That's an assumption that is made by one of the sub-selves that needs the reassurance that it is "in charge". The other sub-selves allow this, with an air of amused tolerance, because it's usually harmless enough.
But assuming that the dominant "you" is a leader of many sub-selves, some of which want things that are at odds with your overall goals, how do you deal with this?
I've seen people take this too far, though, and believe that they only exist in their "rational" choices. Then they wonder why things don't work out, because after all, weren't they being completely reasonable? Hey Forrest, it's a tree! look out! SMACK! Ooo, it made a sound all right. o_O;
Yes, all of those and a few more!
Committee meetings? Voting sub-selves off the island? Serenely tolerating the deadlock?
cross-posted from another thread