"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." ..

[freeform]

19 minutes ago, Stosh said:

I always take things personally since they are said to me

 

I see.

 

But in this form the 'you' is only your posts on a screen. If 80% of communication is non-verbal... and the rest is your speech... then your thoughts in written form must constitute an absolutely minuscule subset of 'you'.

 

It's not a case of being an emotionless vulcan - it's a case of recognising that however it may seem, none of this can be taken personally because we're not interacting personally. It's just our ideas bumping into each other.

[Stosh]

18 minutes ago, freeform said:

 

I see.

 

But in this form the 'you' is only your posts on a screen. If 80% of communication is non-verbal... and the rest is your speech... then your thoughts in written form must constitute an absolutely minuscule subset of 'you'.

 

It's not a case of being an emotionless vulcan - it's a case of recognizing that however it may seem, none of this can be taken personally because we're not interacting personally. It's just our ideas bumping into each other.

I accept that you feel that way ,I guess I am more personally 'available' , when I do things , I do them wholly.

I am not compartmentalized. I don't need to wave my hands or make faces to convey my sentiments. I get no thrill out of doing the wave at a football game , nor do I like complying with formalities. But.. me aside, , you gotta be kidding if you think it uncommon to take such input personally, man , in the old days,, this place got positively heated regularly, there as this one guy something like "imsiz Biri' - man o man that  guy was one aggravating character. Wait ! you have 2000+ posts , you should remember back for yourself. 

... but anyway people do take ownership of their ideas ,and often take rejection of them as personal rejection. Try telling your neighbor they have an ugly dog and a silly car , see if they don't take it personally.  

[freeform]

11 hours ago, Stosh said:

I don't need to wave my hands or make faces to convey my sentiments. I get no thrill out of doing the wave at a football game

 

You’re basically saying you’re not Italian 

 

No but in person you can’t help but communicate huge amounts of information - everything from your facial microexpressions to your breathing rate, the redness of your face, your eye movements, voice tone, breathing, posture etc etc 

 

Ive been a member of this forum for 14yrs - not always participating, but I’ve seen my fair share of arguments. I’ve even been put on ignore by Aethereous 😄. People are rude and aggressive because they sit safely behind a screen - it’s like drivers swearing at other drivers from the safety of their car. And the other side of it is that we can’t see one another. So much communication is lost that way.

 

I did a series of counselling sessions with a lady that was at her wits end. She’d already gotten divorced, just got fired, her children wouldn’t visit etc.

 

It only dawned on me as to where the problem was, right at the end of our first session. “Oh thank you so much Mr Freeform, you’ve helped so much already 😏” 

 

Her face was so infused with Botox (and other ‘enhancements’) that she could not make genuine facial expressions! Although her words sounded sincere, her face just showed contempt.

 

An online forum is like taking Botox to the extreme

 

So realising the shortcomings of communication over the internet, I just find it natural to not take what people say to heart. You keep calling me smug for example. I can kinda see your point. Because I know that in reality you’re just reacting to your interpretation of some words on a screen - not to “me” - so it just doesn’t hit me in the same way as if my neighbour called me smug. 

[Stosh]

All that may be true, and maybe someday we will find that out. Or.. I might be right on the money, and you actually should consider it, lest ye be misunderstood..like Botox lady.. or understood when you would rather be discrete. Any way it is, though I may be wrong, I still read it as being condescending .

I can't see you, can't read your body language, and so, these things are not available to blind me . That you counsel, predisposes me to figure that you indeed compartmentalize, conceal, and so forth, and you have been encouraged to think you have an upper hand ,because in the scenario,suggested, a subject starts out playing a second rate role . The shrink or priest plays into the parental role as seen by a six year old and the person with the problem has to condone it. 

 

[liminal_luke]

On 2/1/2019 at 5:35 AM, freeform said:

 

This, however, I’d like to challenge you on.

 

I think this is a truly unhealthy thing to strive for.

