[Lexicon78]

My T just told me a was a collectivist and altruist. I'm wondering if that's a bad thing.

Does anyone else think they are this way? I mean I did research both things a bit. I guess you could say I'm a true altruist. More than most, anyways.

Oh please, I hope I'm not all alone!

[(JD)]

Very interesting, as I just changed my profile to basically just altruism.

Being altruistic is a good thing, the unselfish regard for other's welfare. However, if you are putting yourself last because of low self esteem, your putting others first could be a poor response.

IDK about why the use of collectivist... unless your T is coupling that with the altruistic attitude... of a controlling nature? IDK, really.

I hope you talk this over more with your T, and find out what the T meant! TC

[January]

Hi Lexi,

Altruism is a wonderful thing unless we put ourselves last. So many of us who have had difficult lives think we are worthless and everyone else is worth saving.

I have not idea what your t means by "collectivist". Why don't you ask for a more detailed explaination? Please do let us know. Ok?

Hugs,

Jan

[pegasus]

Lexicon78

Sounds like you got a good T there.

'collectivist' - You are inclined to try to bring people together.

'altruist' - devotion to the good of others.

Both are great qualities to have, and sometimes it takes a T to point out what we are good at.

My T often comes out with long words, and I think he does that on purpose because he knows I will go home and think about it.

[hillbunnyb]

Guess I'm them two big words, too. Yo Lexy, we care in a broad sense. Balancing care for others with care for ourselves, ah, that is the challenge. Best.

[Fuzzybear]

Sounds like you have a great T Lexi! I look forward to an update!

[gardenergirl]

These are some differences between collectivist and individualists as I know the terms, and in broad strokes. Most of us are not strictly one or the other, but we do tend towards one more end than the other.

Collectivists tend to value group membership and teamwork. They work towards the good of the group versus individual achievement. They value cooperation over competition. Many Asian cultures are collectivist, whereas the US is an individualist culture. In individualist cultures or natures, personal achievement and gains are valued over group achievements. An individualist does not tend to overly identify with a group to the point of placing their own needs secondary to group needs or goals. Individualist cultures usually have a much higher potential for personal rewards, achievements, and sucesses for an individual, although sometimes success of one can come at the expense of another. This is more evened out in a collectivist culture.

Hmm, that's about all I can remember from undergrad. I do think it's possible to be altruistic whehter you are a collectivist or an individualist. I suppose it depends, in part, on the underlying reasons for altruism. Personally, I don't think either way to be, individualist or collectivist is better than the other, per se. There are benefits and costs to both. I think it's probably good to have both around.

At any rate, I hope that helps.

gg

[Lexicon78]

Yes, I guess being an individualist, in my opinion, is quite selfish. I really don't know where I get my ideas from since I was born and raised in the US. I think it is just completely wrong to do something for yourself if it's not gonna benefit other people. I'm really against things like that.

Maybe I should move to Asia? I don't know.

[DaveyJones]

col·lec·tiv·ism (kə-lĕk'tə-vĭz'əm) n.

The principles or system of ownership and control of the means of production and distribution by the people collectively, usually under the supervision of a government.

col·lec'tiv·ist n.
col·lec'tiv·is'tic adj.
col·lec'tiv·is'ti·cal·ly adv.

[gardenergirl]

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
Lexicon78 said:
Yes, I guess being an individualist, in my opinion, is quite selfish. I really don't know where I get my ideas from since I was born and raised in the US. I think it is just completely wrong to do something for yourself if it's not gonna benefit other people. I'm really against things like that.


</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

I don't think one is necessarily better than the other. It depends on the context and such. I think for something like academic achievement, it's much better to be more of an individualist as far as working towards doing your personal best, etc. Of course, having a bit of collectivist in you might lead you to work in study groups, and to help out your fellow students (within the rules, I guess), which also can help you do better. (Hmmm, I suppose I lean more towards collectivism, too). But if the other folks in your class or group did not do as well as you, would it be fair to give everyone in the class the same grade for the group's efforts and achievements? Or should each be graded on their own efforts and abilities?

I think both serve their purposes, but like everything else, it might be more effective to hold some traits of both or to be more moderate. But then, what makes this world so interesting is the diversity of beliefs, cultures, personalities, and so on.

Clearly I'm in a serious "hedging" mood today.

gg