I mean yeah they are interesting, but if that's all they ever end up being then they get painfully boring remarkably fast.
They each break through those inflexible beliefs in ways that are symptomatic of the beliefs themselves, so in that fashion they can be fun, but who enjoys a broken record for more than it's warped audio?
TLDR; To become strong, you must deny the opinions of others when they clash with yours, for they are just nay sayers that are envious of your confidence. To not echo your feelings is to be a bully, and to laugh in their face is to steal their strength.
A lot of it tangents between how to compose yourself and how to deny others.
"Strength comes from being challenged, since being challenged keeps you sharp or gives you issues to overcome. Weakness comes from comfort, from a lack of effort, from raw apathy. As such, I think to mock someone is to challenge them, while letting someone remain flawed pushes their weaknesses further. I see it like stoking a campfire; If you leave it alone, the fire will eventually go out. "
Comfort doesn't make you weak all by itself, it can make your prone to weakness, but at the end its only important if you can face challenges when they do arrive. You can have comfort and still be able to get over challenges when they try to break your comfort.
"It fits with why comedy people are so depressed, but come on, no one?"
I fully agree with this :P
"Yes, because that is always a sign of strength, devaluing the opinions of others to keep your own status quo in check. Sometimes ones sense of security must be broken to introduce better ideas."
This also reminds me of people who think they should be accepted by others, just because they exist.
That article is just generalizing all 'mockers/bullies' to a specific type of person. In a way you could say he is imagining that the bullies are below him to make himself feel stronger. Thats ironic.
Strength comes from getting what you want(being happy, etc). Regardless of opposition. And always take a balanced road... Neither the path of absolute resistance or the path no resistance is a good choice. It would be too easy otherwise.
I do not see a problem with sycophantic behavior, as long as what you really care about is not touched. And a superficial ego is not something important. Its rather a useful resource to be used.
"Comfort doesn't make you weak all by itself, it can make your prone to weakness, but at the end its only important if you can face challenges when they do arrive."
Comfort introduces sloth. If you ask me, the real question ought to be "How much weakness is acceptable?"
Oftentimes, to become stronger you must put comfort to the side.
"You can have comfort and still be able to get over challenges when they try to break your comfort."
You can, but the harder road, at least from my understanding, yields more memorable rewards than that which is just comfortably given to you. The trophy you fought for and earned has more value than a trophy everyone received for "participating".
"This also reminds me of people who think they should be accepted by others, just because they exist."
Acceptance is something that should be earned. To oppressively expect it only serves to make others accept them less. 
"Strength comes from getting what you want(being happy, etc)."
Sometimes what you want can introduce weakness. Hard drugs and medications with heavily addictive symptoms are an example.
Happiness can also be a weakness depending on how it's achieved. Mania, Denial, there's all sorts of "happy" displays that are less than good.
Strength comes from being content, a mid ground of feeling. Happiness is only as strong as the means of achieving it. From the looks of it, the happier someone allows themselves to be, the more they allow themselves to be open to other feelings as well.
"I do not see a problem with sycophantic behavior, as long as what you really care about is not touched."
A yes-man with an agenda will weaken those around them by getting them just what they asked for. It's like being a non-magical djinn, and it's what has popularized the "Evil Adviser". In that sense, it's the one who allows sycophants to be a staple in their lives that weaken while the sycophant itself is a parasite of another's success.
"And always take a balanced road... Neither the path of absolute resistance or the path no resistance is a good choice."
Through strength and weakness, the aspect of what is "balance" can shift. Stress sucks, but becoming jaded toward that which grants you stress can make the hard road suddenly easier. Avoiding stressful situations meanwhile makes you more prone to feeling stress when "stuck" dealing with it.
"Oftentimes, to become stronger you must put comfort to the side."
Always. Oftentimes, its things that interfere with comfort that need to be dealt with to regain the comfort. Which means you lose your comfort to deal with it.
"You can, but the harder road,at least from my understanding, yields more memorable rewards than that which is just comfortably given to you. The trophy you fought for and earned has more value than a trophy everyone received for "participating"."
I guess it does, but the end result is the same. You can of course use your 'special success' in other ways to get better results.
"Sometimes what you want can introduce weakness. Hard drugs and medications with heavily addictive symptoms are an example."
