RE: Re: Introductions

> If you've ever been with children you must know that they are living
counterexamples of that hypothesis.
> Children take many actions, and seem unable, most of the time, to say
exactly why they do as they do.

This is near and dear to my heart as I have a three year old son.  I've read
some theory on why kids lie about things were it is really obvious that they
are lying (standing over the broken lamp saying, "no I didn't break it").
The theories are that they acted out of impulse, then create a belief
(fantasy) about what they wish had happened.  I take from that that: 1)
impulse does not come from belief, but just the opposite; and 2) the thought
that some of the struggles  with the conflict between impulse and belief are
caused when one creates the "fantasy" of acting against a belief in order to
somehow justify a negative outcome.  I interpreted James' original
comment -- "move on and stop blaming himself", to be more about trying to
understand why the outcome was negative, rather than beating yourself  up
over going against a belief (which could also be interepreted as a way of
transferring the blame anyway).

> I think true hypocrisy is when someone professes a certain beliefs,
knowing they are not his real beliefs,
> in order to gain social status or some other reward. Your friend might be
a real hypocrite, or maybe just
> confused.

I agree completely with this definition for "hypocrisy".  It's like,
hypothetically, holding drug buyers responsible for creating the drug
culture, but hold gamblers blameless for the gambling culture . . .


Ronald E. Thompson III
Director of Product Delivery
govONE Solutions
(303) 470-6922
(720) 332-3654
[email protected]
[email protected]

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
- Steven Wright



  -----Original Message-----
  From: James Bach [mailto:[email protected]]
  Sent: Friday, May 09, 2003 3:37 PM
  To: [email protected]
  Subject: Re: [resistance] Re: Introductions


  On Fri, 9 May 2003, Chris Morris wrote:

  > > > Why did he go against his beliefs? He talked about his desire for
  > integrity
  > > > in a way that convinced me (still does) for 30 minutes. He still
went
  > > > against them, though.
  > >
  > > I don't see how he went against his beliefs, in the story you tell. He
may
  > > have gone against his stated beliefs, but perhaps those are not his
real
  > > beliefs.
  >
  > Well, he said he believed pursuing her was wrong, then he did. That's
simply
  > why I say he went against them.
  >
  > What this reveals to me, as I've seen and continue to see in myself, is
that
  > he's a hypocrite :) He has conflicting beliefs. I never like to admit to
  > myself that I have inconsistent beliefs, but it sure as heck explains a
lot.

  It's better to be a hypocrite than not when your beliefs are wrong. And
  much apparent hypocrisy, I think, is simply a transient side effect of a
  learning process. It often happens with younger people that they embrace
  beliefs with their conscious minds that they may not embrace in their
  hearts. This is not necessarily an indictment of their heart, but possibly
  of their minds.

  Dabrowski's theory of constructive disintegration may be useful to
  consider here. Dabrowski hypothesized that some neurosis is actually a
  symptom of growth: as someone with simple beliefs and simplistic
  personality matures into a complex, integrated personality, he goes
  through periods of deep confusion and disintegration. These periods are a
  necessary side effect of personality building. Dabrowski identified what
  he thought those stages were, and even gave examples of literary and
  historical characters that fit each stage.

  It certainly was true for me, growing up, that I went through hard times.
  At one point, I was doing a lot of shoplifting. Had I been labelled a
  "thief" at that time in my life, it would have been an accurate label, but
  it may also have been very damaging to my growth, because I was looking
  for identity at that moment, and I'm glad I didn't decide that "thief" was
  my true nature. At one critical instant, after almost being caught, I made
  the decision that I would live my life without telling any lie that would
  embarass me to be caught uttering. And no stealing, either, since that is
  just another kind of lying. I was ten years old, and I've lived up to that
  standard pretty closely ever since. That was an integration event in my
  growth as a person.

  >
  > > When I was much younger, I used to have a lot of trouble reconciling
my
  > > apparent beliefs and my impulses. It took some years, but most of
those
  > > are worked out, now. Now I have beliefs that honor my impulses,
instead of
  > > rejecting them. I found that my old beliefs weren't helping much.
  >
  > Interesting - would it be correct to say then that you believe that all
of
  > your impulses are correct? That you don't have unhealthy impulses? That
  > doesn't sound like what you wrote, so I guess I'm just confused.

  No, because I have also learned more about the nature of my impulses, and
  figured out which ones are more important to indulge and which are more
  important to control. For instance, the urge to punch someone I'm
  frustrated with is one that I must control. The urge to confess what I
  feel to someone I trust is an urge more important to indulge, in most
  cases.

  As we become adults, we have to align our impulses with our self-image and
  self-control mechanisms, or else we live in constant stress and
  self-loathing. This is a complicated and interesting issue, of course. I'm
  just pointing out that it may have been a very *good* thing that your
  friend let his feelings lead his actions in that case. Or maybe it really
  was a bad thing-- but not just because of his stated beliefs.

