Posted:
Post subject:
They don't have to be narcissistic, they could just be run-of-the-mill self-centered people. Then again, this also describes most of humanity, so.psychokind wrote:what kind of classification are people which treat people in a way to take benefit of it? I always thought this is "narcisstic"?^^
Posted:
Post subject:
that doesn't sound very scientific ./Miss Prime Blue wrote:They don't have to be narcissistic, they could just be run-of-the-mill self-centered people. Then again, this also describes most of humanity, so.psychokind wrote:what kind of classification are people which treat people in a way to take benefit of it? I always thought this is "narcisstic"?^^
Not sure, it depends.
Posted:
Post subject:
Well because, most people are self-centered by nature. It's just how humans are.psychokind wrote:that doesn't sound very scientific ./Miss Prime Blue wrote:They don't have to be narcissistic, they could just be run-of-the-mill self-centered people. Then again, this also describes most of humanity, so.psychokind wrote:what kind of classification are people which treat people in a way to take benefit of it? I always thought this is "narcisstic"?^^
Not sure, it depends.
in egoism-based sociology and descriptive economics this is assumed standard behaviour, so I can't believe this is their description from a psychological view
Posted:
Post subject:
I think one should balance consideration for others, boundaries how to treat others AND actively using others for personal gain. it's just necessary for surviving in the world of todayMiss Prime Blue wrote:Well because, most people are self-centered by nature. It's just how humans are.psychokind wrote:that doesn't sound very scientific ./Miss Prime Blue wrote:They don't have to be narcissistic, they could just be run-of-the-mill self-centered people. Then again, this also describes most of humanity, so.psychokind wrote:what kind of classification are people which treat people in a way to take benefit of it? I always thought this is "narcisstic"?^^
Not sure, it depends.
in egoism-based sociology and descriptive economics this is assumed standard behaviour, so I can't believe this is their description from a psychological view
But, usually, people learn to balance that with consideration for others, and then learn boundaries and how to treat others. Those who don't, don't have much consideration for others.
Most people want benefits from others. Everyone wants something for themselves in some capacity. So, there is a difference between that and others who actively try to use others for personal gain.
Posted:
Post subject:
There's no real way to have consideration for someone while actively using them for personal gain. The selfishness kinda cancels out any consideration.psychokind wrote:I think one should balance consideration for others, boundaries how to treat others AND actively using others for personal gain. it's just necessary for surviving in the world of todayMiss Prime Blue wrote:Well because, most people are self-centered by nature. It's just how humans are.psychokind wrote:that doesn't sound very scientific ./Miss Prime Blue wrote:They don't have to be narcissistic, they could just be run-of-the-mill self-centered people. Then again, this also describes most of humanity, so.psychokind wrote:what kind of classification are people which treat people in a way to take benefit of it? I always thought this is "narcisstic"?^^
Not sure, it depends.
in egoism-based sociology and descriptive economics this is assumed standard behaviour, so I can't believe this is their description from a psychological view
But, usually, people learn to balance that with consideration for others, and then learn boundaries and how to treat others. Those who don't, don't have much consideration for others.
Most people want benefits from others. Everyone wants something for themselves in some capacity. So, there is a difference between that and others who actively try to use others for personal gain.
Posted:
Post subject:
ah I'm sorry, I meant treating different people in different way^^Miss Prime Blue wrote:There's no real way to have consideration for someone while actively using them for personal gain. The selfishness kinda cancels out any consideration.psychokind wrote:I think one should balance consideration for others, boundaries how to treat others AND actively using others for personal gain. it's just necessary for surviving in the world of todayMiss Prime Blue wrote:Well because, most people are self-centered by nature. It's just how humans are.psychokind wrote:that doesn't sound very scientific ./Miss Prime Blue wrote:They don't have to be narcissistic, they could just be run-of-the-mill self-centered people. Then again, this also describes most of humanity, so.psychokind wrote:what kind of classification are people which treat people in a way to take benefit of it? I always thought this is "narcisstic"?^^
Not sure, it depends.
in egoism-based sociology and descriptive economics this is assumed standard behaviour, so I can't believe this is their description from a psychological view
But, usually, people learn to balance that with consideration for others, and then learn boundaries and how to treat others. Those who don't, don't have much consideration for others.
Most people want benefits from others. Everyone wants something for themselves in some capacity. So, there is a difference between that and others who actively try to use others for personal gain.
Hence, why one needs balance to not be a douche.
Posted:
Post subject:
I personally would disagree. Humanity as a whole has a potential for philanthropy that is unfortunately easily disrupted.Miss Prime Blue wrote:There's no real way to have consideration for someone while actively using them for personal gain. The selfishness kinda cancels out any consideration.
Hence, why one needs balance to not be a douche.
Posted:
Post subject:
Well, I guess it's possible in some cases where you could benefit someone else and also have a need for personal gain.Valerie Valens wrote:I personally would disagree. Humanity as a whole has a potential for philanthropy that is unfortunately easily disrupted.Miss Prime Blue wrote:There's no real way to have consideration for someone while actively using them for personal gain. The selfishness kinda cancels out any consideration.
Hence, why one needs balance to not be a douche.
Posted:
Post subject:
That's definitely a grey area. I'll give you an example; a boss is trying to get me to be a team leader in a certain area of our store. He doing it because he knows I would do a good job there. That said, he only wants there because I could do a good job, which in the end would benefit him, since he kind-of runs the entire store.Miss Prime Blue wrote:Well, I guess it's possible in some cases where you could benefit someone else and also have a need for personal gain.Valerie Valens wrote:I personally would disagree. Humanity as a whole has a potential for philanthropy that is unfortunately easily disrupted.Miss Prime Blue wrote:There's no real way to have consideration for someone while actively using them for personal gain. The selfishness kinda cancels out any consideration.
Hence, why one needs balance to not be a douche.
Not sure how that amounts to 100% consideration, though.
FAQ
TerraEarth.com
TerraEarth Gallery
Usergroups
Memberlist
Profile
Register
Log in