You do not take drugs for the drugs, you take them for the feeling. Its the side effects that weaken you, its your poor choice that makes you weak, unless you were prepared for the consequences.
"Happiness can also be a weakness depending on how it's achieved. Mania, Denial, there's all sorts of "happy" displays that are less than good."
Those strike back at a later date and make you unhappy. If they do not, then there is no problem. Why should someone who wants to be happy, care that its not real, as long as it doesn't make you unhappy in the end?
"Strength comes from being content, a mid ground of feeling. Happiness is only as strong as the means of achieving it."
If its being content that you are after, then getting that would make you happy.
"From the looks of it, the happier someone allows themselves to be, the more they allow themselves to be open to other feelings as well."
Probably, its a risk then.
"In that sense, it's the one who allows sycophants to be a staple in their lives that weaken while the sycophant itself is a parasite of another's success."
Unless the one who allows it, knows what he is doing and is enjoying it, but is ready for the consequences.
"Through strength and weakness, the aspect of what is "balance" can shift. Stress sucks, but becoming jaded toward that which grants you stress can make the hard road suddenly easier."
Yes, the overall balance should be kept.
--
Being prepared and able, and acting when required is what makes you strong and stable. Being able to get what you want, being prepared to deal with the repercussions and actually dealing with them. When i say being prepared, i mean that you should mentally consider the bad outcomes, of whatever risk you are taking to get what you want.
"You do not take drugs for the drugs, you take them for the feeling. Its the side effects that weaken you, its your poor choice that makes you weak, unless you were prepared for the consequences."
The drugs itself have side effects, plus there's still the emotional attachment aspects of it. Being able to introduce "the feeling" in such an easy fashion (with costs that aren't immediately apparent) can cause it to become a crutch that denies other improvements.
Through association, they desire the drug for the feeling it grants. The feelings and side effects are the drug. Besides, they still want it though, don't they? The original point was: "Strength comes from getting what you want(being happy, etc)."
Strength is what allows you to get what you want, it's not that getting them makes you stronger.
"Those strike back at a later date and make you unhappy. If they do not, then there is no problem."
Living in the present with no eyes toward the future strikes me as reckless. If there will be later problems, that makes the initial actions problematic. Costs that are paid later are still costs.
"Why should someone who wants to be happy, care that its not real, as long as it doesn't make you unhappy in the end?"
Because happiness isn't all there is to living, there is also the matter of "growth".
"If its being content that you are after, then getting that would make you happy."
Happiness is short lived, a state of excited stimulation. Content is simply neutral, no raise in heartbeat, no stimulation, simply a lack of discomfort. One is fun, the other is comfortable. One is a roller coaster while the other is a hot tub.
Happy doesn't mean "positive", it is a specific emotional state. Someone can be comfortable without being happy.
"Unless the one who allows it, knows what he is doing and is enjoying it, but is ready for the consequences."
How often does someone both see and expect the specific means to their own downfall in advance without at least taking measures to make it no longer a threat, save for those who want to see their own success end (like self sabotaging types, the emotionally masochistic ones)? That would require something to blind them to the true dangers, like pride.
"Yes, the overall balance should be kept."
Balance isn't kept, it's made.
"When i say being prepared, i mean that you should mentally consider the bad outcomes, of whatever risk you are taking to get what you want."
More often than not, people cannot see every angle. If they choose to live in the present than future outcomes aren't even being fathomed. Even the most meticulous over prepared person might overlook a simple answer.
"Those who watch their backs meet death from the front."
Edit: I guess the TLDR would be that strength comes from proper growth as opposed to happiness. Through growth, one can become stronger.
"Through association, they desire the drug for the feeling it grants. The feelings and side effects are the drug. Besides, they still want it though, don't they? The original point was: "Strength comes from getting what you want(being happy, etc).""
Hm, yes you are right. However is it a weakness if you knew it would happen and took it anyway? Then later you didnt regret it, when counter productive effects kicked in? I do not think it is. Then its a matter of how much you got out of it against how much you lost. And the first few times you should never regret. They teach(not talking about drugs specifically, but anything that can be used with the drugs example).
"Living in the present with no eyes toward the future strikes me as reckless. If there will be later problems, that makes the initial actions problematic. Costs that are paid later are still costs."
Yes, this is what i meant. But if the costs are lower then the gain, its still fine.
