JivinJeffJones
New member
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2007
- Messages
- 3,702
- MBTI Type
- INFP
now I'm just wondering what the fuck is wrong with people
Look. I just want fun without resorting to violence. Besides, Insults should be distinctly separate from physical harm. The negative opinions of others should be taken independently. They should not matter.
I find this quite irrelevant and most pertinent only if we are on a subjective discussion. The question, at hand, is about the morality of my actions. Those that are hurt are only hurt because they let themselves be hurt. (not in a physical sense of course...)
Although my opinion about our own control our psychology may be misled. Perhaps external abstractions damage ourselves and we have no power over it(unless well trained that is).
yes...I was trying to justify my actions by the idealism of independence, but I'm starting to think that most people don't have the same impressive mental control as I do. Some may even collapse with a simple "you are an idiot." But this further justifies growth. Reaction should be converted into Proaction. Is this conversion obtained through experience? If it is, then the more I should continue my very helpful behavior.
and other similar statements you dislike pain.I have never liked getting punched in the face, nor have I liked being looked at with nasty looks.
I'm sure if you start saying things to violent people and yet for some odd reason they refuse to help with your growth of pain tolerance, whatever would be glad to help you. Then you would be impervious to pain and could get away with much more than you can now, right?growth. Reaction should be converted into Proaction. Is this conversion obtained through experience? If it is, then the more I should continue my very helpful behavior.
There is a difference between truthfulness and being an asshole. Although tact is probably a useful idea, even for the 'non-violent' people. (Never doubt the ability for someone to pent up vengeance and then do something about it.)Because there is great risk for physical pain. I do help rarely by "abusing" non-violent people. I call the unqualified "unqualified". The foul foul. the fat "fertile".
Wrong. Some of us do a) care b) try to do something about it. Now, I will be truthful and say I could do more, but there is a line between helping others and helping oneself that one has to decide for themselves. Not an easy line.The pain of others is everywhere. Tell me. What do YOU do regarding world poverty? You don't dislike it. You ignore it like everybody else does.
You don't have any IRL friends, do you?
I know. I wub myself!First off, condescending. Impressive mental control. :rolli: Although I do like you for your upfrontness.
I doubt I'll turn to masochism :rolli: so its more efficient to avoid pain. I feel that the path towards physical tolerance is too cumbersome.However your thoughts have a few holes.
Based on
and other similar statements you dislike pain.
Now if you were being honest, you seem to have a strong mental control for emotional reactions, but weak for physical. You can control your reactions to physical pain by developing cognitive responses to ignore pain. So since you have a pain tolerance that could be raised, why aren't you risking physical pain by your philosophy? It would only help I'm sure if you start saying things to violent people and yet for some odd reason they refuse to help with your growth of pain tolerance, whatever would be glad to help you. Then you would be impervious to pain and could get away with much more than you can now, right?
News to me. Sensitization can be a process of adaptation? Make sense. Still, I doubt the degree of my 'efforts' is enough to form sensitization. On second thought, maybe it is enough.As for your thought that you are helping people by hurting them; in general you're not. With repeated doses of pain, sensitization occurs, where although adaptive cognitive thinking does occur (your mental control), there is also increased reaction to lesser stimuli in order to act more effective. More reactionary, not less.
Tact is "useful"...? In what way?There is a difference between truthfulness and being an asshole. Although tact is probably a useful idea, even for the 'non-violent' people. (Never doubt the ability for someone to pent up vengeance and then do something about it.)
I still think most, if not all, have their "lines" extremely disproportional by virtue of care. Eat Luxury cuisine for yourself and then give a nickel to malnourished dying kid. How much "care" is invested in that scenario as oppose to telling someone to "go away'"?Wrong. Some of us do a) care b) try to do something about it. Now, I will be truthful and say I could do more, but there is a line between helping others and helping oneself that one has to decide for themselves. Not an easy line.
My apologies, Craft, if I was too harsh, although considering your stance, I believe, I have done nothing you would take seriously.
There are many methods, although it is case specific and unfortunately most studies have focused on phobias. Desensitization in general works by showing that a person's reaction is out of proportion to the stimulus. You seem? to want to correct people on what you deem melodramatic, I would suggest to ignore it, unless necessary for your own well-being not to. Some people have such strong reactions because it gives them some reward often attention; trying to correct their over-reaction rewards their behavior. As a reminder, since I would feel negligent not to say it again; it is a case by case basis, and double-check that the reaction is not warranted for the stimulus, a difficult task in the firsthand.So what methods are efficient in lessening reaction? (on general population.)
Tact, when used correctly, attempts to get one's message across to others in an efficient manner. Do not be mistake efficient for heartless or trite remarks. It can take time to refine the message, but once sprung an effective message can at least distill the idea for others to see even if not agreed with. It often involves showing respect and recognition that the other person has some rationale (even if poorly reasoned by your own thoughts) for doing or believing something. Odd you ask this question as you have attempted tact within this very thread. Of course tact is it's own downfall when a person places more importance on it than on the message or when used for manipulation. Nor is tact the panacea for all conditions; like a bomb with a few seconds left, some situations don't have the time for defusing.Tact is "useful"...? In what way?
