FAQ/Help |
Calendar |
Search |
Member
Member Since May 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 352
4 |
#21
I find what you write highly interesting, TheUrOther, because it partly reflects experiences I have had. Especially the situation of being branded as a liar (or, for example, a manipulator) is very painful, because there is an inescapable paradox in a liar telling the truth. Every truth you tell or hold on to becomes another lie, or another piece of manipulation.
So, I think, the only option I have is to limit my contact, and curb my desire for cooperation from anyone. To start believing there will be no cooperation, ever. To stop expecting. That way at least I will be (slightly) less aggravated by the ****** situation I have. I have pain and depression, but sometimes I experience at least partially functioning interaction, which is valuable to me. Often the interaction becomes functional, because the other person relaxes, because they know they will not be asked for cooperation. People love it to be left alone. And sometimes I dare ask for something (or fall into the old habit), and then I become very happy if the answer is not evasive, nor negative, but becomes a statement of intention. Then it is important to not really believe it, so as not to become angry when nothing happens. By the by (this is my theory) everybody starts forgetting what you are supposed to be (a liar, a manipulator) , and suddenly it becomes possible to experience some form of friendship, or even love - and this is a less technical term for cooperation, I guess. Please note that I conflate you and I. Mainly because I didn't want to tell you what to do, but try to tell myself. I think I am different from you, but I see parallels. I think it could be helpful, by the way, to replace anger with sadness (a kind of helpful hint). People never feel as threatened by sadness, and become slightly more willing to cooperate. Because it makes them happy to help a sad person, just as it makes them happy to attack an angry person. |
Reply With Quote |
Iloivar
|
Wisest Elder Ever
Member Since Nov 2002
Location: Cave.
Posts: 96,326
(SuperPoster!)
21 81.2k hugs
given |
#22
I haven’t read the whole thread yet. I’m replying (with this short post, I simply don’t have as much time here as some members do ...) as I find your posts interesting. I agree that bullies do tend to act on false information.
__________________ |
Reply With Quote |
Legendary Wise Elder
Member Since Mar 2011
Location: Northeast USA
Posts: 23,114
(SuperPoster!)
13 21.3k hugs
given |
#23
Quote:
A person can be so sensitive as TheUrOther describes they can barely interact vocally normally. Some try therapy but end up disassociating, those patents are very hard to treat for example. |
|
Reply With Quote |
Fuzzybear
|
Fuzzybear
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
#24
Quote:
As a PhD in psych, researcher, and assault survivor, Christine Blasey Ford gave a very good neurological explanation of the disconnect between trauma and memory. You reminded me of that with your explanation of "discussing episodic." |
|
Reply With Quote |
Open Eyes
|
Wisest Elder Ever
Member Since Nov 2002
Location: Cave.
Posts: 96,326
(SuperPoster!)
21 81.2k hugs
given |
#25
Quote:
__________________ |
|
Reply With Quote |
Member
Member Since Jun 2017
Location: California, USA
Posts: 183
6 |
#26
A skill I can't develop because no one treats me as an equal - which only gets worse as my skill falls behind the age-appropriate average.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Also, I have never disassociated in my life - I've had to face life at full volume with not so much as eyelids to dim it. People have done the equivalent of shove a firehose in my face and wonder why I'm drowning. Incidentally, what would it say if a patient could not disassociate? What brain injury would that reveal? Does anyone know? __________________ Please don't hug me. |
||||||
Reply With Quote |
Anonymous49426
|
Member
Member Since May 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 352
4 |
#27
I find it quite poignant that you like do see yourself like an automaton, a machine, a meat grinder, a camera, or anothe device which acts on an input-output principle. Is this impression of mine correct? Is that maybe a form of disassociation?
And if that's correct, does that not make communication with a fellow human even harder, because of the destructive impulses humans have towards objects? They show that, by the way, because they always have to dehumanise a person before destroying them, so as not to feel guilt (unless they are psychopaths, non-human themselves). |
Reply With Quote |
Member
Member Since Jun 2017
Location: California, USA
Posts: 183
6 |
#28
Quote:
I see myself as a human being. A logical human being, but a human being nonetheless - complete with flaws. I do use machine-like metaphors, because of my familiarity with machines - I am a computer programmer. I have had more interactions with machines than I've had with people. And I'm well aware of the practice and system of dehumanization - I've witnessed it used on me my entire life, and I've seen it happen to others. The U.S. is full of it right now. __________________ Please don't hug me. |
|
Reply With Quote |
Legendary Wise Elder
Member Since Mar 2011
Location: Northeast USA
Posts: 23,114
(SuperPoster!)
13 21.3k hugs
given |
#29
Quote:
I was trying to explain to my therapist recently how it was hard for me to pick an event in that often what happens is because there has been so many events I get flashes much like you describe. However, from what you have shared you were facing constant traumas and mistreatements. So you had to survive your environment in a very different way than many who may not be able to relate or know how to affectively support you the way you would like them to. |
|
Reply With Quote |
Member
Member Since May 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 352
4 |
#30
Quote:
I'm sorry if I'm projecting. I must say I find your style and phraseology quite amenable, and also convincing, as if I could like you. I don't think I would ever punch you. Maybe the convincingness comes from the fact that your world of experience is a system - you see the logic in your abuse, and it becomes inescapable. |
|
Reply With Quote |
Member
Member Since May 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 352
4 |
#31
The Fundamental Problem you have with People - is it that they have an illogical behaviour? Or is it more like an illogical logic they follow?