"Because happiness isn't all there is to living, and every action has a cost. "
In this case, i will rephrase:
Why should someone who gets what he wants, care that its not real, as long as its not taken away in the end?
And since you might answer the same way, i will say this: its not relevant if what you want is not all there is to living, as long as you live good. and the costs should be measured and they always get measured naturally.
"Happiness is short lived, a state of excited stimulation. Content is simply neutral, no raise in heartbeat, no stimulation, simply a lack of discomfort. One is fun, the other is comfortable. One is a roller coaster while the other is a hot tub.
Happy doesn't mean "positive", it is a specific emotional state. Someone can be comfortable without being happy."
Okay then, i must of though happy means something else.
"Strength comes from getting what you want" <- in this case, what you want is to be content.
"How often does someone both see and expect the specific means to their own downfall in advance without at least taking measures to make it no longer a threat, save for those who want to see their own success end (like self sabotaging types, the emotionally masochistic ones)?"
He is ready for the possible consequences, so he keeps the sycophant around, until he thinks its time to stop. But he must be ready that the sycophant could outsmart him. Because this is like playing with fire.
"Even the most prepared person cannot see every angle, and if they choose to live in the present than future outcomes aren't even being fathomed. Even the most meticulous over prepared person might overlook a simple answer."
You need to be ready to fail. This is what i mean. Not practically ready. Your mindset must be ready. When you fail you need to act accordingly and not indulge into your failure. And not deny it either. Look at it, learn from it, fix it and get on with it.
Its almost methodical.
--
I see people as strong or weak from their own perspective. Are they able to deal with themselves and can they carryout what they want? Are they trying to carry it out? Are they lying to themselves, due denial that will eventually fuck them, or is already fucking them? How will they deal with failure(part of are they able to deal with themselves)?
"However is it a weakness if you knew it would happen and took it anyway?Then later you didnt regret it, when counter productive effects kicked in? I do not think it is."
Becoming attached to a substance is introducing a weakness, foresight or not. You are introducing eventual withdrawal into your life if for any reason you cannot continue the proper upkeep, even if it's simply an upkeep that's become rough from a changing market or adaptive tolerance. Even if assuming you're able to "tough through it", it introduces occupational and social hazards.
"Yes, this is what i meant. But if the costs are lower then the gain, its still fine."
That really depends on if the costs are being properly weighed or not. Even someone with the proper foresight might not understand how bad the eventual detriments will be. Nothing teaches lessons more strongly than experience, but there isn't always room to recover after it's happened.
It also gets complicated if the costs and gains are seemingly disconnected, because then it becomes a matter of personal values (which get even muddier if unaware of them). Adding a time table to it throws people off even further.
"Why should someone who gets what he wants, care that its not real, as long as its not taken away in the end?"
What are some examples of this? Like someone who is given a constant drip of morphine with an axe to their neck for the minute they become too tolerant of the substance to properly enjoy it anymore?
It denies growth in a haunting fashion.
"its not relevant if what you want is not all there is to living, as long as you live good."
So the perception of quality of life is all that ought to be thought on? How often does "living the good life" end up a perpetual situation?
"and the costs should be measured and they always get measured naturally."
They should, but they rarely do. Hindsight is a word for a reason.
"Strength comes from getting what you want" <- in this case, what you want is to be content."
Being "content" isn't always good either. In many cases it doesn't promote growth, it simply protects what they already have. If anything, it promotes defense.
"He is ready for the possible consequences, so he keeps the sycophant around, until he thinks its time to stop. But he must be ready that the sycophant could outsmart him. Because this is like playing with fire."
You give people's foresight far too much credit. Many would just keep such a person around since having an underfoot figure makes them feel strong. It's effectively coddling yourself through another.
"You need to be ready to fail. This is what i mean."
How often are people ready for it? If ready for "anything", they may be ready for the wrong failures, increasing chances of paranoia as they begin to carry theoretical stress on their shoulders.
There's also those who think that to think on failure is to decrease in conviction, to increase one's sense of doubt. While I am not one to agree with conviction being a strength, how does this fall on your theories?
"Are they lying to themselves, due denial that will eventually fuck them, or is already fucking them?"