This view which pain is more significant is subjective and dependent on the person and their experiences. Until that person has experienced the multitude of forms of pain and somehow remains sane can that particular person say accurately which pain is worse. Comparing between the kick in the balls versus being called stupid, I agree, I would prefer being called stupid. If I had to relive my life experiences of mental pain versus my physical pain, however, I would choose my physical pain.I have experience vengeance, mainly in the internet. It's not really as painful as being kicked in the balls.
Unfortunately, I do agree with you partially about this. Dealing with a problem just enough so it's not major enough to disrupt their world or self view.I still think most, if not all, have their "lines" extremely disproportional by virtue of care. Eat Luxury cuisine for yourself and then give a nickel to malnourished dying kid. How much "care" is invested in that scenario as oppose to telling someone to "go away'"?
I have to disagree. What happens when they escape 'justice' again or even worse when they rise to positions of power? The cycle restarts or spirals farther out of control. I think "assholes" need to learn of themselves and everyone else as human beings. Of course, I'm probably spouting crazy NF shit that can be ignored.EffEmDoubleyou
I think a lot of trolls deserve the justice of a black eye.
I talk to people all day long.... lots and lots of random people... on top of that I have a rather large extended family. Despite all of these interactions though, I have NEVER run across as many people who are as contrary, disagreeable and likely to pass judgement on others for really dumb reasons as I manage to on this forum
Marmalade.Sunrise said:When many people feel there are no real consequences for bad behavior, they'll act however they please.
Why case specific?There are many methods, although it is case specific and unfortunately most studies have focused on phobias. Desensitization in general works by showing that a person's reaction is out of proportion to the stimulus. You seem? to want to correct people on what you deem melodramatic, I would suggest to ignore it, unless necessary for your own well-being not to. Some people have such strong reactions because it gives them some reward often attention; trying to correct their over-reaction rewards their behavior. As a reminder, since I would feel negligent not to say it again; it is a case by case basis, and double-check that the reaction is not warranted for the stimulus, a difficult task in the firsthand.
Does tact induce sensitization?Tact, when used correctly, attempts to get one's message across to others in an efficient manner. Do not be mistake efficient for heartless or trite remarks. It can take time to refine the message, but once sprung an effective message can at least distill the idea for others to see even if not agreed with. It often involves showing respect and recognition that the other person has some rationale (even if poorly reasoned by your own thoughts) for doing or believing something. Odd you ask this question as you have attempted tact within this very thread. Of course tact is it's own downfall when a person places more importance on it than on the message or when used for manipulation. Nor is tact the panacea for all conditions; like a bomb with a few seconds left, some situations don't have the time for defusing.
Pain can be quantified via collective opinion. In general, Internet vengeance(if anonymous) is inferior to RL vengeance.This view which pain is more significant is subjective and dependent on the person and their experiences. Until that person has experienced the multitude of forms of pain and somehow remains sane can that particular person say accurately which pain is worse. Comparing between the kick in the balls versus being called stupid, I agree, I would prefer being called stupid.
why?If I had to relive my life experiences of mental pain versus my physical pain, however, I would choose my physical pain.
Your right. I'm actually a very nice person.Despite what you or others may say of yourself, I have yet to see you as either asshole or troll, you may have a veneer of condescension, but nothing bearing of ill will yet.
It's great that you realize this.Of course, I'm probably spouting crazy NF shit that can be ignored.
no, I am always an asshole
Because we are individuals. In social psychology, psychologists study how the situation affects the individual and their responses. Having said that no studies show a reaction to a situation that is one hundred percent universal to all individuals. Individual personalities and past experiences do affect the situation.Why case specific?
Ideally no, realistically, on occasion. To induce sensitization there has to be pain or anxiety of pain. Mistakes do happen, what one thought was a good response may be in the end be a poor choice of words. However, trying to be careful and occasionally failing is better than being careless and failing most of the time.Does tact induce sensitization?
So collective opinion is considered to be an accurate basis of measurement? I thought that was Ad populum fallacy. I do understand your point. If the behavior is truly anonymous, then why can it affect people? Some people fear anonymous disapproval more than other forms. More likely, the situation surrounding that person is not healthy, e.g., a person suffering already from taunts and beatings at school creating low self-esteem may be easily crushed by what others would think of as mere shallow expressions of anonymous hate.Pain can be quantified via collective opinion. In general, Internet vengeance(if anonymous) is inferior to RL vengeance.
My summation of experiences of mental pain have been more painful than my experiences of physical pain, although the two are interwoven.why?
I did not mean to imply cooperation, simply respect. There is a large difference from disagreeing with others viewpoints and finding out someone's wife died, then 'poking fun' of that situation. This needless pain serves no practical purpose. Even if one gets joy out of the situation it starts to desensitize oneself to the plight of others including those who one knows offline.Why should having a similarity with another person automatically mean cooperating with that person?
Yeah. There was a film forum I used to participate in which is off the scale in bitchiness. I would post something and then live in fear that I was about to be hung, drawn and quartered.To be honest, this forum seems really peaceful when compared to most others I partecipate. Anyway, yes, I personally have run into quite disagreeable people in real life, however tone of voice is a component of communication which is lost through the internet medium, so anything disagreeable is likely perceived as colder than how it would in real life.