And what is logic? In The Wrath of Khan (1982), Spock says, “Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.” Captain Kirk answers, “Or the one.” |
Reply With Quote |
Member
Member Since Jun 2017
Location: California, USA
Posts: 183
6 |
#32
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Their refusal to use logic and their tendency to wallow in emotion makes them behave nearly like animals. They literally enjoy being out of control, and they don't care who they harm in being so. It is their refusal to use logic that makes them see me under a cloud of fear and hate, instead of the obviously harmless person I am. __________________ Please don't hug me. |
|||||
Reply With Quote |
Poiuytl
|
Magnate
Member Since Jun 2018
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,285
5 117 hugs
given |
#33
so, are you enjoying being out of control?
|
Reply With Quote |
Member
Member Since May 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 352
4 |
#34
Well, but still, maybe you started relying on logic long before you learned to program. My idea is that that might be the big crux of your problem with people.
I think it's spockish (without the stoicism). Maybe you're right, it's less your phraseology then the content of what you write that I am referring to. Or maybe it's part of your phraseology that you make many statements. And I want to repeat, I like that. Maybe it's a sign that you are less an empiricist and more of a logician. A bit like me. I tend to think the world through and in the end come up with my own design of the world, which does not always accurately reflect the world as a reality independent of me. |
Reply With Quote |
Member
Member Since Jun 2017
Location: California, USA
Posts: 183
6 |
#35
I rigidly control myself. I am not under your control, and that is by design. I fight every day not to be controlled by others who would fully enslave me given the slightest chance. What makes you think I'm "out of control"? __________________ Please don't hug me. |
Reply With Quote |
Member
Member Since Jun 2017
Location: California, USA
Posts: 183
6 |
#36
Quote:
Quote:
I think of everything independently of people; I try to match my mind to objective reality as much as possible and flay any biases and inaccuracies out of my mind. Too many people rely on biases, interpretations and subjectivities and how people end up hating me - predators know how to manipulate those to feed false information to people and get them to do their bidding. No one cares enough about facts to sacrifice themselves to make sure that's all they learn. They'd much rather believe the comforting lie than the inconvenient truth. __________________ Please don't hug me. |
||
Reply With Quote |
Blknblu, Poiuytl
|
Member
Member Since May 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 352
4 |
#37
But doesn't logic always rely on assumptions? Is a logical world view possible without making assumptions about core conditions or assumptions of ethical nature (like the value of cooperation).
Have you read The Sea Wolf by Jack London? I highly recommend it to you. Very honestly. It has some romantic content and weaknesses, but at it's core it's the description of an absolutely cruel antagonist, who has developed an entirely logical world view based on his assumptions, his reading of the philosophers, his lack of any formal education. And he places logic just as high as you do. Yet he is the perfect bully, while you are, as you describe yourself, a harmless, even gentle human being. |
Reply With Quote |
Member
Member Since Jun 2017
Location: California, USA
Posts: 183
6 |
#38
Quote:
On the contrary, to be truly logical one must not have any assumptions. One must always seek to fill the holes in one's knowledge with proven facts. Assumptions are precisely where errors come from. To err is human precisely because humans assume. To solve a problem logically, one needs all the facts pertaining to that problem, and acknowledge one can't solve the problem if one doesn't have all the facts. Quote:
While I have read others of London's works, I don't think I've read the Sea Wolf. I don't remember it in any case. But if the antagonist is making assumptions - especially if he has no education on logic only relying on philosophers - then it would make sense that the result would be flawed. There is a phrase used in computer science: Garbage in; Garbage out. It's used to describe the idea that the outputs can only be as good as the inputs. If the premises of an argument are flawed, no amount of logic can save you. So it's no surprise to me that a man who fed himself a half-diet of flawed philosophers and believed himself a sage would end up a flawed man himself. I make a point of practicing informational hygiene to avoid this; only getting information from peer-reviewed sources or that which that be confirmed by both myself and by third parties. The premises must be as flawless as the logic, or the whole argument is doomed. And to be perfectly honest, I would not call myself "gentle". In fact, "rough around the edges" would not be an inaccurate description. __________________ Please don't hug me. |
||
Reply With Quote |
Member
Member Since May 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 352
4 |
#39
I disagree about your assumption that assumptions have no part in logical reasoning. The fact is, there can be no logical reasoning without assumptions (which is my assumption).
See for example this argument: The production of pencil sharpeners can no longer be profitable. This is because various factors have decreased demand for pencil sharpeners. First, pens are used far more than they once were. Second, those who use pencils often use mechanical pencils. Finally, increased use of electronics has decreased the need for handwriting. The argument depends on which of the following assumptions? Availability of mechanical pencils has increased Students no longer prefer pencils over pens for math calculations Production of pencil sharpeners cannot be profitable if there is a decreased demand for them Anything that can be accomplished with pencils can also be accomplished with electronics Pencil sharpeners are only in demand for the purpose of sharpening pencils So if I say, cooperation is good for people - therefore the only logical interaction between people is cooperation - people who refuse cooperation act illogical. Which is the assumption therein? Or are there several assumptions? Or is this not a reasonable example for logical reasoning? |
Reply With Quote |
Member
Member Since Jun 2017
Location: California, USA
Posts: 183
6 |
#40
Quote:
You chose to assume all those things. One can go out and prove or disprove for certain all of those things you mentioned. You didn't prove that assumptions are necessary. Quote:
Logical arguments require proven facts, not assumptions. Once you introduce assumptions into the mix, you're no longer arguing from logic - you're arguing hypotheticals. __________________ Please don't hug me. |
||
Reply With Quote |
Reply |
|