Magnus Anderson,
You might change that word “obliged” to self-aware and a person may at that point want to become self-actualized or evolve.
This kind of reminds me of when an alcoholic or drug addict reaches rock bottom and recognizes his own inferiority OR better stated, his own inability to cope and to change his life. So he does at some point wake up even more and feel an obligation toward himself to do something about that…not to become superior but to become “real” and “sane” again. Superior may simply be one more perspective based on the desire to over-inflate one’s self to the one who thinks in terms of being superior. That could be construed as over compensating.
Someone who is/was self-aware would not speak in terms of superiority, would they? Would they compare their self to others or would they simply work at becoming what they could in an ongoing way?
But wanting to become “real” at first needs to be seen then I rather think it does become a choice, a willingness to become.
Overcompensation is a matter of not seeing the forest for the trees, of acting from unconscious need, like trying to fill a cup which has a hole in it.
Why would anyone want to accept their self as such when they could move forward? And if someone were so inferior, could they be blamed for that? But it would take others to help them along
One can’t know that til the end. But evolution also does move forward from error. We’re all a bunch of mutants who have adapted some more than others.
I don’t think that that is his point. I had the impression that his point was just the opposite of what you said above. We are not the herd or the Borg.
But that’s just the beginning of the discussion. That’s looking at the shell but that shell has to be cracked open to see what’s inside.
But didn’t you just say different strokes for different folks, different predisposiitons, different moralities.
When you say “moralities” are you speaking in terms of self responding to “real” though subjective human values which might include “to do no harm as much as possible” or simply that one’s OWN way of being moral is naturally higher than that of others? In other words “How could it possibly be any other way”?! That’s just narcissism I feel.
Can you define stupid as you mean it here? Can it simply mean a different perspective, looking at things from a different lens perhaps, remaining open without feeling a need to have answers to all the questions?