Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold and Silver Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LLCF who wrote (9466)	4/21/2006 2:37:34 AM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78416

You must be a born again hippy. :) There is an ego, a superego, and an id. What Freud thought was that there was a conscious and unconscious mind. The conscious was 10 per cent or 20 and could not reach or know the unconscious which was far more powerful than the conscious. The ego, id and superego where the components of both the U and the C. The ego represented the knowledge of self that said I and was the most powerful sense of identity the mind had. The Id represented that which generated the primitive urges that needed satisfaction but had no mediating impulses such as hunger, love, sex etc.. The superego represented the simple consciensce of the being that learned proper behaviour in society from fear of not belonging or satisfying the greater group. The ego makes identity, the supergo wanted to belong and the id wants satisfaction of the "limbic system". In harmony is the individual. At the U level, the ego cannot be known to have dissatisfaction with self, but if it did, it complexes the C self with an unknown view of self that requires and overdrives compensatory behaviour. The Id, both C and U, could seek, unbeknown to either the U and C, what sensations of satisfaction that both the U and C minds could feel but would react differently to the same feeling. As well, all Ego and superego reactions above reactions of nerves would drive the social behaviour of the individual to become a personality. Complexes come from conflict of the U and the C where the behaviour that the U mind drives at the ego and superego level and the repression of the ID reflexes are borne of what the C does not know that the U compensates for. In other words, if a person has an inferiority complex it is manifested by perfection in hehaviour, (anal retentive) whereas the person at the C level of the superego is not aware of "being inferior" or feeling inferior. But the U thinks so, so drives the C mind to become better than is normally thot possible. An example would be a person who is a clothes horse and a dapper dresser whose personal things are perfectly organized at all times. If the U mind has a sense of being above it all, then the outward appearance of the person is compensated by inferior dress, hirsute appearance, organization, speech, and slothful behaviour. An Einstein type has a superiority complex. Pants tied up with twine, 5 days growth etc. It is interesting indeed to go into certain sections of the country and see immaculate houses and perfectly kept interiors, good manners and outward dress of the mannered gentleman. A national inferiority complex. No one in that country feels inferior at all. But their U mind knows better. How you know this is true is to say it. I guarantee you if it true, you will never get out of that country alive. Are there such places? Yes, but I won't say where. I want to go on living. In general no matter what behaviourists say, Freud is right. The C mind does see the U at work in 10 to 30 second cycles if it is in tune with itself, but there is nothing it can do. It is too late. Unless hypnotized the super powerful U mind cannot be reached or taught. Freud was right. Mesmer was right. Maslow is low on the totem pole. Lorentz is a learner, Eisynck (sp?) merely an observer. EC<:-}