Are you ready to entrust dealing centres with at least $10,000? - page 11
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
By the way, according to my observations, Forex (and generally the near-exchange industry) mostly attracts schizoids.
If you are on this forum, are you schizoid by any chance? )))
No, I am an epileptoid rather if you consider my character traits as psychopathy, in fact in trading psychology is very important, markets are driven by collective consensus, and epileptoids are said to be the following:
The leading features of epileptoid personalities are extreme irritability and excitability, explosiveness, up to the attacks of anger, rage, and the reaction does not correspond to the strength of the irritant. After an outburst of anger or aggressive acts, the patients quickly "withdraw", regret what happened, but do the same in appropriate situations. These people are usually dissatisfied with many things, look for reasons to pick on them, get into arguments about anything, being overly heated and trying to shout down their interlocutors. The lack of flexibility, stubbornness, certainty of his rightness and the constant struggle for justice, which ultimately results in fighting for their rights and selfish interests, leads to their intolerance in the team, frequent conflicts in the family and at work. For people with this type of personality, along with astringency, sticky, vindictiveness, characterized by such qualities as voluptuousness, flattery, sanctimony, a tendency to use in the conversation diminutive-flattering words. In addition, excessive pedantry, accuracy, power, selfishness, and the prevalence of a gloomy mood make them unbearable in everyday life and at work. They are uncompromising, either loving or hating, with those around them, especially those close to them, usually suffering from both their love and hate, accompanied by vengeance. In some cases they may exhibit compulsive disorders in the form of alcohol abuse, drug abuse (to relieve tension) and vagrancy. Gamblers and serial drinkers, sexual perverts and murderers can be found among the psychopaths of this circle.
But to some extent half of Caucasian men "suffer" from epileptoidism, and I'm very hot when it comes to beautiful women or when I need to punish a man for disrespect or stupidity.
By the way Gordon Gekko is a sociopath but not schizoid, he is social and persuasive on the one hand but he did not like people, he was manipulative, just like Bernand Madoff
There is no single "ruler" of what is "normal" and what is "defective".
So, a complex, like disability, is an objective thing. Another thing is that not everyone sees a defect, especially in themselves.
Often only a specialist (doctor) can see both physiological and mental disorder.
So in order to see a psychological problem, one has to have some kind of depth vision.
(1) Using the word "you" emphasises respect for the person. The use of the word "you" (if it is not a close relative or a friend) is disdainful. For example the landlord says to his servant (even if the servant is twice his age): "Take my coat off, brother".
How do you say that in English?
So, a complex, like a disability, is an objective thing. Another thing is that not everyone sees a disability, especially in themselves.
That is why there is so much controversy about it, and why there are so many problems in determining the disability group?
There is not as much objectivity in psychology as we would like.
The vital, vital needs are objective. But the rest... We just observe them in all people, so we consider them objective.
And the definition of all kinds of "complexes" is even more so...
Can I give you an "objective" example of a complex ?
(1) There is no single "ruler" of what is "normal" and what is "defective". A maniac's behaviour is unacceptable only because his needs run counter to the needs of others and to generally accepted norms. That is, people have simply agreed that "this would be the norm". And so - there are norms that everyone agrees with (the same "don't kill"). And there are norms that are not immediately obvious.
For example, with teenagers, if you don't have the proverbial iPhone, you're a "sucker". What is that? From my point of view - bliss and stupidity. But from their point of view, it's the right thing to do. There are people who live in run-down flats, but have a car more expensive than their own flat - again, from my point of view - stupidity, it's better to spend the money to repair the flat, but, from their point of view - the repair in the flat will only see them and a couple of friends. And a cool car will be seen by thousands of people on the street, plus it will get a ton of likes on Instagram - it's clearly more reasonable to spend the money not on repairs of the apartment, but for a car.
On the street we really don't recognize each other. But, in my opinion, "you" on the forum emphasizes distancing and is just less respectful than "you"... For me it's just a place for quite close relations in a sense - I'm not going to show my code to anyone, and I do that on the forum because I perceive forum users as people who are close to me...
You don't want to. You prefer to distance yourself and emphasize your disdain... well... as you know.
(1) There are plenty of rulers (and quite similar ones, and authoritative enough to accept them) and humanity has known some of them for thousands of years. The fact that you don't want to acknowledge these rulers, which billions of people acknowledge, is not evidence that they don't exist, but rather evidence of your own problems. Such rulers are, first of all, Universal Human Values and Moral Ethics. Clever people (who have always been there) formulated the latter in the form of capacious aphorisms. For example "Don't do to someone else what you wouldn't want them to do to you. "You don't want some moral creep to "whack" you. And don't be slyly clever (or rather cheating) on this subject - there's no relativism here. And if there is (1 in a billion) some pervert who wants to be "whacked" by some moral freak, that's just indicative of a clinic.
The fact that these rulers are repelled, as a basis, from society does not speak about their deficiency or bias. Man is a social creature and acquires the fullness of life and real power only by being organically integrated into society. Adequate social behaviour gives strength. Inadequate weakens a man. You yourself have written about fools (and this is the result of a false value cliché imposed on them), that live almost in a lavatory, having spent money on a prestigious car. In fact not many years will pass when they won't have strength to earn money anymore, their car will be in the dump and the toilet in which they live will be shabby by that time. And then they will realise what idiots they have been.
(1) Using the word "you" emphasises respect for the person. The use of the word "you" (if it is not a close relative or a friend) is disdainful. For example the landlord says to his servant (even if the servant is twice his age): "Take my coat off, little brother".
How do you say it in English?
My knowledge of linguistics is quite modest. EnglishYou is always You, which means that it is a very polite language.Theyused touse thou, like our You, toaddress an inferior person. But I don't know if they use it now.
Didn't we communicate on INVESTOR.RU forum about ten years ago? There was a man with that nickname there too.
(1) There are plenty of rulers (with enough authority to accept them) and some of them humanity has known for thousands of years. The fact that you do not want to acknowledge these rulers, which billions of people acknowledge, does not indicate that they do not exist, but rather that you have your own problems.
"Millions of flies can't be wrong !" (с)
All these rulers are based on the subjective opinion of the majority. Therefore, they cannot be objective.
But, I don't see any problem here - so what if they are biased ? That's the way it is in this circle. And the fact that it seems to some as a "complex" is irrelevant. If you want to feel normal, you have to abide by the rules and attitudes here. Even if they seem "wrong" to you. Otherwise, leave this circle and look for another one, one whose customs suit you.
"Millions of flies can't be wrong !" (с)
All these rulers are based on the subjective opinion of the majority. And therefore cannot be objective.
But, I don't see any problem here - so what if they are biased? That's the way it is in this circle. And the fact that it seems to some as a "complex" is irrelevant. If you want to feel normal, you have to abide by the rules and attitudes here. Even if they seem "wrong" to you. Otherwise, leave this circle and look for another one, one whose customs suit you.
What do you think is objective?
Objectivity - belonging to an object, independence from the subject; a characteristic of factors or processes that do not depend on the will or desire of man (mankind). (Once again, "you poop"... ugh, "you poop"... Eh... )