This is the factor that makes certain comforts and thrills bad. Some substances or activities blind them to their sense of logic, like a gamblers vices.
by RayvenIs it really so black and white? Is it really the difference between strong people and the weak?
"Those who lack the strength to be themselves are always trying to tear down those who do."
True?
It's 100% true. I agree with the link you posted, and it's probably why I remained here, cause in here I get the opportunity to rise to the occasion of confronting malicious intentions that eventually collapsed due to recognizing the real reason behind those who seek to belittle me. I once said this place made me stronger, even in person I've become seemingly ' Un - offend able'. Drama also puts a smile on my face, while laughing in the face of my aggressors is optional. I refrain from laughing in their face cause all it really does is provoke the aggressor, and to do that lowers the quality of originality required to even bother interacting with low grade personalities. Over all laughing in the aggressors face is lowering the self closer to their level.
Knowledge alone isn't strength, it's at first experimenting with what you think you might have discovered, when the results prove it's worth, there is no better way so you become so.
"Even if assuming you're able to "tough through it", it introduces occupational and social hazards. "
Nothing is for free, its again cost versus gain. It would often be weak to be addicted to drugs yes, but not necessarily always.
"That really depends on if the costs are being properly weighed or not. Even someone with the proper foresight might not understand how bad the eventual detriments will be. Nothing teaches lessons more strongly than experience, but there isn't always room to recover after it's happened.
It also gets complicated if the costs and gains are seemingly disconnected, because then it becomes a matter of personal values (which get even muddier if unaware of them). Adding a time table to it throws people off even further."
If everything was 100% mathematical accuracy, things wouldn't be surprising and fun. Just boring. You would always know you'd get it right. Now you feel better when you get it right, because there was a chance you are wrong.
"What are some examples of this? Like someone who is given a constant drip of morphine with an axe to their neck for the minute they become too tolerant of the substance to properly enjoy it anymore?"
I can only imagine this as some mental deviance.
"It denies growth in a haunting fashion."
Growth towards what? Whats the point of growing, if you have achieved your needs? Perhaps you can find a better way to get your needs, or get better quality of those needs, etc. But is it worth it, to risk it all for that? Because if we imagine someone is happy in a delusion, is it worth the risk to get over the delusion? What if real life is shit for this person? He would be weak in real life. But he doesn't live there, not in his mind. The only real question of strength here would be, can he handle it if he gets over his delusions somehow and adapt to real life? He doesn't need to do it, but if it was to happen, can he adapt?
"So the perception of quality of life is all that ought to be thought on? How often does "living the good life" end up a perpetual situation?"
When it ends, you need to be able to adapt. Best way is to control your environment, but its not a requirement. But perhaps a more accurate explanation of what i said would be:
its not relevant if what you want is not all there is to living, as long as you live good, unless its worth the risk to lose it all."
This is where things are very subjective to different people. As they do the waging.
"They should, but they rarely do. Hindsight is a word for a reason."
Hindsight is not always too late, if you have tested the grounds of your advance. Wage little parts of the big picture, and once you have all the measurements of the little parts, you can measure the cost of the entire risk effectively. But there is always some hindsight you forgot about. However it would be rarely so big, if you have done the testing correctly.
"Being "content" isn't always good either. In many cases it doesn't promote growth, it simply protects what they already have. If anything, it promotes defense."
Nothing is perfect.
"You give people's foresight far too much credit. Many would just keep such a person around since having an underfoot figure makes them feel strong. It's effectively coddling yourself through another. "
I was giving foresight to this hypothetical person, but in general you are correct.
"How often are people ready for it? If ready for "anything", they may be ready for the wrong failures, increasing chances of paranoia as they begin to carry theoretical stress on their shoulders."
You need to be able to accept the consequences of your actions, when you fail. Not that you need to be obsessively thinking about it... Just when it happens, you should be content with it, on the inside. Sure think about a way out, act out to other people if it helps to fix the situation, but if it doesn't work, do not break down over it.
"There's also those who think that to think on failure is to decrease in conviction, to increase one's sense of doubt. While I am not one to agree with conviction being a strength, how does this fall on your theories?"
You do not need to over think it. Consider it a possibility.
"This is the factor that makes certain comforts and thrills bad. Some substances or activities blind them to their sense of logic, like a gamblers vices."
This only matters if the person values his logic. Which would often be the case, but not always. There are people who just don't care.