SmoochieFace Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 to be honest outcast, i think it is more because everybody likes to think of themselves as individuals, and they dont like it when somebody thinks they are more individual than they are. same way they dont like it if somebody says they are nicer than they are because of this or that, or more moral than they are etc... But why does it matter? If we truly are individuals and we have our own unique thoughts, feelings, etc. AND we are comfortable with them then why does it matter if someone thinks that they are more *whatever*? If you are TRULY comfortable with yourself and have healthy self-esteem then those things really shouldn't matter, right? Ex. So Joe Blow down the street has a plasma teevee... yeah? So? I am happy with my 21-inch console behemoth so why should I get all worked up over what Joe has? Do I think that Joe is *better* than me because of his possessions? Nope... not in the least.
Outcast Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 If you are TRULY comfortable with yourself and have healthy self-esteem then those things really shouldn't matter, right? BINGO! Give the man the prize!!! See, Smooch, that first bit is the important bit. Unfortunately, it's not very common, it seems. I feel exactly the same way but it seems there's a huge crisis of insecurity so that people get threatened very easily if you say anything that means you are somehow not 'like them'! You're not allowed to be different. You have to be individual just the way everyone else is Do I think that Joe is *better* than me because of his possessions? Nope... not in the least. You don't think he's better than you but if you're like 'most' people, you'd get all in a snit if you THOUGHT he THOUGHT he was better - even if he doesn't think he's better.
Art_Critic Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Ex. So Joe Blow down the street has a plasma teevee... yeah? So? I am happy with my 21-inch console behemoth so why should I get all worked up over what Joe has? Do I think that Joe is *better* than me because of his possessions? Nope... not in the least. Material possession doesn't mean individuality in real Adult life.. As kids peer pressure pushes the kids to have what their friends have.. ie: a certain brand of clothing or shoes. But this isn't about being an individual this is about fitting in giving up any individuality
newbby Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 you are right smooch, in that it shouldnt matter what somebody thinks of you or of themselves in comparison to you. it is the same as you feeling hurt about a percieved (real or imagined) rejection or misunderstanding of your character.
a4a Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Ex. So Joe Blow down the street has a plasma teevee... yeah? So? I am happy with my 21-inch console behemoth so why should I get all worked up over what Joe has? Do I think that Joe is *better* than me because of his possessions? Nope... not in the least. Perhaps ( could be wrong here) when one would say I do not have a plasma TV because I am not a sheep like you, and I do not choose to participate in purchasing of plasma tv's because I am an individual. (need more coffee to word this properly) I could care less as well as to what people have or do not have as possessions. Then again maybe it is because I have everything I would want or am working towards getting what I want. If somebody said they just bought a new car and they are so excited..... I think "wow that is great. Happy for that person". Or if they post they are expecting a child and thrilled I am happy for that person.....even tho I do not want kids. a4a- loves her plasma and escient and getting plasma for the bedroom
Outcast Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Smooch, here's how it works: 1. Observe behaviour you don't like 2. Ascibe motivation to the person - of course it must be negative motivation remember what Hobbes said about humanity 3. Accuse the person of having the motivation you have ascribed 4. When he says that he doesn't have that motivation, don't believe him because you know what he thinks better than he does. 5. Get mad at/dislike the person because of the motivation you have ascibed to him, whether or not he agrees you're right Get it now? Essentially, people will believe their perceptions of you even in the face of you explaining that their perceptions are wrong. I used to think that people all were scrupulous about wanting evidence and proof of their beliefs but they don't. They just want beliefs and then they cling to them.
newbby Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 BINGO! Give the man the prize!!! See, Smooch, that first bit is the important bit. Unfortunately, it's not very common, it seems. I feel exactly the same way but it seems there's a huge crisis of insecurity so that people get threatened very easily if you say anything that means you are somehow not 'like them'! You're not allowed to be different. You have to be individual just the way everyone else is but outcast, it is still ego. i am different, i dont care, i do care etc, it is all still ego.
Outcast Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 I could care less as well as to what people have or do not have as possessions. Then again maybe it is because I have everything I would want or am working towards getting what I want. If somebody said they just bought a new car and they are so excited..... I think "wow that is great. Happy for that person". Or if they post they are expecting a child and thrilled I am happy for that person.....even tho I do not want kids. Ah, but if you badly wanted kids, and were unhappy about not having them, you would say that the person who is excited is 'rubbing it in your face' and then get mad at them for it even if that's not what they're doing.
