Talk:Selfism

distinction

I distinguish "selfism" from "egoism" based on the useage of Paul Vitz (I liked it, even though I mostly hated him), and on the fact that Erikson and Fromm, although praising the self, were certainly not egoists, at least not in the same way as Rand, et. al. Rand's Objectivism hardly ever uses the words egoism or rational egoism, but is really big on the word "selfishness". I think Vitz might be on to something. Shanoman 23:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

More substance needed

I tried to make some NPOV edits. As I did so I noticed that the actual substance of Vitz's critique is either not presented here or consists solely of the label. It would be useful to have a presentation of the substance of his critique. Who else has made this kind of critique? It is certainly "in the air". DCDuring 16:46, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

IP comments

208.74.4.114 (talk) placed the following comments directly into the article:

Some random person's addon: Actually Vitz in his book explicitly explains that his attack at modern psychology (and his attack at modern psychology is only at the aspects that have served the purposes of religion) is not specifically against left wing or liberalism. Both left or right wing can be anti Christian, and this is proven as throughout the world regardless of what type of rule a country (like communism which if anything is extreme left, not right) is, Christians become persecuted. His claim is that selfism has served as a religious substitute in order than the government can still value humans beyond a reductionist view of simple machines. He claims 'pluralism' is a disguise for selfism as a state religion. His hope to show is that this religious substitute should not be equated to science and actually is a harmful secular religion that has destroyed individuals and families for years.

I have moved these comments here as they are more appropriate to the talk page than the article itself. Hopefully they will be useful to other edits attempting to improve the article. --RL0919 (talk) 13:54, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

To 208.74.4.114 (talk): Maybe so in regards to Vitz, but the even more conservative Christians Martin & Deidre Bobgan are completely anti-psychology and support its total replacement with "pure" religion (Christian prayer & Bible reading, etc.). I found it interesting that Vitz---who apparently does believe that psychology can have some value---nevertheless credits & praises the Bobgans in his book, so evidently he does find them at least somewhat convincing (and probably agrees with them more than he does with any conventional psychologists). Just thought I'd throw this out there. 05:43, 26 September 2012 (UTC) Shanoman (talk) 05:44, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I believe this page has a lot of potential, and with more research and more sources, the page could hold a lot of useful information. As of now, it seems as if the page is too bland and does not hold enough information on the concept of selfism. There is so much more to write upon this as one could go deeper into the psychology aspect of selfism along as the sociological aspect. --Amurph1997 (talk) 02:49, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Proposed merge with page egoism

WP:WEIGHT issues would not ensue. FatalSubjectivities (talk) 02:11, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Paul Vitz

Proposed merge with Paul Vitz Because The other info that doesnot touch Vitz is not related with specifially "Self-ism". FatalSubjectivities (talk) 03:34, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

As most of the material is, indeed, broader than the topic of Selfism, I think that a merge to a broader topic would be more appropriate. I suggest Selfishness, although Egoism might work too. Klbrain (talk) 18:13, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

I've switched the templates to the alternative, given that there was no support for the January proposal; so, any thoughts on the new proposal to merge to Selfishness? Klbrain (talk) 12:55, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

I think Selfishness makes the most sense based on content. Psychastes (talk) 20:43, 22 May 2024 (UTC)