Egotism - What do you think?

[Stormin Norman]

Throughout my life, people have called me an egotistical bastard. I say this is a flagrant remark designed to weaken my self-esteem. It is rooted in jealousy, and demonstrates the inferiority of the people that have accused me of this. What do you think? Am I an egotist? How do you weigh in on this?

[vox]

Isn't the egocentricity of the question itself an indication of the answer?

vox

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from vox on 1:58 pm on July 22, 2002
Isn't the egocentricity of the question itself an indication of the answer?

vox

I think that the egocentric nature of his question was obvious and intentional. I think that whole question was just a joke.

A rhetorical question that contains its own answer?

SN is to intelligent for that to have been a legitimate question.

Vox, I'm surprised that you even entertained his inquiry.

[James]

What do you think? Am I an egotist? How do you weigh in on this?

One tiny example is;


-----
Do not curse science simply because short-term problems often accompany it. Demand that the science improve to a point where the previous problems become outdated and obsolete. Do not promote the notion that we should become smurfs living on berries, for this is an absurd notion generated be someone who is deficient of any concept of reality. The fact that our technology seems to be racing ahead at an astronomical rate does not mean that we should abandon reason. We should demand that humanity race ahead with it. We should strive to control it before it renders us extinct. This is the current challenge, which humanity has to face. In order to accomplish this feat, we will need fewer sophists and a new line up of modern day philosophers.
-me

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



And the fact that you've wanted to start a whole thread centred around you. Yes i would say you are i'm afraid. More examples?

[Michael De Panama]

Egotistical? Nah, you're just fat.

[Supermodel]

I'm way more egotistical than you, and rightly so.

After all, I'm an incurable narcissist as well.

[deadpool 52]

http://www.bladegash.net/forums/images/smilies/newlaugh.gif
I was just noticing how all the capitialist "fighters" on this forum have problems with their ego.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from deadpool 52 on 7:49 pm on July 22, 2002

http://www.bladegash.net/forums/images/smilies/newlaugh.gif
I was just noticing how all the capitialist "fighters" on this forum have problems with their ego.

Not I, said the bear

[deadpool 52]

http://www.bladegash.net/forums/images/smilies/newlaugh.gif
I think we all know.

[Stormin Norman]

-Good answer, vox.

-Good job, CI. You picked up on that. You are an intelligent specimen, as well.

-Ther is no way in hell that you are more self centered than me, supermodel. I take the cake, and am far to beautiful for you. Maybe I will date you when I turn fifty and start to lose my sex appeal.

-Fat? No just stubborn.

-James please explain what is egotistical about my signature? Is it the fact that its mine?

[Mazdak]

I think you are egotistical and a bastard all at once.

[Guest]

Egotism is a necessity of life. You cannot refuse yourself or you have betrayed yourself, and become a worthless loser who lives for no purpose. The self is you, and you are your self. You cannot be selfless, though many attempt it.

[Stormin Norman]

Very true, guest. It appears that we agree on many things.

[peaccenicked]

I dont think you are egotistical. A slave to american imperialist ideology, yes. You are here so that suggests to me you are extremely uncomfortable about your identity.
A human being that defends corporate America is profoundly out of love with humanity and therefore can only sanctify his vulgarity with a dim witted individualism
that has nothing to do with genuine egoism which wants everything for everybody and for him/herself.ie real freedom

[The Guest]

Everybody can't have everything, it is against the laws of nature, i.e. out of possible reach. Some people feel it necessary to look for what they need through other people, some look for it through themselves. I agree America's imperialism isn't right, but it by no means represents what America stood for. It represents years of compromise of justice, until government dealt with every petty conflict of man, because the average man feels he can't deal with it alone. I admit I loath the average man for selling out my ability to be free for his inability, and if what your implying is that I should love the men (which if so you can't truely understand the emotion of love) that would ruin my ability to live without a majority telling me what to do (like it is know) then you are a fool.
Ego in every sense of the word is self, not everyone. Pychologically ego is an individual facility within the mind that tirmines your choices. Otherwise it is your comprehension of self.

[peaccenicked]

Quote: from The Guest on 8:02 am on July 29, 2002
Everybody can't have everything, it is against the laws of nature, i.e. out of possible reach.

I can see you have not really thought about this at all. Possible reach? How about potential reach?So possession has something to do with the laws of nature.
Which ones do you think it has to do with. May I ask Mr Scientist?



(Edited by peaccenicked at 8:41 am on July 29, 2002)

[peaccenicked]

LOVE your fellow man brother even if is an idiot and your enemy but when it comes to a fight, give him all you have got.

[Stormin Norman]

What?!?!

[The Guest]

Your altruist nature shows you to be the enemy of mans potential. By saying it is okay if he fails you give him weakness. Man has a potential to be great, but he must achieve it himself, a man's potential doesn't come from another man.
Possesion has a lot to do with the laws of nature, naturally we are all alone as individuals. Naturally I seek a way to provide for myself. If I provide myself with something I posses it, not you, meaning naturally I provide myself my own possesion and don't ask you for it. That is within mans potential, but not all humans really have the minds of men, lost reason (along with self-sufficiency, ego, and true respect for his fellow man). Please define what you call LOVE.

[peaccenicked]

I was a bit tired when I last posted here so I am sorry I did not spend appropiate time on your seeming confusion.
Love is generally reduced to types parternal, romantic,
brotherly etc. In modern radical psychology it tends to be regarded as life's prime want. Possession has very little to do with a static human nature, it is notoriously transient. You cant take anything beyond the grave.
The beef Marxists have is not with personal property, it is needed to survive. Private property is the expropiation of the labour of others.
Private property is the of source long term poverty and exclusion. Communists want the world for all its people to share. This does not negate personal property but puts access to wealth on an equal footing. Our only real enemy should be scarcity. It is rational to believe that there is no need for greed and that it is merely a bad socially learned habit that diminishes the potential of all humanity. Love as the noble desire to end human misey
is socially created as the guiding force in life. That is the nature of the socialist order that we want and believe society will eventually evolve towards.