Outcast Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 but outcast, it is still ego. i am different, i dont care, i do care etc, it is all still ego. But newbby, it's 'ego' in the sense of 'the essential I', not 'ego' as in 'conceit'. Yes, it's about ego defense but Freud didn't speak of 'ego' the way we do as in 'stuck up'. 'Ego' is your Self and people's Self is often very fragile. Fine if you hope to shed yourself of your ego defenses, but again, not everyone can so you have to take that into account when dealing with normal mortals. Folks are much more fragile than we wish to believe. In fact, that's probably the lesson LS has driven home - that people are much more insecure and fragile than I ever suspected.
newbby Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Ah, but if you badly wanted kids, and were unhappy about not having them, you would say that the person who is excited is 'rubbing it in your face' and then get mad at them for it even if that's not what they're doing. well i understand your argument now. you are saying that because everybody else is not individual, then it bothers them because smoochie is rubbing it in their faces that he is. so what makes you think that others are not individual or less individual than smoochie. this is not a defense argument, my belief is that none of us are really unique not even you or smoochie. it is the same ego that likes to identify with others, as the ego that likes to think of itself as unique etc...
SmoochieFace Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Smooch, here's how it works: 1. Observe behaviour you don't like 2. Ascibe motivation to the person - of course it must be negative motivation remember what Hobbes said about humanity 3. Accuse the person of having the motivation you have ascribed 4. When he says that he doesn't have that motivation, don't believe him because you know what he thinks better than he does. 5. Get mad at/dislike the person because of the motivation you have ascibed to him, whether or not he agrees you're right Get it now? Essentially, people will believe their perceptions of you even in the face of you explaining that their perceptions are wrong. I used to think that people all were scrupulous about wanting evidence and proof of their beliefs but they don't. They just want beliefs and then they cling to them. Yep, I *get it*. Quite interesting, actually.
newbby Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Fine if you hope to shed yourself of your ego defenses, but again, not everyone can so you have to take that into account when dealing with normal mortals. why do you say that not everyone can? i really have to do some work now, so i am not being rude if i dont reply.
a4a Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Ah, but if you badly wanted kids, and were unhappy about not having them, you would say that the person who is excited is 'rubbing it in your face' and then get mad at them for it even if that's not what they're doing. No OUtcast you are dead butt wrong there! I would love to take a vacation. My dear friend is heading out for 2 weeks this summer. I was invited to go. I cannot. I am not angry or jealous or upset. I am thrilled that they can go, and showing me brochures or talking about it is not rubbing it in my face. Nor do I get upset with people with $120,000 hunter jumpers. I would love to experience that as well........but it does not bother me. Maybe one day I will be able to take a 2 week vacation in Europe and afford a high dollar horse, but until then my life is blessed. I don't think I am alone in this train of thought. Not every person feels cheated by anothers joy or success. Even if they do desire it for themselves.
ReluctantRomeo Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 I don't quite get it either but a lot of people *NEED* to be agreed with. Yes, because you and Smooch take it sooooo well when people disagree with you Time for a reality check - neither of you cope well with opinions different to your own. Or do I need to prove this by proclaiming my undying love for Dubya... and make us all hurl 1
lindya Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Yes, because you and Smooch take it sooooo well when people disagree with you Time for a reality check - neither of you cope well with opinions different to your own. Or do I need to prove this by proclaiming my undying love for Dubya... and make us all hurl This is absolutely correct, so perhaps it's time for people to stop believing that only one or two posters have some sort of monopoly over empathy and understanding. Outcast, you have given me very sensible advice on occasion...but likewise off the wall posters like a4a and all the others who like to write funny nonsense have cracked me up with laughter when I really needed it. There are all sorts of ways of helping and understanding other people.