 

Let me explain why.

 

The world we live in will always tend to ‘reward’ you for your skilful means. The less skill, ability, ‘accomplishment’ that you bring to the world, the more likely you are to live a pretty lowly existence. In this world, it is very healthy to strive for growth and improvement.

 

Yes, there can be this sense of urgency, even a bit of anxiety that goes along with this. But far worse feelings await those that waste away the precious life that they’ve got.

 

Think about the kind of people who’re very proud of themselves, but achieved nothing of worth in their life... Do you know such people? Do you want to be such a person?

 

I understand that there’s this sense that ‘if only I can accept myself fully, just as I am - then I’ll be happy and content and at peace’ etc. It’s a very popular notion in the newage literature. But if you ever meet anyone who’s truly content and at peace, you’ll see that this is just the tip of the iceberg - the rest is continuous, hard work on self-development.

 

There is a good reason that this drive is part of our nature. Yes, it’s true that striving for recognition from people, when it’s decoupled from developing actual skill, worldly accomplishment and personal growth is pathological.

 

But the people that get the most well-deserved respect and recognition (in general) tend to be people that achieve impressive things, develop amazing skills and abilities and have many wonderful accomplishments.

 

Spirituality has nothing to do with high or low self-esteem. But it’s practically impossible to develop spiritually if you’re super happy with yourself without having achieved or given the world anything valuable.

 

My suggestion is not to succumb to such ideas but work hard on really doing something with your life. Compare your accomplishments not to others’, but to your own yesterday.

 

Hi Freeform,

 

I wasn`t going to reply to your post because I didn`t know if I could explain myself in an intelligible way, but I`ll give it a whirl.

 

I like a lot of what you say.  Totally agree about the necessity of engaging with life and not being a proverbial "bump on a log" who doesn`t strive for anything in life because he`s happy doing nothing.  And I certainly don`t mean to suggest that I want to turn into a psychopath, quite the contrary.  

 

Since you do counseling, perhaps you`ve heard of dialectical behavior therapy?  It`s a current interest of mine.  The dialectical part of the name comes from the concept of synthesizing opposites, kind of like in Daoist alchemy.  Wisdom, so they say, is often the product of combining two seemingly irreconcilable perspectives.  One of the main "dialectics" in DBT is between the necessity of asking a client to change problematic behavior and acceptance of reality as it is.  The theory goes that BOTH these stances are valuable in life: trying to change circumstances (both external and internal) and accepting them as they are.  

 

I bring this up because I believe our two perspectives represent  two poles of a slightly different dialectic and they might be wisely integrated.  There`s great value in striving for personally held goals.  In fact, I`m not sure it`s possible to be happy without such motivated activity.  (It wouldn`t work for me anyway.)  And at the same time, I stand by my idea of decoupling my sense of personal worth from the achievement of such goals.  It might seem like such a decoupling would be demotivating (why strive to do better if my personal worth is not on the line?) but in reality I don`t think it works that way.  I  think that having a strong foundation in positive regard that isn`t dependent on goal achievement makes accomplishing things in life all the easier.  When we do accomplish things, I think it`s A-OK to feel proud.  This might seem like a contradiction to my earlier statements but such is the paradoxical nature of life.

[Owledge]

"You can only either grow or expand at the same time."

- Dowlphin

[freeform]

15 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

wasn`t going to reply to your post because I didn`t know if I could explain myself in an intelligible way, but I`ll give it a whirl.

 

I’m glad you did!

 

It made very good sense and actually I think we completely agree.

 

15 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

And at the same time, I stand by my idea of decoupling my sense of personal worth from the achievement of such goals.

 

I completely agree with that. 

 

I think its healthy to couple your Le your sense of worth to the the striving - not the achieving 

 

And I’ve not come across DBT before - so thanks for that. Actually my counceling wasn’t really ‘professional’ as such. I certainly didn’t get paid for it. Mostly just listening.