Nicola Tesla comes to mind as a self-effacing genius of great achievements. John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, even Steve Jobs... You have to remember that The Virtue of Selfishness overturned 2500 years of ethical teachings. People who achieved great accomplishments in the past were not raised to think well of themselves, nor were they rewarded for it in later life.

"I do not know what I may appear to the world; but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the seashore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me." -- Sir Isaac Newton.

Newton's colleagues called him fearful, cautious, suspicious, insidious, ambitious, execessively covetous of praise, and impatient of contradiction. Even his relatives and his true friends were modest in their praise of Newton. However great his accomplishments and however strong his personality, Newton was clearly did not enjoy good self esteem or a strong ego.

Thanks, Belle. You are apparently the only other person here who uses the key words in their objective (technical) versus vernacular meanings.

Is the Pope Catholic??

You can live three minutes without air, three days without water, three weeks without food, and three months without love. Donald Trump does not strike me as the kind of person who could go that long without personal reflection from other people. To the best of my knowledge, having read The Art of the Deal about 20 years ago, and being unable to avoid him now, my judgement is that he needs other people around him in order to be "himself."

If Donald Trump has a "healthy ego" or a "healthy self-image" as you claim, why does he behave the way he does" Why did he bully kids on The Apprentice? Why does he brag about his sexual exploits? Have you read any of the books on Objectivist psychology, especially *The Psychology of Self Esteem" by Nathaniel Branden?

What is there to "get away with"? If you are saying that Donald Trump is above average in intelligence, that is clearly true by observation. Whether he is an real egoist versus a mere egotist is a different discussion entirely. He could be the most selfless man ever to serve from the White House.

Taxes might become lighter. Regulations might become less stringent. Those have nothing to do with Donald Trump's ego, or lack of ego. The words egoist and selfish have specific meanings to those who understand and appreciate the ideas behind Atlas Shrugged.

In the common vernacular, Donald Trump may have "a huge ego." However, for someone who appreciates the ideas behind Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead Donald Trump does not have a strong ego. He is not objectively selfish. He is in many behaviors selfless. He needs other people in order to be "himself." Donald Trump is more like Peter Keating, the successful man about town.

Allow me to recommend that you find the books of Nathaniel Branden. The very examples you offered of hos Trump appeared to treat people on The Apprentice and his bragging about his sexual exploits are exactly the hallmarks of someone with weak self-esteem. He appears to me to be covering up his weak ego with grandiose behaviors.

Putting own name on everything could an example of a strong ego. You might think easily of Ayn Rand's Hank Rearden or other heroes. The villains had corporations with vague names like Associated Steel and Amalgamated Switch. But in our time, with Donald Trump's generation, the "Me Generation" it could also be just the opposite.

I would disagree somewhat with your assessment of Romney. He had a real distaste for Russia, and I think that would have made relations with them more difficult. Reagan and Gorbachev liked each other and that was a distinct advantage. Russia has a more aggressive foreign policy, but has met with little resistance from Obama. Trump will stick up for the USA and Putin will stick up for Russia. There is some middle ground that will let both countries prosper, and we definitely need that to happen. Arguments between Russia and the USA dont really do much for either country, and I think Putin realizes that (along with Trump). Romney or Hillary for that matter would have just been combative and gotten us nowhere.

That is an easy generalization, but in fact, John D. Rockefeller went to a business school after a year of high school. Moreover, Trump himself did attend business school, specifically because Wharton had a major in real estate. He completed a bachelor of science degree in economics.

When sketching an analogy about "how men used to do business," I find Donald Trump to be like a successful Willy Loman.

Have you read any books on Objectivist psychology? Most people here are using these words in the their vernacular sense, not their technical meanings. Selfishness, ego, egoism, and compromise have very specific meanings to anyone who understands the ideas behind Ayn Rand's *Atlas Shrugged."

No, if you understand what it means to have a strong ego, hardly any President has demonstrated self esteem. By necessity, the kind of person who becomes president is the vector sum of competing external forces. They are either pushed in some direction or they are zeroes.

You used many of the key words in their vernacular sense, granted that the question was posed that way: "big ego" not strong ego.

The difference is subtle, but important. An "egotist" is not an "egoist."

You identified Trump's "not having problems with low self esteem" as being "egotistical." I agree that both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are egotistical. Neither one is an egoist.

Also, being open to new facts is not the same thing as being open to "different opinions." Uncritically accepting many points of view is not necessarily a virtue.

Finally, changing one's opinion in the face of new facts is not necessarily an example of rational thinking. It could be the reduction of cognitive dissonance, a form of irrational thinking.

"i think Trump is a lot more into getting all the right information before he acts."

