Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Relationships and Sociology' started by Odyne, Jan 30, 2020.
@Hostarius Who controls when you are hurt? Who experiences the emotion, who generates the emotion?
Just to clarify. I don't think humor is bad or off color humor is necessarily bad. I think it's a matter of the mood, vibe, and the people involved. I don't dictate to anyone about what they should find funny. I laugh at myself at lot. I don't mind if others laugh at me if they're laughing with me, and it's not mal-intention. I don't want people to feel uncomfortable so I'll just play along. I will make jokes myself, but my jokes are pretty tame, and usually at my expense. My humor is rarely about other people. I'd feel horrified making fun of others, but that's just me. Not claiming to be a saint. It's just that that I'm not built for insult humor, and that's fine. If that's your cup of tea, then that's fine. I just don't want to feel that just because you may like a particular sense of humor, that I must like it too.
You can intellectualize it as much as you want. I see it simply as telling someone they are too sensitive and can't take a joke is what is pretty weak because it takes no responsibility. There's a time and place and audience for being off color. That's the point. When someone actually offends or hurts someone else the problem is just as much theirs. It's not a fault of the harmed party for feeling harmed. Also, no bad feelings here even if we disagree.
Control is different for each type, each person. Even from a biological point of view, it has to do with brain chemistry and hormones. Thus, factually, nobody is in control. If you happen to see it as a virtue to internalise feeling so much that it implodes into a black hole, so be it. But don't expect others to follow you into the void.
I know, slant. Stoicism. It's a philosophy that will allow you to operate in the world with a lot of dignity and insulation from pain. It also makes you seem balanced, wise and composed to outsiders: it's good social signalling, ironically. However, there's a 'life after Stoicism' where you consider more closely the role of emotion. What emotions do I enjoy? What passions are empowering to me and others? Is a life with feeling preferable to one without? Does excessive composure divorce me from my fellow man and actually make them feel more disconnected? Live stoically and you'll be a rock. The waves of life will crash against you ineffectually like the rocky promontory which juts into the sea, to paraphrase Marcus. However, the stoics never really achieved anything but their nobility. They were good managers; stable, reliable and just. And completely sterile. Impotent and passionless. Put out your own fire by all means; it works, and it works well. But if you do, be content with the irony of losing all your real attachment to life, others and meaning.
If I decide that I want you to be angry, can I make you be angry? Perhaps I can make actions which influence your mood, But let's say I want you to feel happiness, all the time. Can I make that happen? Can I choose for you what you feel? Can you choose for me what I feel?
Of course, acd, this is what I appreciate about you Let me process that and get back to you, I need to get back to work.
I'm not sure why everyone keeps labeling me as stoic. I don't prescribe to that belief. Im an absurdist. I have feelings. I feel things all the time. I chose where to put my feelings, what to funnel them into. I do not hold others accountable for my own actions... Including how I feel. You're drawing conclusions based on what your impression of what my words imply. Which I suppose we all do. Anyhow, both of our realities can exist at the same time with neither being wrong. That's the beauty of it all. I suppose I keep responding because I find the conversation interesting, not to prove my point... Because there is no point, at least not toward you.
This. @slant, in your statements that I read so far, I would like to think that your attempt is to empower the victim in gaining back control over one's self, emotions and their perception of the world, control which might've been taken away temporarily or permanently by an aggressor, but I feel your attitude is so extreme that it removes accountability from the injurious party. If someone is hurt, yes, they need to tap into their own coping mechanisms to move on, but the injury, unless self-inflicted which is not the point of the OP, was inflicted by an outside party that is just as equally responsible and accountable for the pain in this dynamic. I don't mean to dissuade you from the way you perceive things, but I felt "pressure" from the way you outlined your perspective, I felt I needed to balance it out loud. I appreciate your participation.
In a sense, this proves your point correct, @Ginny . The conflict is, I decide to do x y z with my emotions Others want to do a b c with their emotions So we can all do what we want, and interpret what we're doing as what we want to interpret it as. So for me I may find someone expecting me to apologise for something I've said as them holding me accountable for their own feelings, To the other, it is them holding me accountable for my actions and justice. Both things exist. So I chose not to apologize, you choose to be angry with me. So it goes.
You can't choose what you feel. There is no secret generator in your super ego that can decide what comes from your ego and id. As much as they overlap, they are also separate entities. Aye, there's the rub. You channel them into different actions, but the emotion stays the same. Yet you conflate it all and say that the decision to act differently changes the emotion. It doesn't, even if you programmed your brain to ignore the difference.
Pain, especially emotional pain, is so intangible. Where does my responsibility for your emotional pain begin and end? What actions are sufficient to remove the pain from you? It has no end.
Emotions are just emotions. They don't always make sense nor are they always useful. Just like thoughts, sometimes anxiety creeps in. We are feeling creatures so we feel, but you can actually train your brain using CBT and other ways to direct your thoughts and reduce the frequency of certain thoughts. Attitude is everything. Interpretation is everything.
This is very wrong. You're very absolutist in your statements, you chuck away a ton of research behind how emotions play a vital role in our lives and even our survival as a species. I don't know where to begin. lol I am going to stick to the scope of what I want to understand out of this thread, otherwise you're taking me down the rabbit hole there Slant. lol
self speaks to self: "let it go. .but when I see someone telling a friend to fuck off. . then calling it humor, I have an issue with that." self: "again, shut it". . So this is what this whole issue set off internally, for me. Yes, these are my feelings and I own them. . but, yeah, there is that. . then using a known emotionally charged word to denigrate women. . grrr. .but, hey these are my emotions, and I own them. . but it pisses me off that I have to feel them because someone decided to start it, then run. . they don't seem to want to hold any accountability, and yet here we are, discussing accountability. .
The main point was, I don't believe anyone else is responsible for our emotions. That's where we disagree predominantly.
"I have no expectations" Spoiler
Emotions always have a purpose, if you choose to recognise and process them. I doubt that what you call CBT is actually the kind of therapy you get from a therapist. It sounds more like an improvised layman procedure someone did on themselves. It just feels wrong and unnatural, at least the way you portray it. There is no one way to do something, like a miracle cure. When it comes to the mind, the protective mechanisms we use on ourselves can be more harmful than helpful. One needs to be careful, especially when it comes to therapy pet projects. And as for attitude... half acting, half self-programming. If you begin unrooted, you won't recognise yourself in the end, for better or for worse.
Because you're echoing some core Stoic principles - exercising an extreme level of control and autonomy over our own emotions. I know you don't have to subscribe to anything or label yourself like that, but 'Stoic' is an easy way to talk about what you mean. I would be, yes, but... This exactly. I think there's something to flag in the way you're talking about this, slant. Let's run an exercise. Suppose that I insulted you right now, how would you: 1) Feel 2) Manage your feelings 3) Respond to me 4) And this is key: how would you channel those emotions into your response? Pick your poison... 'You're a [INSERT SENSITIVITY HERE] bitch, @slant' Fat? Dumb? Slut? Worthless? What are you going to do? Take a deep breath and rest in your serenity? Defend yourself with dignity? But pay attention to your feeling. That upset, that rage - that's the feeling of injustice; of real damage. What would be the most just response? You would let me know precisely how much damage I did, and then hit me with the big fucking consequences of having done that. Your emotions aren't just about you. They play a necessary role in social regulation.
I may not be responsible, but I will be influential