|
|
Post by Reefs on Apr 25, 2014 6:51:23 GMT -5
Right, association fallacy, guilt/honor by association. Exactly my point. No doubt about that. However, this only applies to personal growthers, because their focus is on behavior (or improving behavior) by default which means it's hard to keep the messenger and the message apart. There's no such dilemma in non-duality discussions where behavior is irrelevant. Which means if you preach the ideal of unconditional love and how it applies in your life and how you are making progress and then you go on a hate rampage against your archenemies then there's an obvious credibility gap. The moralist doesn't see it as a distraction though. The pattern in the conversations on this forum and others like it is: 1) A statement of direct experience 2) Intertwining of that experience with abstractions -- the entanglement of ideological identification 3) The abstractions are challenged 4) Identification with the abstractions is not noticed on the part of the identifier From the perspective of a moralist so self-identified the challenger has unnecessarily and with apparently no provocation done a symbolic violence by challenging the abstractions, which often, because of the entanglement, takes the form of personal disparagement. Unless the identifier is also a pacifist or currently experiencing a movement of pacifism they are completely self-justified in retaliating. The motivation for the retaliation is most often just reflexive ... but if the identifier also has a self-image involving that of teacher or activist, then the retaliation is going to be a bit more elaborate and the retaliator much more absorbed in the action of it. ====== The case where a moralist attempts to associate their subject with a set of ideas is, of course, another matter altogether. What we call "straw man" or "picture painting" is all about assuming the ideological identification to begin with. Practicing pacifists tend to postpone the anger and then blow up after a rather significant delay for no reason.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2014 6:57:29 GMT -5
save the pity party .. I've been up since 12:30 (9:30 pacific) Hey Farmer & Silver - the hypnotist has been planting stuff to help me sleep and it's working. Five days in a row sleeping until 6AM - WOOT WOOT! with all due respect, and don't take it personally... but stick a sock in it   |
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Apr 25, 2014 7:01:01 GMT -5
Hey Farmer & Silver - the hypnotist has been planting stuff to help me sleep and it's working. Five days in a row sleeping until 6AM - WOOT WOOT! with all due respect, and don't take it personally... but stick a sock in it Ooooh, are we a widdle gwumpy? Nap time!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Apr 25, 2014 7:04:24 GMT -5
Leave your garden behind, Move to the ghetto, handle your finances poorly, start getting calls from bill collectors, and don't reassure her in any way, and see how long that 'trust' lasts, and how much validation she still gives you during those squirrel satsangs. Why should that have any impact on her trust? Now I'm also getting a little worried about your relationships.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2014 7:06:45 GMT -5
with all due respect, and don't take it personally... but stick a sock in it Ooooh, are we a widdle gwumpy? Nap time!!! hehe, been up 8 hours, and I haven't even opened my office for business yet but all good at this point (and all appropriate apologies to Reefer, fer the off topic thread interruption) |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 25, 2014 7:59:10 GMT -5
save the pity party .. I've been up since 12:30 (9:30 pacific) Hey Farmer & Silver - the hypnotist has been planting stuff to help me sleep and it's working. Five days in a row sleeping until 6AM - WOOT WOOT! Great news Quinn. Is the lung-dart/per day count getting effected yet? |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 25, 2014 8:00:05 GMT -5
 For whomever is interested in the discussion! what would be better is to dispatch nonsense right away, no point in letting it fester, it might get infected, might even spread
(** muttley snicker **) |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 25, 2014 8:02:11 GMT -5
The moralist doesn't see it as a distraction though. The pattern in the conversations on this forum and others like it is: 1) A statement of direct experience 2) Intertwining of that experience with abstractions -- the entanglement of ideological identification 3) The abstractions are challenged 4) Identification with the abstractions is not noticed on the part of the identifier From the perspective of a moralist so self-identified the challenger has unnecessarily and with apparently no provocation done a symbolic violence by challenging the abstractions, which often, because of the entanglement, takes the form of personal disparagement. Unless the identifier is also a pacifist or currently experiencing a movement of pacifism they are completely self-justified in retaliating. The motivation for the retaliation is most often just reflexive ... but if the identifier also has a self-image involving that of teacher or activist, then the retaliation is going to be a bit more elaborate and the retaliator much more absorbed in the action of it. ====== The case where a moralist attempts to associate their subject with a set of ideas is, of course, another matter altogether. What we call "straw man" or "picture painting" is all about assuming the ideological identification to begin with. Practicing pacifists tend to postpone the anger and then blow up after a rather significant delay for no reason. Prime example of how manipulating experience by practices can lead to a desired outcome for a time but will always fail in the end. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Apr 25, 2014 8:41:17 GMT -5
1. Hmmm....have you seen a woman's private bits?....seems like there are some significant 'differences' between men and women... and those physical differences equate to many mental differences as well...as an aside, differentiation does not mean in-equality, so please don't make that leap. I'd say that's mostly a myth. 2. No...I'm saying that all relationships generally begin based on need or desire...and are most often sustained or ended over needs and desires...I am not offering an ideal of how things SHOULD be, I'm commenting on what you might call WIBIGO ;-) Desire, maybe. But not necessarily need. It's easily explained with LOA. 3. Haha.... Now who went moralistic lol....hehe, as a side moralistic tangent, if you had to choose one or the other, would you be happier living by Dale Carnegie's ethos, or Nietzsche's ethos. Both approaches are flawed. I recommend the A-H approach. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Apr 25, 2014 8:50:03 GMT -5
'Need is the death knell of all relationship(s).' sure sounds catchy and kitsch. Actshooally, they DO join together to survive - and to celebrate! I guess it sorta dove-tails from where I'm sittin'.  But to the extent that you bring need into a relationship, you compromise it. Bingo. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Apr 25, 2014 8:52:31 GMT -5
A great deal gets by this crowd on a regular basis.  Shall I tell you the real reason you chose the name 'empty'? Ahh come on, now your just pouting... Its just some entertaining conversation my friend. I think he's trying to say that coming empty is still on your personal to-do list. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Apr 25, 2014 8:56:51 GMT -5
From where you're sitting, you need to survive and want to celebrate, so that's what you use relationship for. But to the extent that you bring need into a relationship, you compromise it. Everybody has needs....I think you'll have to be very specific about the type of 'need' to which you are referring. Heh, life is a crapshoot -- there is nothing but compromise to it. Life itself is The Big Bet. Not my experience at all. |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Apr 25, 2014 9:03:13 GMT -5
It's quarter to 3 here in the a.m., which doesn't help matters any. I'll stfu now, 'kay?  save the pity party .. I've been up since 12:30 (9:30 pacific) Will somebody move this over to the UM section, please?  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2014 9:13:01 GMT -5
save the pity party .. I've been up since 12:30 (9:30 pacific) Will somebody move this over to the UM section, please? why do you persist in trying to hide things? |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Apr 25, 2014 9:21:27 GMT -5
Goofiness Is funny...in a thread about argumentative drama, someone says some basic common sense, like: Make folks around you feel more secure, comfortable, and respected, and you will have less argumentative drama, and folks make this big personal hubbub and idealistic argument about 'that not being genuine' just to argue something. Heh Folks around here have less sense than they have pride and argumentativeness sometimes Its like folks are disconnected from the world here sometimes...like a bunch of teenagers sitting in a coffee shop debating aspects of life they they have never lived or something...that is an over-exaggeration of course, but still, there seems to be this kinda disconnect from life and often, common sense in these types of conversations, where a kind of teenage like idealism that is divorced from every day practical life happens. Why don't you give us the respect you think we need? Why the need to defame everyone instead? Seems your need to be respected hasn't been fulfilled in this discussion. So you aren't able to give any respect to anyone else in return either. Instead, in order to fulfill your need to be respected anyway, you now have to burn a couple of straw men so that you at least shine in comparison to those that don't give you the respect you needed. The result, of course, is more conflict and not more harmony. I don't see your approach working out all that well, at least not here on the forum. How does your basic common sense work out in real life? Have you ever tried being 100% genuine, just being who you are? |
|
