There are a few conflicting frameworks, plus what I describe is normative behavior rather than people with diagnosable conditions (depression in abnormal psychology tends to be more a dysfunction of the brain). I teach social psychology to undergraduates, so I’m familiar with the other frameworks at a fairly broad level-- the one the person you responded to is a bit of an older perspective, but the direction you’re taking I’ve heard discussed.
Still, it’s difficult to get into the details in a Lemmy comment on a shower thoughts thread.
None the less, I mostly don’t like the fragile/secure ego approach because it’s harder to measure something like that, meaning there’s less evidence that’s what’s going on.
I will say more generally though, our brains seek out acceptance and avoid rejection, much like we do physical pain (fMRI confirms it’s the same part of the brain). That includes good things, like behaving cooperatively, and bad things, like confirmation bias. Self-esteem, similarly, cuts both ways-- it makes us feel better without needing external sources of esteem, but it also rejects external threats to that self esteem.
I simply worry that excess of anything leads to bad outcomes, like certain politicians we’re dealing with now. But now we’re getting more into my opinion and less about the research.
True on the measurability but to me its a concept that explains a lot of social behaviour. The following is my current understanding of it. It of cause has a lot of root causes playing together, like internalized / toxic shame, fears, self doubt, socialization etc.
Depending on the framework, it can be Interpreten differently i think:
Overcompensation (big ego) or surrender (small ego) are modes we slip into and both are part of a fragile ego which means low selfesteem. And also low confidense.
Being and accepting myself is high selfesteem and means a stable ego and high/realsitic confidense. Or also realistic self image.
I thing understanding and recognising those behaviours in oneself is helfpul to reach a stable ego but they are a very generalized view and can habe many causes. So it only helps a bit to recognize ones own patterns but its not possible to improve the selfesteem etc by working on selfesteem, as its just a symptom.
I think to improve selfesteem we have to gain proficiency and confidense in multiple fields by repetition and training which will spread to other areas. We habe to overcome our shame and fear by facing them and being open about it. And learn that people are different and that is beautiful becsuse everyone will find their tribe.
There are a few conflicting frameworks, plus what I describe is normative behavior rather than people with diagnosable conditions (depression in abnormal psychology tends to be more a dysfunction of the brain). I teach social psychology to undergraduates, so I’m familiar with the other frameworks at a fairly broad level-- the one the person you responded to is a bit of an older perspective, but the direction you’re taking I’ve heard discussed.
Still, it’s difficult to get into the details in a Lemmy comment on a shower thoughts thread.
None the less, I mostly don’t like the fragile/secure ego approach because it’s harder to measure something like that, meaning there’s less evidence that’s what’s going on.
I will say more generally though, our brains seek out acceptance and avoid rejection, much like we do physical pain (fMRI confirms it’s the same part of the brain). That includes good things, like behaving cooperatively, and bad things, like confirmation bias. Self-esteem, similarly, cuts both ways-- it makes us feel better without needing external sources of esteem, but it also rejects external threats to that self esteem.
I simply worry that excess of anything leads to bad outcomes, like certain politicians we’re dealing with now. But now we’re getting more into my opinion and less about the research.
If you’re curious, the textbook I use is open source. https://opentextbc.ca/socialpsychology/
It’s not perfect, though. I find it covers the topic well enough not to need to force my students to buy a text.
True on the measurability but to me its a concept that explains a lot of social behaviour. The following is my current understanding of it. It of cause has a lot of root causes playing together, like internalized / toxic shame, fears, self doubt, socialization etc.
Depending on the framework, it can be Interpreten differently i think: Overcompensation (big ego) or surrender (small ego) are modes we slip into and both are part of a fragile ego which means low selfesteem. And also low confidense.
Being and accepting myself is high selfesteem and means a stable ego and high/realsitic confidense. Or also realistic self image.
I thing understanding and recognising those behaviours in oneself is helfpul to reach a stable ego but they are a very generalized view and can habe many causes. So it only helps a bit to recognize ones own patterns but its not possible to improve the selfesteem etc by working on selfesteem, as its just a symptom.
I think to improve selfesteem we have to gain proficiency and confidense in multiple fields by repetition and training which will spread to other areas. We habe to overcome our shame and fear by facing them and being open about it. And learn that people are different and that is beautiful becsuse everyone will find their tribe.