.

[michelle1963]

The times of which I speak, where I have learned to listen to my what my emotion is telling me occurs in very specific circumstances ~ there really isn't enough data for my logic to make a sound choice (although the minimal data available still point me in one direction, because logic doesn't rest even in a dearth of information), but I must make a decision right then and there, and emotion and logic are at odds.

This has happened only a handful of times in my life.

When I am faced with this situation, I try to wait until I do have more data with which to make an informed logical choice. The emotional information comes into play when I am forced to make a choice without much data.

I learned some hard lessons by not listening to my emotions in these very specific types of circumstances (not enough data, but had to make a decision) early in my life.

When I have enough data, then I don't have the emotional-logical conflict of which I spoke.

[codekitten]

you always go with your logic as it pertains to your responsibilities or you always go with your logic, well, always?

[codekitten]

jesus christ, can you stop making posts that i have to think about for days on end before i respond.

:P

[ehowton]

I'll get right on that.

[michelle1963]

That's like asking him to give himself a lobotomy. :D

[codekitten]

yeah i know...but he keeps touching on things that i have to think about once i've read them...they can't be unread!

but in all seriousness this is a good thing :)

[codekitten]

As it turns out, I simply misunderstood their definition by assuming one of my own until I tracked it down.

did you say what this was? i'm not sure if i missed it...

[ehowton]

I did not. I remember thinking at the time if I should outline what it was or not, and didn't for the sake of flowing more easily without the sidetrack - yet was aware a situation like this might arise.

In short, I don't remember. I *think* it was the fact that I didn't require 'beauty' or 'order' in my life in order to feel happy or successful, then thought perhaps I do, i just see it in different things or in different ways than everyone else. I must've found something along the lines which either defined it in a different way - one that I understood, or backed up my own supposition.

One of the other epiphanies I had concerned Mr. Maslow himself, and how he defined self-actualization. He based it on himself! So he said, "Wow, I'm all these wonderful things, this must be it!" Which is great. But some things which may have been very important to him may not be important to me. So I could have different traits of self-actualization that his defined ones, and still be self-actualized

[codekitten]

He based it on himself!
he did? i thought he based it on a few people he thought were super awesome (not that that makes it any more scientific to increase the sample population only a few-fold!)

i just see it in different things or in different ways than everyone else.
i think the B-values are definitely interpretable to your own life. i would be tough to be convinced that "beauty" meant the same to you as it does to me.

Its something I would never have said of myself - I had to be told. Yes, despite my enormous ego!
now this is the most shocking thing of all! :P

[ehowton]

i thought he based it on a few people he thought were super awesome

I've been looking for a used college psyche book - anything really - to run this down. There's really not a lot on the web surprisingly. But I did recently run across a book whose first chapter "The Top One Percent" gave a history of those Maslow first saw these traits in - so yes, you are correct.

But what I'm now reading shows that you don't have to identify with all the metavalues - just the ones which apply to you.

And down the rabbit hole we go!

[codekitten]

It’s not that we love other people less, and it’s not even necessarily true that we love these people more, but we love them in a different, special way that is unlike our love for anyone else in the world

My husband and I adamantly support each other to have our own independent relationships (he goes to Atlantic City with the boys, I go on annual or semi-annual adventures with my girlfriends, etc)...enough wiggle room so that we can develop our own space with others...while at the same time still retaining our relationship together. I think both people have to be on the same page with this idea for it to work. You have to be very confident with yourself as well as with each other.

As the new metavalues become more important, people spend less time with persons or groups who don't share their emphasis on these metavalues. They often seek new relationships or groups that do share them. They actively try to bring every relationship more in line with their metavalues.Same thing. You both have to be on loosely the same page in order

[ehowton]

Tomorrow I'm putting up a post about my assumptions that we all eventually learn pretty much the same things in life, about life.

But now...I'm not so sure.

I think some people learn vastly different things from life.

[michelle1963]

While life provides us all with experience, learning from those experiences requires desire and effort. The lessons each of us learn will be dependent on how much desire and effort we are willing to put into the learning process.

[ehowton]

I guess I was hopeful that there was a lowest common denominator which could apply to all people. Maybe not, huh?