And if he does that, he stands a much better chance at being successful - assuming of course that the people he is getting his information from are honest (and I don't see anything that leads me to believe otherwise ATM). Obama's Cabinet consisted of yes-men and patsies that told him what he wanted to hear - which is often the case when dealing with large egos.

Regarding Romney, I think Romney would have done a credible job as SoS. I would point out that during the 2012 debates with Obama, Romney was correct in pointing out that Russia was the most dangerous threat to world peace - even though he was laughed at on stage. No one is laughing now. I think it would have shown a lot of humility and objectivity to select Romney because it would have shown that Trump was willing to let bygones be bygones. Instead, he held a meaningless grudge. That isn't a trait I see in a great leader - it's the trait I see from a great ego.

Please don't get me wrong. I want Trump to succeed in "making America great again". I remain skeptical, however, that Trump has the necessary tools of character to carry out the necessary changes. I could be wrong. Time will tell. What I don't want anyone getting into is a Trump-mania similar to the Obama-mania that took over the left and led to Obama's Nobel Peace Prize. I won't have any problems lauding Trump after he does something right. I just find the celebration quite premature. Let's wait until after his first 100 days and re-evaluate then, shall we?

Does anyone know of any people of note, who have accomplish and created things that have low self esteem or tiny, self effacing egos? Trump or Howard Roark - which one has the bigger ego? George Washington or Rockefeller? Henry Ford or Edison? Of course he has a big ego, and he actually enjoys putting it on display.

I don't think the kind of arrogance he shows indi-
cates much true self-esteem (especially in the
Objectivist sense). He does have a big mouth,
and a tendency to put his foot in it. He seems to have a tendency to shoot off his mouth without thinking much beforehand.Somebody
with more true self-esteem would want to avoid
getting caught being in the wrong because of
what he had said, by being careful beforehand.
Still, I voted for him, considering the alternative.
But we have to watch him, to keep him under a
certain control. He is supposed to be account-
able to us, the people.

I wish he'd keep his hands down, especially that lame Hitler salute with the bent elbow and back bent hand.

His real smarts come from surrounding himself with people that agree with his agenda and are allowed to do it pretty much their own way, as long as they achieve the desired results. It's quite obvious he could not do much of anything by himself. His ego and arrogance could get in the way, and I think he understands that. I also feel he's really not that quick on his feet. He simply frowns and raises his eyebrows when he's stumped. Kellyanne will be running a lot of the show behind the scenes, if only they could plug her into his ear so more proper things might come out of his mouth. But then again, when he speaks in direct response it definitely keeps the media busy and out of his way.

Trump was brought up to be a businessman in a generation which learned from their elders, more than business school. That is what he projects. It is the old fashioned promote yourself, to get what you need done style. We are so used to politicians, and smooth business school grads, we forget how men used to do business. He likes to talk about his win, but at the same time, I think he is also amazed at how it all came down. That is why snowflakes can't related, no tie to what came before their generation.

i think Trump is a lot more into getting all the right information before he acts. He would have had to do that to be financially successful as he has been. I can see that very trait playing out in his cabinet selection. He is seeking the input even from people who I think are snakes in the grass, just so he can get them to talk and tell their "side" of the story. THEN, he makes a decision, like he did in trashing Romney as potential SOS. I say he knew all the time Romney wasnt the right person for that job, but he wanted to let him talk and perhaps shed some light of the office.

There is a difference, however, between entertainment and government; success is measured very differently in those two cases. I'm not trying to take away from Trump's accomplishments as an entertainer, I'm just pointing out that the same characteristics that make one a successful entertainer are not the ones that make one a policy wonk.

Reagan successfully made the transition from actor to governor and then to President. He had his terms as Governor to learn the ropes and the job. Trump is trying to make the leap straight to President, and people will be very unforgiving of the inevitable mistakes he will make along the way. But that is precisely where one's ego comes into play. Ego is the sense that I know what I'm doing and I don't need anyone else to help. It is arrogance and pride. When one is used to getting their own way, their ego gets in the way of learning from what didn't work and why - which is sometimes one's ego in the first place! Trump's comments that he "had never done anything wrong and didn't need to change anything" concern me greatly because that is an attitude of ego - not of learning.

Trump and Reagan differ significantly in almost every other major personal character attribute. It will be interesting to see which of those attributes plays out in the first 100 days, as they will be a huge clue as to the rest of his term.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

I am even inspired to do better now that Trump is president. I was very depressed at the idea of Hildebeast. Its just the way it was for me. Why work when Hillary will take credit for it and take away a chunk of what I worked for?

Interesting that his apprentice show was an unqualified success. Martha Stewart's was a dismal failure. I think its because he just said it like it is, and didnt mince words. martha Stewart was too "nice". Thats not the way the world is, and people didnt relate to it.