  >
  > It also flips my way of viewing things on its head. I believe that my
  > impulses are a result of my beliefs - so your statement comes off weird
in
  > my framework. Hmmm
  >

  Well, think about that. If a belief is a conscious idea, then you're
  saying that all impulses come from conscious ideas. That would imply that
  someone who doesn't know his beliefs also can't take an action. If you've
  ever been with children you must know that they are living counterexamples
  of that hypothesis. Children take many actions, and seem unable, most of
  the time, to say exactly why they do as they do.

  On the other hand, if a belief can be an unconsciously held idea, then
  it's possible that someone can profess a belief that is contradicted by
  another, stronger belief that he is not consciously aware of, which leads
  to apparently (but not truly) hypocritical behavior.

  I think true hypocrisy is when someone professes a certain beliefs,
  knowing they are not his real beliefs, in order to gain social status or
  some other reward. Your friend might be a real hypocrite, or maybe just
  confused.

  > > Sounds
  > > like your friend is confused, that way, too. It will pass.
  >
  > It might pass. Or he just might move on, not resolving his conflicting
  > beliefs, not acknowledging that he even has conflicting beliefs and just
set
  > himself up for another failure of the same kind in his next
relationship.
  >

  Yes, we don't know. We would have to observe him over time, and see if
  he's learning or if he's stuck. Again, I'm not convinced this was a
  failure at all. Perhaps it was not meant to be. I have to wonder at why
  his prospective girlfriend would be "weirded out" by someone expressing
  his feelings, unless she wasn't meant for him, anyway.

  > > If the girl he was pursuing was weirded out by what he said, I doubt
that
  > > has much to do with rules of office romances. I suspect its because
she
  > > doesn't like him, or if she does, perhaps she is confused about rules
  > > versus impulses, too. Anyway, he got his answer, and he should move
on,
  > > without blaming himself.
  >
  > I disagree. He disobeyed God and his employer, two entities he had prior
  > commitments to. He should blame himself, take responsibility for his
  > actions, dust himself off and get back in the game.
  >

  I haven't seen you present any evidence that he disobeyed God. Moreover,
  since I believe God speaks directly to each of us in our hearts, I can
  report that God is reminding me, right this instant, that I don't know
  what God was instructing him to do and it's not my business to judge that,
  anyway. So even if you had evidence that he disobeyed God, that evidence
  would seem to irrelevant based on God's message to me.

  I hope you see that, whether or not God is really speaking to me, invoking
  Him as an authority maybe not be a winning strategy in a debate, since
  each of us has our own sense of God's will and purpose in the world. So
  whenever you say "God" I'm going to translate that into "my own deepest
  feelings about what is right."

  As for disobeying an employer, there are definitely things that would make
  me disobey an employer. If an employer makes an unreasonable request, I
  will consider disobeying it. That's can be a good kind of resistance.

  > He had plenty of normal, healthy options to pursue a relationship with
this
  > girl *and* keep his existing commitments -- it's not that pursuit in
general
  > was wrong, it's just that he was going against his word to try and get
what
  > he wanted now. But doing what he did risked *all* three relationships
(God,
  > employer, girl) -- not very wise. (That statement's a bit over the top,
but
  > I think it's essentially what I'm going for...)
  >

  So, the fact that he did this unwise action should be a tip-off that there
  is something other than stated beliefs and logical reasoning going on,
  here. It's a tip-off that the world of humans is a complicated landscape.
  Reducing it to estimates of what is wise and unwise may not help much.

  Whenever I see insane behavior, I have to remind myself that insanity is
  just a form a sanity that I don't yet understand.

  > This seems to hint at my impulses being my guide, and I don't agree with
  > that if that's what you're indicating. I think my impulses/feelings
should
  > be my guide into discovering where I am, but there's just not enough
  > information in an impulse/emotion to help tell me where I need to be.

  In the great Indian holy epic The Bhagavad Gita, Krishna (an incarnation
  of the creator) advised Arjuna to find his duty through meditation. In the
  Hindu faith, the struggle to know your Dharma, or duty, is a big deal.
  It's a life's work. Some forms of Hinduism specify everyone's duty. Others
  advise that it be sought within.

  I'm not telling you that you're wrong, just that the world is an
  interesting place with lots of different ideas about impulses and inner
  worlds.

  >To
  > frame it in computer terms, the impulse is just feedback, just a passing
or
  > failing test -- it's not the specification, the story, the task, or even
the
  > test itself, telling me where I need to be.
  >

  Maybe it's the output of a program you have no other access to.

  > Or another way - my emotions (impulses) tell me what I believe, but do
  > nothing to judge the correctness of that belief as being morally right
or
  > wrong.
  >

  I understand that you believe that, but not everyone does, nor is it the
  sort of thing that follows as a logical necessity from other things that
  we might agree are true.

  BTW, the courtly love revolution in literature, during the late middle
  ages, can be seen a a rejection of external moral codes and a strong
  affirmation that the heart knows what is right. This is an old argument
  we're having.

  -- James


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  [email protected]



  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Rent DVDs Online - Over 14,500 titles.
No Late Fees & Free Shipping.
Try Netflix for FREE!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/YoVfrB/XP.FAA/uetFAA/X1EolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/