Being ourselves, Aspartners, and Jack McClellan

Page 4 of 4 [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

starkid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,812
Location: California Bay Area

02 Apr 2014, 7:13 pm

cubedemon6073 wrote:
It presupposes that there is a natural and static self one can be and one should always be this static and natural self.
I don't see how you've come to that conclusion. That might be what some people are thinking when they use the phrase, but that interpretation is not inherent in the words.

Quote:
The problems I see with it is that this line of thinking does not allow for growth and understanding. In addition, it also disregards free will and choice. I believe that a part of being human is being able to reflect upon ourselves and how we think and change our way of thinking.


If self-reflection and personal growth are parts of the self, then "be yourself" applies to them.



cubedemon6073
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Nov 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,958

02 Apr 2014, 7:51 pm

starkid wrote:
cubedemon6073 wrote:
It presupposes that there is a natural and static self one can be and one should always be this static and natural self.
I don't see how you've come to that conclusion. That might be what some people are thinking when they use the phrase, but that interpretation is not inherent in the words.


I was going by definition 4 which states "to continue or remain as before: Let things be."

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/be

What is your interpretation of it?