Am I being accused of making things be about me again?

Gallstones wrote:Quote mishap John.

How I know what?

Gallstones wrote:Some people just deviate and others are deviants. And there can be an impasse too great to be bridged; a distance too great for understanding to cross.

Do you know how you know that?

John

z8000783 wrote:

Gallstones wrote:Quote mishap John.

How I know what?

Gallstones wrote:Some people just deviate and others are deviants. And there can be an impasse too great to be bridged; a distance too great for understanding to cross.

Do you know how you know that?

John

There is more than one statement in there. Which one do you mean?

Both.

John

I know that there are some who only deviate because they get cured.
And there are those who are deviants, who will always be abnormal and will never be cured.

I know that because I live it, and I know others who live it too.


I know that there is a gap between the two groups--normal and not normal-- a separation of experience, how existence is experienced. Other people, by their behavior have taught me that what is reality for me is not reality for them, how they experience existence is not how I experience existence. Normal lives in a different world than not normal.

I know that understanding can be elusive to the point of never because I am not understood. I am obsessive about accuracy in the language I use to explain and there are some things--like this---that I can't get others to understand, no matter how carefully I try to make myself understood. And I am told that I am wrong, that I have to change.

I know because I live it. It is what happens.
How can something that happens not be reality?

I expect you to reject this.
And I expect some ignoramus to come make fun of me for it--they do so because they haven't the capacity to understand what I am saying. It is like expecting a tortoise to understand calculus.
I expect someone to find that insulting.

What did you want this for John?




I'm not sure this is a good idea.

Insanity is incapability to explain oneself to others. This too could be seen as insulting. It is a matter of perspective.

tuco wrote:Insanity is incapability to explain oneself to others. This too could be seen as insulting. It is a matter of perspective.

I disagree with your premise that insanity is [an] incapability to--or is it incapable of?--explain oneself to others.
A person may be quite articulate and yet one's audience may be completely unable to understand for a variety of reasons that have nothing to do with the sanity of the speaker.

Indeed, incapability to explain oneself to others does not imply inability to articulate. For example, there are some self-proclaimed experts on Nietzsche or Kafka who were no doubt quite articulate, however, I am pretty sure nobody can safely claim s/he knows what the fuck they were on about. Did I just support your point? Matter of perspective.

What I think is there are experiences, aspects of existence--one's own existence--that no one other than the self (and sometimes not even the self) can understand regardless of how competent one is with language or how much effort is expended to try and explain. What I also think is that those who can understand those experiences can do so only because they experience them also. And I think that such persons are very rare and it is remarkable and serendipitous to find them. And that connection should not be taken for granted.

I think that there are different types of people who live in the same physical space and mostly interact in effective ways, but exist in different worlds having different realities. I think that the separation of those worlds and realities is nearly, if not completely total.

I think it is an unconscionable and foolish mistake to peripheralize people who are different, or drive them away, or fear them, or try to make them be like you (or pretend to be like you just to get along), or think there is something wrong or defective with them and they have no value. They might have extraordinary value.

I think that not understanding coupled with ordinary can mean not valuing the extraordinary and wasting opportunities and possibilities that come with differences. Don't believe me? Go ask evolution.

I think it isn't unusual for those who do not fit the normie slot to want to exit a world where they are expected to fit, aren't valued and are unwelcome because they won't or can't fit in so the ordinary majority can be comfortable about them.


Before somebody decides to get outraged, take things personally and accuse me of wanting to wind you up--fuck you. You are a tortoise.

seventhousandtwohundredsixtyone extraordinary fcuks

tuco wrote:Insanity is incapability to explain oneself to others. This too could be seen as insulting. It is a matter of perspective.

It may be insulting, its certainly wrong. The word you are looking for is "inarticulate", not "insane".

Ultimately, the only thing that can give meaning to our lives is what we decide our lives "mean". If someone is in a situation where they cannot pursue that meaning, I think that suicide could be a rational choice. The goal that makes one person bounce out of bed every morning might seem pointless and futile to another. That second person might choose to live for reasons that the first would find trite and sentimental. If person one was denied the pursuit of the goals that gave meaning to his life it would be a act of purest arrogance for person two to say that one should pursue two's "meaning".

I really suggest that people watch the movie I posted for an excellent exploration of the issue.

I did watch the movie. It was quite good.

Gallstones wrote:What did you want this for John?




I'm not sure this is a good idea.

I was curious about what you wrote and why and I am still thinking about your response.

Some posts I answer quickly and others get the consideration they deserve.

John

Gallstones wrote:What I think is there are experiences, aspects of existence--one's own existence--that no one other than the self (and sometimes not even the self) can understand regardless of how competent one is with language or how much effort is expended to try and explain. What I also think is that those who can understand those experiences can do so only because they experience them also. And I think that such persons are very rare and it is remarkable and serendipitous to find them. And that connection should not be taken for granted.

