Ego Traps

[JGirl]

I'll be honest. Me neither. It sounded good at the time.

QUOTE]
fair enough lol

 

[Paladin-X]

I couldn't quite figure out how to put into words what I wanted to say about this topic [MENTION=2172]Trifoilum[/MENTION], so I'll try pictures:

View attachment 16710

View attachment 16711

View attachment 16713

View attachment 16714

View attachment 16715

View attachment 16712

This is a quote from my blog:

I present but a pool of water, still and serene, but deep. It appears as though when you look, you observe only that which is reflected upon the surface, without considering what might dwell beneath it.

It goes well with the last picture. This is how I see people interacting with one another. Two people, trying to communicate something but somehow getting misunderstood by interpreting something they see reflected on the sheen surface of their own bubbles.

Which, when interacting with the world, makes me feel like this:

 

[Trifoilum]

I couldn't quite figure out how to put into words what I wanted to say about this topic @Trifoilum , so I'll try pictures:

Aaah, looking at your last post; that makes sense. I was thinking of bubbles and popping them. XD;

@JGirl : I have a feeling it's somewhat the same, what we're seeing, we're just defining it differently, but I'm lacking sleep so cray cray potential times 10.

What made it an over reaction, that he had a few paragraphs of clearly typed out rebuttal compared to her couple of condescending sentences? Or ... what? I think he might appear closed minded considering he is the subject matter expert on his work, should he have explained more? If he did he'd probably have been perceived as over reacting even more!

How should he have reacted to someone slamming his thoughts and theories on the subject? I thought it was appropriate and GREAT that the actual author would show up to be available to discuss their ideas further but you (a a couple others) seem to just want to banish the outsider.

For me? Tone. The author appeared to attack acd's credibility, rather than defending himself or explaining himself. Those are two very different things. I don't see any room for discussion in the author's post. Instead of explaining how the author came to the understanding, or what he's thinking about his thoughts, or even a "you know, I think about it like this and that, and I think you're wrong.", the author uses ad hominem and attacks acd's personality. it's more like "HAH! YOU SUCK, I'M STILL RIGHT, SUCK IT!"

I can see how the writer might feel the need to defend their work to that point, especially if the writer seeks money from it. But from appearance, the post appeared to be very butthurt and unproductive to the discussion. >_>;

I won't deny that there might be a bias towards acd because she is a long timer and the author just came, however.

I dont know why it is all of a sudden frowned upon for an author of a work to come to the forum and defend their ideas. Since when did you guys become so closed minded? ACD is not mentally disabled, she can defend herself on an internet forum. Let her have her dignity, and stop chasing others away.

It is what @Kgal said; I'm asking what people are thinking-- and acd disagreed. And that's alright.
Now I differ a bit from Kgal; If the writer wants to defend his work, that's fine; and I don't mind @acd defending herself as well. If they chose to bring it out, that's going to be uncomfortable but in principle it's also alright for me. Mods may think differently.

As far as the (alleged) author's defense, my issue lies in the way they are expressing it, not because of them simply defending. And I consider the prickly way the writer is reacting as-- a separate issue from the defense itself.

 

[acd]

@UBERROGO wtf are you talkin bout?
this thing is done. The author hasn't returned, and I couldn't be bothered to defend myself--because there is no need... my dignity remains in tact. Forgeddaboutit!
onward with the actual topic!

 

[acd]

Hey [MENTION=731]UBERROGO[/MENTION] , this is what I think of your thumbs down:

;-P

 

[the]

Hey @UBERROGO , this is what I think of your thumbs down:

;-P

You are no mr. Rogers.

 

[Trifoilum]

See, I'm fine with acd and UBERROGO out tsundere-in--- *shot*

But si, let's get back to topic, shall we?

 

[Trifoilum]

Okay, I am reviving this thread, because....uh, 7 months after this thread was made (and WHAT AN EVENT), I am stumbling upon a branch of this; false humility.

It was-- I dunno, striking. Striking because my mind vehemently denied being this but this is a proof that I had pondered about this and-- ugh.
So yeah. Anyone had more to add?

 

[JGirl]

I'll be honest. Me neither. It sounded good at the time.

Maybe too much exposure to the ego causes one to get trapped in the ego trap? It causes narcissistic rot, overreactive defenses mechanisms, other complexes. Or something like that.

i gave this some thought and i now can see your point
i see you saying -
if the ego is exposed to negative stimuli it can become corrupted or 'rotten' so to speak, just as food exposed to bacteria does the same.
ok
but then, is it fair to say that the ego itself is not the problem, but rather it's the exposure we allow it that is?
therefore it is the environment (outside of ourselves) that is the issue, not the ego (inside of ourselves).