Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Spagoodler t1_jashroc wrote

I feel this article is neglecting a lot of psychology. Sense of self is very important to maintain mental stability. The brains thoughts and pathways are largely connected to the concept of the self.

62

librarygirl t1_jasxsp7 wrote

Yep. “Know thyself” is pretty much the oldest piece of advice we have in our civilisation

38

Anineko13 t1_javby5a wrote

I believe the modern term is you better check yo self before you wreck yo self

7

_fidel_castro_ t1_jav9k6j wrote

Yes! But the answer has been mostly forgotten by our current civilisation

−2

Armchair_QB3 t1_javbzoj wrote

Speaking of psychology, this author lost all credibility with me the moment they cited a different result on the discredited Myers-Briggs as evidence of a changing ‘self.’

That test was designed by laymen, holds no scientific merit, and often gives a different result depending just on your mood, let alone retaking it years apart.

18

LBGW_experiment t1_jawd5vz wrote

They were using a pop sci self personality test to show the change of one's self over time, and it was a brief mention, and didn't say Myers-Briggs held any water.

2

DrHaroldSkrote t1_jawixuf wrote

Personality is firmly established by the late teens.
A person may feel that they have changed but that change imperceptible to everyone else. Behavior can change fortunately

−2

vestigina t1_javwq75 wrote

You really think the author picked this as "evidence"? It is clear that this is written to make a story, starting small and then expand later. The next sentence is already telling you it is not just about the anecdote...

I am surprised this is the take-home of the article you focused on.

−4

plssirnomore t1_jav9k21 wrote

Assumption that mental stability is understood. Who says what is mentally stable? Is it mentally stable to do the same thing everyday, destroying the mind body and soul, to be able to purchase consumer goods, which are only desired due to advanced manipulation by cooperate entities, whose only desire is to gain material wealth on a mass scale. Is that really mental stability?

Is it mentally stable to pass the homeless man on the street without as much as considering that anyone of us could be that man within mere months upon losing your job? Is it mentally stable to ignore that, when you are able to understand how you would feel if another ignored you in that same situation?

One day, you think one thing. The next day, you think the next thing. One day you 'love' the girl, the next day you cant remember her face. You are not the personality, the narrative, the perceived reflection of yourself in others treatment of you. You are not the result of the conditioning you received. You are not the theory of evolution, your thoughts, or even your ability to think. You are not the pathways in your brain, or a 'concept' you believe originated in the brain.

I don't know what I am, but I can rule out what Im not. If I can demolish the 'self', and still exist, then I was never that 'self'. I merely assumed I was out of ignorance.

5

Spagoodler t1_jaw4uh1 wrote

Hm, you bring up an interesting point. I think a brain has an essence and having a defunct concept of self would hinder that essence of functioning properly. There is a physical aspect here in which you could measure mental instability through neural pathways, etc… I agree with what you are saying though; is mental stability simply conforming to reality/society or is there more to it? I’ve personally though as mental instability as anything that hinders you from fulfilling biological needs.

1

plssirnomore t1_jax35wn wrote

I could do a better test of mental stability than any machine. I could sit in a dark room with my eyes closed and watch what happens internally. You, me and everyone else on earth can do it for free, everyday. After doing it for a bit you will find that the self you identify with may not be as concrete to your functioning as you may of been led to believe!

1

VitriolicViolet t1_jaymyfn wrote

>Assumption that mental stability is understood. Who says what is mentally stable? Is it mentally stable to do the same thing everyday, destroying the mind body and soul, to be able to purchase consumer goods, which are only desired due to advanced manipulation by cooperate entities, whose only desire is to gain material wealth on a mass scale. Is that really mental stability?
>
>Is it mentally stable to pass the homeless man on the street without as much as considering that anyone of us could be that man within mere months upon losing your job? Is it mentally stable to ignore that, when you are able to understand how you would feel if another ignored you in that same situation?

yes, those things are all mentally stable, since mental stability is only measured by differing and changing mental states.

whether or not they are mentally healthy is another thing (i am mentally stable, to an extreme point, but i'm not mentally healthy)

1

plssirnomore t1_jazv7bs wrote

Sorry to hear that. I agree with you though, and see that a sense of self for sure makes you mentally stable. But as I understand it nothing in nature is static, and as part of nature we don't want to be too stable, especially if its in conformity to corrupt societies or systems.

Wishing you mental health and fluidity from afar.

1

sn2chemist t1_jazhae2 wrote

The idea behind this is that a focus on the self leads to disharmony because people start to see their traits as particularly unique and isolated. That can make someone feel way more inferior or superior to others due to too much focus on some concept of a unique constant self. When there’s less focus on the self a person can see themselves as part of a whole and make changes and feel normalcy etc. as opposed to being stuck absorbed within what you’ve labeled yourself.

1