RE: Re: Introductions

> Kids say wildly exaggerated things.

Many times because they are stating the truth that adults are good at hiding
. . .
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: Monday, May 12, 2003 11:49 PM
  To: [email protected]
  Subject: RE: [resistance] Re: Introductions



  My theory is just that kids are inarticulate. "I didn't break the lamp"
  simply means "I didn't mean to break the lamp." or any of a dozen
  alternative possibilities.

  Among the cruelest things an adult can do to a child is to take everything
  they say as if they mean it the same way an adult would mean it. Kids say
  wildly exaggerated things.

  On Mon, 12 May 2003, Ronald E. Thompson III wrote:

  > > 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]
  >
  >
  >
  > 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/
  >
  >


        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 from home.
Over 14,500 titles. Free Shipping
& No Late Fees. Try Netflix for FREE!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/BVVfoB/hP.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/