Ah, great great great, Brent. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Well, to begin with, I think, the first signs of personality that we develop subconsciously, is derived from our parents. In most cases, what our folks don't like/approve of, we don't like/approve of as kids either. If we come from a happy home, we're likely to develop a happy attitude, or at least the biggest part of our personality will be that way, and of course, the opposite. As we grow older, we get influenced by who we are friends with, who we look up to, authority figures, and so on. Culture and heritage. But. It's hard to generalize on a subject like this, and what is relevant to one, may not be relevant to another. But I think that most subconscious beings will find themself influenced by either ones family or ones friends. But what if a person has neither a family, nor any friends? What kind of personality will he/she develop? That's kinda interresting, isn't it? Also, I must say, that conscious thinkers are more likely to develop the personality they choose, and not the one that is 'forced' on them. They will act and think more like independent beings, and be more distant from the subconscious thinkers in a family or a group of individuals. I'm not saying that this applies to everyone, so don't attack me if you aren't like the ones described here. This is my personal view only.
my understanding of personality are rooted in this philosophy. By Carl Rogers(1989) 1. Every individual exists in a continually changing world of experience of which he is the center. 2. The organism reacts to the field as it is experienced and perceived. This perceptual field is, for the individual ‘reality’. 3. The organism reacts as an organized whole to this phenomenal field. 4. The organism has one basic tendency and striving: to actualize, maintain, and enhance the experiencing organism. 5. behaviour is basically the goal-directed attempt of the organism to satisfy its needs as experienced , in the field as perceived 6. Emotion accompanies and in general, facilitates such goal directed behaviour, the kind of emotion being related to the seeking versus the consummatory aspects of the behavior for the maintenance and enhancement of the organism. 7. The best vantage point for understanding behaviour is from the individual himself. 8. A portion of the total perceptual field gradually becomes differentiated as the self. 9. As a result of interaction with the environment, and particularly as a result of evaluational interaction with others, the structure of self is formed – an organized, fluid but changing conceptual pattern of perceptions of characteristics and relationships of the ‘I’ or the ‘me’, together with values attached to these concepts. 10. The values attached to experience, and the values which are a part of the self structure, in some instances are values experienced directly by the organism, and in some instances are values introjected or taken over from others, but perceived in distorted fashion, as if they had been experienced directly. 11. As experiences occur in the life of the individual they become (a) symbolized, perceived, and organized into some relationship to the self, (b) ignored because there is no perceived relationship to the self-structure, (c) denied symbolization or given a distorted symbolization because the experience is inconsistent with the structure of the self. 12. Most of the ways of experiencing which are adopted by the organism are those which are consistent with the concept of the self. 13. Behavior may, in some instances, be brought about by organic experiences and needs which have not been symbolized, such behaviour is may be inconsistent with the structure of the self, but in such instances the behavior is not ‘owned’ by the individual. 14. Psychological maladjustment exists when the organism denies to awareness significant sensory and visceral experiences, which consequently are not symbolized and organized into the gestalt of the self structure. When this situation exists there is a basic or potential psychological tension. 15. Psychological adjustment exists when the concept of the self is such that all the sensory and visceral experiences of the organism are, or may be, assimilated on a symbolic level into a consistent relationship with the concept of self. 16. Any experience which is inconsistent with the organization or structure of self may be perceived as a threat, and the more of these perceptions there are the more rigidly the self structure is organized to maintain itself. 17. Under certain conditions, involving primarily complete absence of any threat to the self-structure, experiences which are inconsistent with it may be perceived, and examined, and the structure of self revised to assimilate and include such experiences. 18. When the individual perceives and accepts into one consistent and integrated system all his sensory and visceral experiences, then he is necessarily more understanding of others and more accepting of others as separate individuals. 19. As the individual perceives and accepts into his self-structure more or of his organic experiences, he finds that he is replacing his present value system – based so largely upon introjections which have been distortedly symbolized – with a continuing organismic valuing process.
Hello. "For most intents", and purposes, a collection of habits, isn't going to work. For conditioning and genetics or because of conditioning and genetics, doesn't really get to the bottom of it. That's what the thread's for. For you, i assume such a thing works. However for me, isn't going to work. I don't even have a conditioning and surely have genetics; I doubt genetics will tell me any-thing real about me at this time. I am trying to get to the bottom of "personality". The title of the thread may be misleading---but I doubt it. Because only under that stance would we have to define personality first. Give me a second.
And a good one. What is subconscious? My hope is to move this as a basic truth of personalities (the thread). It is interesting. I think some beings live such a way in every stance. "Problems" or anything, ... Interesting and ...I'm likely going to relate this thread to me myself, as I am trying to get it "for me" and assume it will be "for all"; Hell, i can't even talk worth a shit anyway, so, how about we just try to get me into having a personality? What the hell? Infact if we relate "everything to me", what we surely will find is a lot. Ask me anything. Cool thread if I can actually get it to work. Peace
Are you asking for a psychologist, Brent? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! No, but seriously, this is interresting. What if you developed a new aspect to your old personality, Brent, whose puspose is to be your own psychologist? Analyze, clean up mess, past, present and future, and integrate it into a new and stronger personality where everything is tidy and organized and you are able to become ahead of everything. Read some basic psychology and work the rest out on your own. Can be both entertaining and interresting, due to the things one might find in ones personality if one is digging in the mud a little.