SmoochieFace Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Here it comes... let's all bash Smooch and Outcast!
serial muse Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Well, Smoochie, I do believe that you actively choose not to follow the herd - and that can be admirable. But I've also seen you become quite frustrated on here, when the herd doesn't acknowledge or agree that you aren't following it. And I think that's worth thinking about. You have protested that people shouldn't care what others think of them. And yet, you do, though you don't want to, because you think that's a bad thing. Perhaps it's not entirely a bad thing, to care? That doesn't mean you should let that interfere with your integrity. But caring, in and of itself, is not necessarily bad, nor is it unnatural. We all care at times - even you, as you have shown. 1
d'Arthez Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Another question is how can we disagree with some posters, if they do not add meaningful content at all? Or merely repeat the same invariable mantra time and again? Would we call those posters individualistic? Wise? Sheep? Or is there an inbetween category for those? Coincidentally, the need for sameness is pathological in some serious mental illnesses. Ever wondered why so many things are written about schizophrenia by philosophers of culture?
ReluctantRomeo Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Here it comes... let's all bash Smooch and Outcast! Noooo, I've got too much respect for the both of you to do that. I enjoy both of you and find your posts generally helpful - just felt the need for a reality check on one aspect
Outcast Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 well i understand your argument now. you are saying that because everybody else is not individual, then it bothers them because smoochie is rubbing it in their faces that he is. No. You don't understand my argument at all. But thanks for making my point. Smooch isn't 'rubbing it' in anybody's face and that's exactly the mistaken perception that I was explaining to Smooch. To him, he's stating objective reality which makes it not a statement of 'I'm better or worse'. To you (and most of LS) you read his statements and mine as 'I'm better' even though I certainly don't think that way and I'm fairly sure he doesn't either. Maybe because people extrapolate from their own experience. Maybe people say to themselves 'If I said I was different, it would be because I think I'm better so that must mean Smooch thinks he's better' but in fact just because that's what it would mean if you did it doesn't mean that's what it means when he does. my belief is that none of us are really unique not even you or smoochie. I think the difference WHICH DOES NOT MAKE US BETTER is that we (and Smooch you need to confirm this because I'm speaking for you) have healthy senses of identity that are not disturbed by others' opinions. I keep touting Albert Ellis - it's everything he taught. His teachings make eminent sense and I learned from them. So in that aspect, I'm different and Smooch is and I thought there were other LSers similar but maybe I'm wrong.
SmoochieFace Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 But I've also seen you become quite frustrated on here, when the herd doesn't acknowledge or agree that you aren't following it. What is *frustrating* is that I get bashed for being different or saying that I am different. Therefore, it seems to be easier to not say anything at all, not share anything, just isolate myself AND what's amazing about that is that if I do those things people will b!tch and moan that I have walls up, I am untrusting, antisocial ,etc. I do not understand the reasons for the reactions I get. So which one is *better* then? A. Opening up to people and sharing myself honestly and being *real*. B. Opening up and sharing myself but being dishonest in order to *fit in*. C. Shutting myself away from people.
Outcast Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 but likewise off the wall posters like a4a and all the others who like to write funny nonsense have cracked me up with laughter when I really needed it. And I get lots of laughs from LS too but I leave the laughs to the jokesters partly because I have a very facetious and irrevernt sense of humour that I know can, on paper, seem mean or sarcastic when I'm actually being absurd and silly. So I keep it under my hat and use it with friends. Sometimes I'll join in the jollity, but generally I don't dare. It's not I don't like laughing - I do it all the time IRL - it's just that this place has lots of people with different senses of humour (as you have found) and people misunderstand me enough as it is
Outcast Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 The problem, Smooch, is that they all think you think you're better than them. They think I think I'm better than them. And we can tell them until we're blue in the face that we don't but they have decided that's how we are and, as I have discovered to my sadness, when someone is intent on believing something about you (for good or ill) there's pretty much nothing you can do to change their minds.
ReluctantRomeo Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 I'm different and Smooch is and I thought there were other LSers similar but maybe I'm wrong. I'm different. But not in the same way as the pair of you *Romeo's sense of humour is way too metaphysical today*
ReluctantRomeo Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 The problem, Smooch, is that they all think you think you're better than them. They think I think I'm better than them. Is this the same Outcast who said Smooch, here's how it works: 1. Observe behaviour you don't like 2. Ascibe motivation to the person - of course it must be negative motivation remember what Hobbes said about humanity 3. Accuse the person of having the motivation you have ascribed 4. When he says that he doesn't have that motivation, don't believe him because you know what he thinks better than he does. 5. Get mad at/dislike the person because of the motivation you have ascibed to him, whether or not he agrees you're right
Recommended Posts