[QLP]

I was thinking recently about how many issues and problems are caused by poor self-esteem / a damaged ego.

As someone with a penchant for wathcing CSI and Criminal minds, it is impossible not to notice how many criminals are reacting out of damage to themselves worth, often from childhool. Fictional I know, but there's way more than a grain of truth in that aspect I'm sure.

How often on here do we see people putting up with unacceptable situations on here due to poor self-esteem.

So I got to wondering how this trait evolved and what its merits might be.

Sure it can be a trigger for change and self-improvement if recognised and dealt with, but the instances where it causes problems seem to outweigh the advantages to me.

Has our sense of self-esteem overevolved? Was it much more useful when we lived a simpler existence? Am I missing seeing the major benefits?

Thoughts anyone?

[TUT317]

I was thinking recently about how many issues and problems are caused by poor self-esteem / a damaged ego.

As someone with a penchant for wathcing CSI and Criminal minds, it is impossible not to notice how many criminals are reacting out of damage to their self worth, often from childhool. Fictional I know, but there's way more than a grain of truth in that aspect I'm sure.

How often on here do we see people putting up with unacceptable situations on here due to poor self-esteem.

So I got to wondering how this trait evolved and what its merits might be.

Sure it can be a trigger for change and self-improvement if recognised and dealt with, but the instances where it causes problems seem to outweigh the advantages to me.

Has our sense of self-esteem overevolved? Was it much more useful when we lived a simpler existence? Am I missing seeing the major benefits?

Thoughts anyone?

Hi QLP,

A very difficult question to answer.

In order to begin to answer this question one would need to ask is,"What is the evolutionary( if any) advantage in humans having self-esteem?" Because evolution talks about function it would be a lot easier to ask questions such as, "what is the function of the opposable thumb in humans and primates?" The advantage is no doubt in the ability to grasp things such as tree branches, tools etc. Animals that can do this afford themselves a considerable advantage when it comes to survival.

Because self-esteem is not a physical thing, i.e. it is a way of looking at the world it becomes very problematic. The nearest thing I can think of to self-esteem is the role of morality in evolution of the human species.

But again, this area is also very problematic. In the end I think that morality has been important to the human species over time. Natural selection COULD benefit very basic gathering of primitive individuals who see the advantage of co operating with others.

How well basic gathering of individuals prospered or perished depended on co operation. It is possible that self-esteem also has a similar evolutionary advantage. This is because within a society there always seems to be those individuals who naturally lead their society ( for better or worse). Those with low self - esteem are less likely to be leaders. The success of a bee colony is very much depended on the overwhelming majority of bees who are exploited by the minority. In other words, in a bee colony the majority are subservient. Naturally, what I have said is a, 'long bow to draw'.

Would it have been detrimental for human evolution if all individuals were to have high self- esteem? Perhaps, but it is PERHAPS more likely that if all humans had low self-esteem then society would probably struggle to progress. Again, I am drawing a very long bow here. Sorry, but this is the best I can come up with.

Regards

Tut

[QLP]

Interesting thoughts.

I can see more advantages to morality since it allows society to impose behavioural norms in a non-violent way. If we consider that intellectual developments have brought more advantages than increased physical prowess would have then the evolution of morality makes sense. A few things that could be debated in there I know.

I suppose in a way self-esteem keeps people subservient to some extent, but when some individuals do 'blow' they can do a fair amount of damage. Then again if we were all fighting for pole position constantly I suppose there would be greater problems.

It is interesting that as we have developed ways in which we are less dependend on physical labour to survive, our morality has started to reject some of the things we would have considered acceptable in order to get the work done, e.g. slavery.

Maybe morality and self-esteem have successfully worked in tandem historically for the benefit of the race. Certainly it isn't long since the lower classes in this country were expected to 'know their place,' a concept accepted by both the higher classes and a good deal of the lower echelons. Going slightly off on a tangent there but just thinking loosely about things... The success of the class system probably depended on morality and self-esteem as much as on economics.

Maybe the problem is that society's morals can keep pace with the changing nature of society whereas self-esteem is more innate and it's advantages are becoming less clear.

You gave me plenty to chew on. Thanks.