Subconscious is the layer of consciousness in which you act on integrated instincts and reflexes. I prefer to call it thoughtless, though, it may sound a little hostile, which it isn't
Hell, I'm all into that idea, Brent. And I would willingly participate as a test subject too. But who would be the therapist, who would ask the right questions and survey the progress? We would have to develop some sort of personality analysis based on the 'prime personality', and record the progress as the experiment goes along. And we would need more test subjects that's willing of putting their personalities on the table for everyone to see/analyze. Doubt we'd get much response, though. But, hell, there's so much to learn when studying personality on a larger scale, apart from the usual psychologists approach. What would we be looking for? Flaws, neuorosis, suppressed memory, strengths, abilities, talents, etc? What would the goal of the analysis be? What would we be trying to accomplish? I suggest we think on it and use this thread as it goes along, and then eventually make a 'personality analysis' thread, where the actual experiment would take place. Maybe I'm taking this a bit far, but the idea is amazing, and I've been thinking on it for nearly 6 months, and would love to see the development of the concept, and maybe use in some setting to present as knowledge on later occasions. I'm gonna be a therapist, you know! But bring forth ideas and suggestions and gain credit, wealth and fame when the concept of personality analysis is fully developed and is being used as a tool for good on a global scale. When the world is being dominated by it. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
there are many considerations to therapy and it is not really wise to open somone up, through a forum type medium, you would really have to know what you are doing and understand the consequence of techniques used. it would be difficult to monitor the reaction of the "subject/ client/ analysand" such contact should really be one to one, people interfering with the process (which would happen in an open forum) is not good for therapist or subject. you could posibly do a brief analysis but a thorough therapuetic analysis could raise problems in a forum. that said i would be willing to investigate how it could work. Illuminatingtherapy: what kind of therapy are you studying?
Depends on the progression of the experiment, I think. To say it is dangerous is an exaggeration. No-one is forcing anyone, but the participants would be in on it together. One doesn't even have to know exactly what one is doing as long as one has a basic idea, and there's an agreement and mutual understanding to where the experiment is heading. We could encourage each other to perform certain tasks of various psychological nature, try out various psychological methods and see who works the best, set a goal for the study, make a scale of optimized personality, strictly subjective of course. We would need something to compare to, like Jesus or something. In example. The more people, the better, maybe a lowest limit of 15-20 people. We would have to trust and be objective, and those not capable of that may be discouraged from participating, or if the experiment is succesfull, and we actually manage to create and develop personality for the better, one might learn a lot.
I'm not actually styding psychology yet, I said I'm gonna be a therapist. I'm studying life at the moment. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Surely. That's why I'm proposing this. And by studying, I suppose you mean like attending a college course, or a university, getting a degree? In that case, no. But, I've read enough on the subject to know what's right from wrong and I think I've been bestowed with a highly developed way of reasonable thinking, which can always be used to the best of it's ability, no matter what I'm trying to achieve. Has worked surprisingly good so far, at least. My personal approach might be a little different from the yours (everyone reading), as though it involves esoterism(?), philosophy, some magic, gestalt therapy and common psychology. That's why i suggest more input.
` Definately does seem so Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I think you're right illum as I've said i like u Definately I am seeming to do a similarity. I hope to change my name from existabrent to something else. But besides that.. Seems I am attempting to come back to Brent, and have a strength. Currently interested in buddhism, illum Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! First, give me my criticisms where they belong. Never really am I quite able to talk with the people on this site, as hard as I try and wonder. Asides from that, I think you're right about the sub-conscious i believe we all have it yet it is something of a danger. Somehow. Thoughtlessness isn't entirely that. Say for example that my problem is that I have an acute awareness of my own instinctive sub-conscious behavior. In this pretense, it can't be bad. Of course bad. Definately it is something on peoples minds. Literature it's too difficult of a maze, and most of it's already down. Figured. Bla did-illie-bla. But should we be able to agree that personality in this tense as in figuring out via a single source [some philosophies start from a single sort of obviousness]; I believe, we surely can by this... what i'm saying is that the main things to this world is human behavior and politics. One of the two is top re-search. By this, seems to me that we should have a fine pointed analysis of all human behavior. Do you see what I mean? .
Main Entry: per·son·al·i·ty Pronunciation: "p&r-s&n-'a-l&-tE, "p&r-'sna- Function: noun Inflected Form(s): plural -ties Etymology: Middle English personalite, from Late Latin personalitat-, personalitas, from personalis 1 a : the quality or state of being a person b : personal existence 2 a : the condition or fact of relating to a particular person; specifically : the condition of referring directly to or being aimed disparagingly or hostilely at an individual b : an offensively personal remark <angrily resorted to personalities> 3 : the complex of characteristics that distinguishes an individual or a nation or group; especially : the totality of an individual's behavioral and emotional characteristics 4 a : distinction or excellence of personal and social traits; also : a person having such quality b : a person of importance, prominence, renown, or notoriety <a TV personality>
Ok... Heres a personality TEST *wink* http://www.personality100.com/page/registration/userreg.xml?sessionid=sid20060404082737164 I aint buying it.. but it's fun.
Incredible, php. Maybe i see if we get an actual defination.. we may get somewhere? i'll respond to later
Oh, really sorry, but I have a little trouble making myself clear in english from time to time. Know that I wasn't pointing to you at all. It was generally speaking. And thoughtless is kind of a harsh word for it. One do think subconsciously, but I was trying to point out the difference between being aware of thoughts and subconscious, and it didn't come out all that good... :bugeye:
