Conflict of Minds

[choudharyneelam]

sigmund freud has also said sumwhere tht man is born neurotic. this is a half-truth, cos man is not born neurotic, but he is born in a neurotic humanity nd the society around drives everyone neurotic sooner or later. man is born natural, real, normal, but the moment the newborn becomes part of the society neurosis starts working...

Totally agreed!!


Dr. Rathee, psychology itself is not always static....and conflicting minds will always be seen as its all in thoughts/conceiving ideas.....can u explain on what basis it is categorised as highly intellectual or mediocre????

 

[neels]

Totally agreed!!


Dr. Rathee, psychology itself is not always static....and conflicting minds will always be seen as its all in thoughts/conceiving ideas.....can u explain on what basis it is categorised as highly intellectual or mediocre????

Sorry dear we are not discussing Psychology here.
n the word static is not apt here... are disciplines static........???? n tht too a discipline of behavior which is ever so dynamic.

I guess highly intellectual n mediocrisy are very basic n self defining terms, wat to explain about these...!!!

Mr Tewatia, whatever Freud said, it was his viewpoint, its not a scientific law which is true or false....ur explanation is intersting...but humanity can not be neurotic. Either dont use the word humanity...or dont call it neurotic.

 

[choudharyneelam]

Sorry dear we are not discussing Psychology here.
n the word static is not apt here... are disciples static........???? n tht too a discipline of behavior which is ever so dynamic.

I guess highly intellectual n mediocrisy are very basic n self defining terms, wat to explain about these...!!!

Mr Tewatia, whatever Freud said, it was his viewpoint, its not a scientific law which is true or false....ur explanation is intersting...but humanity can not be neurotic. Either dont use the word humanity...or dont call it neurotic.

Sorry, i forgot to mention few words....i mean by the psychology of any individual....anyways nothng is static

what one feels of great idea, the other might not b'coz he/she might be foreseeing something else

rest the universal principles are acceptable everywhere b'coz of its applicable quality/standards

how can one say that a mediocre who is opposing some idea is one of that great kind????.....why not we can say that mediocre also has a better idea which can be conceived greatly.....its all in conception....isn't it????

 

[brahmtewatia]

sigmund freud has also said sumwhere tht man is born neurotic. this is a half-truth, cos man is not born neurotic, but he is born in a neurotic humanity nd the society around drives everyone neurotic sooner or later. man is born natural, real, normal, but the moment the newborn becomes part of the society neurosis starts working...

Mr Tewatia, whatever Freud said, it was his viewpoint, its not a scientific law which is true or false....ur explanation is intersting...but humanity can not be neurotic. Either dont use the word humanity...or dont call it neurotic.

Einstein said :Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds.

whatever einstein said, it was his viewpoint, but i see tht my ideas are receiving violent oppositions.
.
.
.
guess einstein was right

 

[brahmtewatia]

how can one say that a mediocre who is opposing some idea is one of that great kind????.....why not we can say that mediocre also has a better idea which can be conceived greatly.....its all in conception....isn't it????

egg...jectly, well said !!! thts wat m also somewat tryin' to advocate in my post #12

 

[ritu]

hahahahhah .......sorry par haasi ghanni aagayi .great ideas isse hua se ke chaalo bera to paat gya.par in buddhijivio te mediocre mind kah ke tahueen mat karro pleez inki

whatever einstein said, it was his viewpoint, but i see tht my ideas are receiving violent oppositions.
.
.
.
guess einstein was right

 

[brahmtewatia]

i n'vr used the word "mediocre minds" in my previous post... rest r individual perceptions.

 

[anilsinghd]

My 2 cents :

1. Neelam ji's ( Both of you ) , You both are rihg ton something that might not be a law but pretty close to it , Neelam Rathi ji u r right that we must not generalise , In today's world , an individual specific approach must be the one to follow. People are too unique , different to be put into buckets.
So even i am against the generalisations.

2. Neelam Chaudhary ji : you are right when u say everything is perception based , in fact in today's world with so much of connectivity and the shrinking of the world due to globalisation , it is all that mattrs ( I mean the perception).

However I would say that not everyone is born leader , or for that matter not everyone can be converted into leaders ( if that would have been the case , probably all big leaders should come from the MBA batches of harvard and caltech ).
There are people who lead and there are people who follow , though both are mutually dependent. The relationship a bit critical as it is many to one from the follower's and one to many from leader's point of view.

Leaders ( you may prefer to call them Visionaries or Great minds ) come out with ideas and they get implemented because of their strong will and faith in themselves.

Else I do believe in the uniqueness and beauty of each mind , being an egalitarian makes easy for me not to distinguish a lot.

There ain's a conflict for me , it is just one must have sufficient abilities to prove himself either by communication , or by results.


==============

It's a good discussion going on and we must also focus on some of the points related to how one must imbibe in the qualities to convert an idea into reality , in a sense a rough to do's list ( ofcourse cannot be exhaustive ). And we must also try and give concrete examples of the same.

=============

 

[sunillathwal]

..... What a brilliant mind wasted in physics and fitghting with spouse...
.

Little off-topic but i guess, it is NOT right to say that a brilliant mind was wasted in physics.

On-topic: i feel more than the 'greatness' of idea what draw opposition is the source of idea!! and again mediocrity of mind has nothing to do with the opposition. Rather brilliant minds oppose more efficiently/furiously any idea they are not comfortable with.

An apt example will be the the great man Einstein himself who ridiculed the idea of Quantum Mechanics and made the famous statement.. "God does not play dice with the universe...".
Well, he could not have been more wrong!!!

 

[choudharyneelam]

.
There are people who lead and there are people who follow , though both are mutually dependent. The relationship a bit critical as it is many to one from the follower's and one to many from leader's point of view.

Leaders ( you may prefer to call them Visionaries or Great minds ) come out with ideas and they get implemented because of their strong will and faith in themselves.

i liked the clarity.....and that's what i was about to point-out, Leaders (great minds) can be only opposed but they don't let any opposition make its stand.....so where is the opposition left when it is not implemented??????

arguments/criticisms/discussions/oppositions etc. are the ways to reach at the right conclusion.....so what is there to categorise people with great mind or mediocracy.....its all in beautiful variant thoughts of the diverse social groups

what psychologists say is not always completely correct....and philosophy of anything will allow the conflicts of different minds

now your say Dr. Rathee

 

[anilsinghd]

Little off-topic but i guess, it is NOT right to say that a brilliant mind was wasted in physics.

On-topic: i feel more than the 'greatness' of idea what draw opposition is the source of idea!! and again mediocrity of mind has nothing to do with the opposition. Rather brilliant minds oppose more efficiently/furiously any idea they are not comfortable with.

An apt example will be the the great man Einstein himself who ridiculed the idea of Quantum Mechanics and made the famous statement.. "God does not play dice with the universe...".
Well, he could not have been more wrong!!!

Off - Topic , would appreciate more of your involvement here.

 

[neels]

what psychologists say is not always completely correct....and philosophy of anything will allow the conflicts of different minds

now your say Dr. Rathee

Btw...Einstine was not a Psychologist...but whosoever it is, every opinion has different sides to it.... only physical sciences give such laws which are either right or wrong....for Social sciences its not all that easy to give one explanation. Those who are living with various myths about Psychology, Psychology never believes in one single approach, it always considers different perspectives in explanation. It is the science which is about Individual differences, then how can it claim that a single viewpoint is completely correct. What I believe in, can be my opinion based on my own cognitions and experiences, so is everyone elses' . It doesnt mean at all that one is right or other is wrong.

Rest I end it from my side with another quote from Lincoln:

" 'Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt."

 

[sunillathwal]

Off - Topic , would appreciate more of your involvement here.

I totally agree with the fact that any revolutionary change or advance is brought by challenging the obvious and persistently upholding the ‘unbelievable’ AND It takes an exceptional mind to break through the contemporary ideas. Anyway here are my '1' cent(s):

• Great inventions or Ideas arises only very rarely compared with the large number of workable and even good n great ideas conceived in the traditional settings. So ‘we’ are naturally predisposed to favor the traditional advance which we all know and believe from our personal experience.
  

• Many times we are so strongly committed to our established ideas and their implications, that we unleash the storm condemnation (especially at early stages) when the ‘new idea’ does not present any results or confirmations. To me it seems natural!!
  

• Opposition of a gr8 idea is NOT synonym with mediocrity: It s really hard to define the term “mediocrity”…. Anyways, more than often, any new innovation or idea is met with scepticism firstly from colleagues only!!! And I think colleagues are of same intellect... more or less!! So where is the question of mediocrity??
  

• As I already mentioned in my last post itself, the same Einstein who coined this statement “Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds”, himself opposed another great (may be greater) theory Quantum Mechanics and obviously he was WRONG here!! Does it mean that Einstein was mediocre?? or QM was not a great idea?? Nopes!!!
  

• Source of idea: I feel, (In most cases) we are NOT 100% averse to any new idea (after all, nothing is absolute wrong and we do have a sense to assess the cos and pros ). So, we criticize/ suggest/ support/ blindly accept the proposed new idea depending on our resonance with the source (idealist souls, kindly excuse ). Nutshell: Prejudices/Reservations against the person more than the idea are very much prevalent.

 

[choudharyneelam]

Btw...Einstine was not a Psychologist

Rest I end it from my side with another quote from Lincoln:

" 'Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt."

Oops!! my mistake....I know Einstine was a great Physician....but didn't paid proper attention whether the first statement was said by Freud or Einstine.

for this i appolgise for carrying ahead my mistaken thoughts....(i mean mixing-up everything)

and for a minute i felt very bad about ur last written Lincoln's Quote but then i realised my mistake immediately after checking ur very first post....and now i also accept it....with a little embarrassment