Talk:Self-knowledge (psychology)

Should Prem Rawat's teachings be linked here?

There are thousands of teachers who claim to teach 'self-knowledge'. Surely listing them all here would not be appropriate. --John Brauns (talk) 06:47, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps a link to the Philosophy of Self/Self Knowledge secition would be appropriate here? (Link [[1]] ) Johnnie Apple (talk) 18:09, 28 June 2019 (UTC) Johnnie Apple, 28 June 2019[reply]

Comments

I'm really pleased to see this article developing so much, although it looks incredibly ambitious. Some of the sections need more spelling out to make sense to the lay reader, but that could lead to it being too long: WP articles are recommended not to go over 80K

Bold text was overused. MOS:BOLD is the style guide for this.
The list of deficiencies would seem to need Miswanting (There's a Gilbert and Wilson ref for this that you can find through Google Scholar).
Wikipedia articles are meant to be flowing prose, not lists. The list form of a lot of the article at the moment probably reflects that it's at an early stage, but the overall readability could be improved by joining up some lists into paragraphs.

Despite quibbles, it's great that the article is developing and that it now has a really impressive number of good academic sources. MartinPoulter (talk) 22:20, 4 December 2009 (UTC) P.S.: Gilbert's "Stumbling on Happiness" is another source on Miswanting. MartinPoulter (talk) 05:19, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

integrative self - knowledge

What is integrative self - knowledge ? Zeynab tamiminezhad (talk) 08:46, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Know Thyself" - Coursera Course on Self-Knowledge

The following Coursera course is available on the subject of Self Knowledge, Know Thyself - The Value and Limits of Self-Knowledge: The Examined Life. Shall we add this as an external reference?

I had taken and completed this course and can vouch that this is a well-presented course and very accessible to all interested learners. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SriKumaran.Wiki (talk • contribs) 10:48, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I plan to add a link to the above mentioned Coursera course, in the external links/references section as follows (please comment or suggest the best way to add this reference):

Know Thyself - The Value and Limits of Self-Knowledge: The Examined Life is a course offered by Coursera, and is created by a partnership between The University of Edinburgh and Humility & Conviction and Public Life Project, a research project based at the University of Connecticut. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SriKumaran.Wiki (talk • contribs) 08:08, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

added philosophy to lead sentence

Please read paragraph for philosophical terms, thanks.Arnlodg (talk) 22:09, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You need a reference for that and even then its not really relevant here - are you going to add in Anthropology and all the other Humanities? -----Snowded ^TALK 10:33, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weak tea

The lead currently ends with the following sentence, which strikes me as weak tea:

This implies physiological properties such as hair color, race, and height etc.; and psychological properties like beliefs, values, and dislikes to name but a few.

You know you've steered yourself into a ditch of substandard diction when you arrive at "etc.;" (or you ought to). And what does it say about the slack relationship between writer and reader that a prosaic wagon ride around the town pump employs a semi-officious tour guide? — MaxEnt 20:59, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Choosing References

How are the references chosen? I mean the writers have to choose the references based on many features. I doubt whether the references are of good credibility or scientifically valuable.