And why is Pythagoras a joker, according to you?
But, please, do not concur too quickly, because know thyself does not have very much to do with the concrete “others” due to the fact that it is again yourself who has to know what the others think of you, and the others’ judgement can be wrong; they can tell you that you are “too much different” and therefore “very evil” - in other words: the others tell you egalitarianistic nonsense, and if you not agree to that nonsense, they will put you in jail, in Gulag, or in psychiatry.
A map of the horrible Gulag camps in the “egalitarian” (a.k.a.: “communistic”, “socialistic”) Soviet Union:
That’s true, Armi. Some egalitarians will claim that " Knowthing Thyself " is too narcissistic, or something along that line. But remember " Pay no attention to the opinion of the multitude " — let them think what they wish — know thyself.
You made this video?
Absolutely Brilliantly! Well done!
Doesn’t matter what anyone else thinks about you because they aren’t you and can never possibly know the inside of yourself like you do.
Yes, sir — I made it.
Thank you very much.
Artimas,
Precisely!
Btw, the video is much better, if you listen to it with headphones on.
I don’t have headphones where I live.
It’s okay — still good quality without them, just have to turn up the volume a bit more.
No, you can concur all you like. But you do not understand.
The Burns poem is not about knowing yourself, but seeing yourself through the eyes of others.
I suggest you have no clue on this front.
Posting a pic of Delphi is indicative of that misunderstanding.
To know yourself, is to know all the myraid of those who were Your predecessors. So if You take the trouble of finding a genealogy of those who came before You, it will take a lot of mystery out of it.
This goes a long way, to compound the feedback coming to You from others. Sometimes, simply trying to ignore these factors, may give a wrong idea of who you really are.
What do you mean predecessors?
Do you mean a literal genealogy?
If so I think you are trapped in a racist determinism, which ignores the uniqueness of each person.
No, no…dear Lev. I understood you, my friend. I suggest that I do have a clue on this front. I simply acknowledged that " Knowing Thyself " is not merely some narcissistic endeavor, but a multifaceted process that can involve, say, " seeing yourself through the eyes of others." The picture of Delphi wasn’t directed at you, but rather to compliment the thread.
Carry on
I do not think so. I did qualify this as one factor among others. Your actual geneology can not be ignored, as can be seen from the ongoing debate about the nurture/genetic split, as determenitive. Even without such a determination, it cannot but be assumed that genetic tracers signify a lot about who we are, even presumed under the most basic assumption of direct relations between genetic structure and psychic traits.
I think looking at you relatives is a big mistake. You so easily build your world on a set of familial, racist, and cultural determinisms.
To the degree these things are real, are the extent that they are unchangeable.
TO know and understand yourself you need to eschew all the clothes of your childhood, and put on your manly gown and make you own life free from the prejudice of the past.
All the things that are important about YOU as an individual are all the spaces in your personality that you fill with your own live and experience.
You don’t need your ancestors, not your parents. You need to find yourself.
I agree with that, Lev, however it is not simply a looking of one’s self which is determinitive, or even one of understanding how you got to the place You are basing a kind of self analysis. It is most likely, that where most of the determination is going on is
the incongruous nature of the way things appear, (looking at Your self-as a conjunction with where You happen to be at the moment, with how and what you
are thinking about),within context. The process of
extricating one’s self from adverse situations, is problamatic to the extent, that it may partly determine the nature and quality of the analysis it’s
self.
Your primary context within a societal matrix is the genealogical makeup, and the strength of it extends
into the farthest reach of the social community. Shedding adverse effects of those, are primary and preceede the subsequent quality of a successful self
evaluation. Kind of puttng the horse before the
carriage. I presume only a minority can proceeds otherwise, and ironically, they are usually the ones who do not need analysis.
It’s icy fingers grip us and bind us to the past; the source of nearly all human conflict and war.
That’s not necessarily true, you know.
I think that is indeed necessarily true, but worse than that we ourselves can never know the real us, “me”, as if that were a meaningful object of knowledge.
We are only party to a limited view of what we are: the conscious part. As for others they only see what is outwardly perceivable.