I think that there are different types of people who live in the same physical space and mostly interact in effective ways, but exist in different worlds having different realities. I think that the separation of those worlds and realities is nearly, if not completely total.

I think it is an unconscionable and foolish mistake to peripheralize people who are different, or drive them away, or fear them, or try to make them be like you (or pretend to be like you just to get along), or think there is something wrong or defective with them and they have no value. They might have extraordinary value.

I think that not understanding coupled with ordinary can mean not valuing the extraordinary and wasting opportunities and possibilities that come with differences. Don't believe me? Go ask evolution.

I think it isn't unusual for those who do not fit the normie slot to want to exit a world where they are expected to fit, aren't valued and are unwelcome because they won't or can't fit in so the ordinary majority can be comfortable about them.


Before somebody decides to get outraged, take things personally and accuse me of wanting to wind you up--fuck you. You are a tortoise.

seventhousandtwohundredsixtyone extraordinary fcuks

I don't understand why you'd think people would get outraged and pissed off at this post. It makes perfect sense to me.

Every single one of us is a different type of person. Every single one of us is 'not normal' in some way. It's why the vast majority of people deny certain experiences and distort others to make themselves fit with their idea of 'normal'. 'Normality' is an illusion which we impose upon each other, either by our actions or by our externally-formed subjective view of others. It's pressure from outside ourselves from others under pressure themselves to conform.

No one can ever fully understand anyone else, most of the time most people do not even fully understand themselves, but then we don't need to fully understand each other in minute detail in order to have an idea of where we are coming from. Whatever experience results in our feelings there is only a finite number of them, and most of us have felt them. Most of us know fear, anger, joy, excitement, have probably felt the frustration of not being understood in what we were trying to express, the panic of being ostracised, all felt that we are not appreciated for what we are. For some of us, this is what we feel as the pressure to conform to 'normality' in order to receive respect and love, and many of us subsequently embark on a (pricey, the cost is our true selves)voyage to accomplish this task.

Others of us will rejoice to an extent in our 'otherness', welcome it, embrace it, absorb the blows and learn to live in a world of great external pressure to conform, being to some degree true to our real selves. A vanishingly small number of people make no concessions whatsoever. Vanishingly small. The very act of communicating with those who we see as a part of the problem represents some level of conformity.

No one is 'ordinary'. Yeah, sounds like new-agey nonsense. I am unrepentant. We are basically a whole heap of unique, complex, exciting, infuriating, whatever people trying to various extents to reduce the sharp edges so that others can rub along with us without getting too cut up, and avoiding getting cut up by others' sharp edges. We might see 'ordinary' in others, but that too is a matter of a lack of understanding. The best way to get as close as possible to understanding what it is really like to be someone else, as ever, is to listen without judgement.

z8000783 wrote:

Gallstones wrote:What did you want this for John?




I'm not sure this is a good idea.

I was curious about what you wrote and why and I am still thinking about your response.

Some posts I answer quickly and others get the consideration they deserve.

John

Got ya stumped, eh?


I like my followup better.



Oops, used the personal pronoun "I" again. That is risky around here.

z8000783 wrote:

Gallstones wrote:Quote mishap John.

How I know what?

Gallstones wrote:Some people just deviate and others are deviants. And there can be an impasse too great to be bridged; a distance too great for understanding to cross.

Do you know how you know that?

John

According to logical bob
It's a common opinion that you can't know something without being aware that you know it.

Gallstones wrote:

z8000783 wrote:

Gallstones wrote:What did you want this for John?




I'm not sure this is a good idea.

I was curious about what you wrote and why and I am still thinking about your response.

Some posts I answer quickly and others get the consideration they deserve.

John

Got ya stumped, eh?

Your posts always do although Fallible put into very fine words some of what I was thinking.

John

Gallstones wrote:

z8000783 wrote:

Gallstones wrote:Quote mishap John.

How I know what?

Gallstones wrote:Some people just deviate and others are deviants. And there can be an impasse too great to be bridged; a distance too great for understanding to cross.

Do you know how you know that?

John

According to logical bob
It's a common opinion that you can't know something without being aware that you know it.

WTF? I didn't say anything about knowing how you know something.

Anyway, I've been gone from this forum for months and you're still moping around making big puppy dog eyes at everyone? I never bothered following the soap opera but whatever happened it must have been some bad shit.

z8000783 wrote:

Gallstones wrote:

z8000783 wrote:
I was curious about what you wrote and why and I am still thinking about your response.

Some posts I answer quickly and others get the consideration they deserve.

John

Got ya stumped, eh?

Your posts always do although Fallible put into very fine words some of what I was thinking.

John

So nothing in your own words?

This was a mistake.