Thread: Hospitality Towards Boasting or High Self-Esteem

I have often wondered why people seem to take such great offense against others that boast, or even seem to hold themselves in high regard. It seems that when it comes to a person and their self-esteem, it is a case of the conscious evaluating the past. That is, it is a subject that concerns only that person. Why than, do people seem to concern themselves so much about how others regard themselves? Is it not more ignorant to take offense to someone regarding something that does not concern them, or anyone else other than that person?

It seems that when people evaluate themselves, and think positively, not even to great extents, others around them make the assumption that they are stating that they are better than them. Or at least, such instances suggest that such people have a low self-esteem, and so they worry that others around them will recognize a "pseudo-implication" that they are better than them (further lowering their self-esteem).

I'm interested in the philosophy of others in this regard.

If individuals are making statements about their capabilities then they are choosing to make those capabilities the concern of others. Your belief that this is not there concern is therefore wrong. The individual has made it their concern by making their feelings a matter of public record.

A boast implies a faulty over-assessment of capability: in essence, a lie. People do not react well to lies. So, condemnation and dislike of boasting appears to me a perfectly reasonable position to take.

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

If individuals are making statements about their capabilities then they are choosing to make those capabilities the concern of others. Your belief that this is not there concern is therefore wrong. The individual has made it their concern by making their feelings a matter of public record.

It is rarely the case that one simply states that "I'm the best" or "I'm above average." This is often seen via indicators in some forms of communication (e.g., hints). Even if statements were made open to the public along the lines of "I'm good"; their meaning still only concerns one person (and certainly is not a fair ground to take insult to).

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

A boast implies a faulty over-assessment of capability: in essence, a lie. People do not react well to lies.

It is not necessarily the case that one is lying. Someone can be as dumb as a rock or a roaring genius; any form of boast is looked down upon. Furthermore, why do Christian groups dislike the Darwinian concept of evolution despite the ample amount of evidence supporting it? This is most certainly not a lie (and, as I've said, comes to down to what people want to hear rather than the truth, i.e., the truth hurts).

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

So, condemnation and dislike of boasting appears to me a perfectly reasonable position to take.

If one has a low self-esteem and dislikes anyone that appears to possess aptitude over others. We call these people "haters" in the conventional sense.

Your writing is ambiguous contradictory and confusing. For example, you state:

Originally Posted by Ellatha

It is rarely the case that one simply states that "I'm the best" or "I'm above average."

But this is not what you described in your opening post. There you spoke about boasting. That is the topic I am addressing: boasting. Boasting is an aggressive declaration of self-worth that sets the boaster above the norm in one or more areas of achievement. Such a public declaration is an implicit attack on the audience.

Now such an attack could be ignored, but it seems reasonable to me that one might reasonably be annoyed by such an attack, even if one chooses to ignore it.


More ambiguity: you say this -

Someone can be as dumb as a rock or a roaring genius; any form of boast is looked down upon.

Here you recognise that is reasonable to 'look down' on boasting behaviour, yet your prior argument is that we shouldn't react in such a way.

This was your response to my suggestion that it was reasonable to be offended by boasters.

If one has a low self-esteem and dislikes anyone that appears to possess aptitude over others. We call these people "haters" in the conventional sense.

This has all the appearance of nonsense. I find boasting distasteful. In contrast I have no problem with persons having greater aptitude than I: admire them. But those who claim aptitudes they do not possess are an offensive to me and to others. This is not a matter of hate, it is a matter of rational distaste.

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

Your writing is ambiguous contradictory and confusing. For example, you state:

As Apopohis reject (and Darius) has noted in the past, you seem to have difficulty understanding concepts that others have not made concern of. Similarly, you actively seek out certain posters in attempt to troll them. This is a good time to ask such a question before I choose to ignore you: why do you do so?

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

But this is not what you described in your opening post. There you spoke about boasting. That is the topic I am addressing: boasting. Boasting is an aggressive declaration of self-worth that sets the boaster above the norm in one or more areas of achievement. Such a public declaration is an implicit attack on the audience.

It is more than obvious by looking at the title of this thread alone that I was describing more than one concept. They both relate to someone thinking highly of themselves, however, whether it be directly (boasting) or indirectly (not stating this, but giving the impression of).

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

Now such an attack could be ignored, but it seems reasonable to me that one might reasonably be annoyed by such an attack, even if one chooses to ignore it.

It's not an attack; in fact, I find this as more or less an excuse.

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

More ambiguity: you say this -
Here you recognise that is reasonable to 'look down' on boasting behaviour, yet your prior argument is that we shouldn't react in such a way.

Here you demonstrate a further lack of understanding: I never said that boasting should be looked down upon (nor did I say otherwise). I said that this is the case amongst a large number of people.

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

This was your response to my suggestion that it was reasonable to be offended by boasters.

If one has a low self-esteem and dislikes anyone that appears to possess aptitude over others. We call these people "haters" in the conventional sense.

This has all the appearance of nonsense. I find boasting distasteful. In contrast I have no problem with persons having greater aptitude than I: admire them. But those who claim aptitudes they do not possess are an offensive to me and to others. This is not a matter of hate, it is a matter of rational distaste.

I don't believe you; in fact, I think that you would be just as offended by someone who possessed greater aptitude than you and boasted as someone who possessed less aptitude than you and boasted.

Originally Posted by Ellatha

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

Your writing is ambiguous contradictory and confusing. For example, you state:

As Apopohis reject (and Darius) has noted in the past, you seem to have difficulty understanding concepts that others have not made concern of. .

If you take the trouble to read the threads where I have interacted with Apophis you will find several established and respected posters declaring agreement with the concerns I have raised over Apophis's posts.

The same is likely true of Darius, but he has been gone so long -apart from a brief recent visit - that I do not recall precisely. (At any rate, Darius was a plonker.)

Originally Posted by Ellatha

It is more than obvious by looking at the title of this thread alone .

You mean the grammatically suspect, lexicologically deficient title that lay in contradiction to the OP?

Originally Posted by Ellatha

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

Now such an attack could be ignored, but it seems reasonable to me that one might reasonably be annoyed by such an attack, even if one chooses to ignore it.

It's not an attack; in fact, I find this as more or less an excuse.

You can stipulate this till the bovines are domiciled, it won't make it true.

Originally Posted by Ellatha

Here you demonstrate a further lack of understanding:.....

Isn't it peculiar that I have no trouble understanding the posts of scores of regular contributors to this forum, even when they are presenting complex ideas and entangled lines of argument, yet I am puzzled by your loose, contradictory, ambiguous and verbose efforts. Why do you suppose that is?

Originally Posted by Ellatha

I don't believe you; in fact, I think that you would be just as offended by someone who possessed greater aptitude than you and boasted as someone who possessed less aptitude than you and boasted.

Mathman had the temerity to suggest on another thread that you were lazy. (I think this was probably related to the fact, amply demonstrated by Dr. Rocket that you were. Although I thought Arcane Mathematician's demonstration that you were also wrong was more interesting.) This was your response "Who the hell do you think you are commenting in my thread and calling me lazy? Do not make trivial remarks about my personal character; you don't know me, don't ever pretend that you do, and don't ever forget that."

I only saw that remark recently and it leads me to apologise and to withdraw from further discussion with you. The reason will be obvious to others; the explanation would be of no value to you.