| Home | Community | Message Board |
|
You are not signed in. Sign In New Account | Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery » |

This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.
|
| Shop: |
| |||||||
|
Registered: 04/15/05 Posts: 11,089 |
| ||||||
|
Yes! Events are neutral...our responses are polarized!
| |||||||
|
oppositional ![]() Registered: 04/07/05 Posts: 1,133 Loc: aporia Last seen: 16 years, 10 months |
| ||||||
Quote: an unsatisfied need always causes pain. i can eat big macs, i can eat caviar; yet if i eat nothing i will go hungry. Quote: see i would argue the sports example is repression: there is wanting your favorite team to win, and there is the enjoyment of the game. and both were there, then repression happened, and maybe you realized there was good there as well as bad, the beauty of the game, as well as the anxiety of rooting for a team. like focusing on a face in a crowd, to the exclusion of the crowd. yet rest of the picture remains, whether or not you are conscious of it/focused on it. you talk about the difference between being really non-attached and being falsely attached. take the example of the person who's angry. if a person starts out angry, and they start saying 'i am not angry i am not angry' they will start to do things to prove it to themselves. the angry person notices they are clenching their fists, and this is a sign of anger, so they stop clenching their fists. they notice they're yelling at their friend, and this is a sign of anger, they stop yelling. pretty soon, yes, by every cue, the person appears non-attached. 'i am not angry, see i'm not clenching my fists about this thing anymore.' they've successful disconnected their head from their heart. yet that's not non-attachment. that's repression. yet a person can also be truly non-attached. if i tell someone they're angry, i may be wrong. if a person doesn't seem angry, and i never saw them go through this "i am not angry" denial stuff, why should i conclude they're truly angry? only a person's own self-honesty can know the truth. an outside observer can only make guesses from external cues. Quote: i can see that acceptance of a situation, as it is, can lead to a sense of peace. compared to disquiet, peace is a form of joy. yet doesn't the joy of such peace come from the relief of disquiet? if i am in a nerve-racking situation, and i suddenly become accepting, the joy will be in the sense of relief that comes from being free of anxiety. i agree that happiness is based on environmental factors is not technically right. i would say happiness is based on stimuli; and memory can be a stimulus. in your example- is acceptance a choice? i agree it's a cognitive act, but not wilful. acceptance happens when a person realizes something about the situation. there's a change of perception, and a change of emotion; yet it's not a choice. it's like thinking through a math problem and having the answer to occur to you. it just happens as you think about it; yet no matter how hard you try, you can never choose the answer to a math problem. Quote: i would still guess there was a need that went unmet. perhaps a spiritual need? a sense of freedom? a sense of connection? a creative outlet? i figure a need must have gone unmet somehow, although what need, i have no idea. edit: meant to respond to deviate -------------------- "consensus on the nature of equilibrium is usually established by periodic conflict." -henry kissinger Edited by crunchytoast (09/20/05 09:06 PM)
| |||||||
|
oppositional ![]() Registered: 04/07/05 Posts: 1,133 Loc: aporia Last seen: 16 years, 10 months |
| ||||||
Quote: i understand you saying because it's a result of his interpretation, IOW his brain, it's his choice. i am arguing choice is but one part of the brain, of which emotions are another. Quote: if we use hunger as an example, i agree i can choose what to eat. yet i cannot choose whether i am hungry or not. Quote: if a person can fulfill their own need for approval, i see nothing wrong with that. yet humans are social animals; i doubt there's no need that doesn't rely on other people, maybe it's possible that you're struggling because this need of yours is social in nature. i know from my own experience i've experienced my needs as burdens. everything from social needs to eating. sadly i never successfully wish them away. out of curiosity, is this what you don't like about needing approval? i wonder if needs serve a purpose. without food my body grows weak for example. i imagine if the analogy holds true for the other needs. Quote: that sounds intense Quote: in a way you are dead on here. i agree that many times i for example trasnfer previous experiences to the present one, in a way that obscures the ambiguity of the present. sometimes i recognize the real ambiguity, and the transference (or whatever you want to call it) stops. maybe i'm just quibbling, but i would argue this is not a choice, because there's no will involved. it's a realization like seeing the answer to a math problem. "emotional choice" IMO is an example of repression. if X says "i will choose to leave ambiguous my situation with Y" when he really doesn't feel ambiguous(he feels dread), i believe that's repression. -------------------- "consensus on the nature of equilibrium is usually established by periodic conflict." -henry kissinger
| |||||||
|
Registered: 04/15/05 Posts: 11,089 |
| ||||||
Quote: Yes, emotional reactions originate in the limbic portion of the brain, which evolved pre-languange, pre-logic. When our neo-cortex received emotional signals from the limbic brain, our thinking process takes over. The process of learning to choose is NOT about eliminating/denying/ignoring the limbic brain's signals, but developing our neo-cortical response-ability. Quote: Yes, and you can consider whether your food choices will contribute to your health and energy levels, or make you sick and sluggish. Same deal with emotional responses! If your usual response to emotions is causing you to feel sick and sluggish, you may want to alter the way you respond. Quote: What I don't like about needing approval, vs. preferring/wanting approval, is how eager I have been to hide myself and betray myself in order to fulfill that need. After spending many years lying and undermining my own well-being, I do not see a need for social approval as a healthy need. Quote: OK, and what if X takes full responsibility for feeling dread of his interactions with Y? If he accepts that he feels dread, allows himself to fully feel it, seeks to understand the dynamics of HIS side of the situation, and refrains from judging/blaming Y for the other side of the situation--that is all healthy and reasonable, no repression involved. This sets the stage for "tinkering" with his emotional response to the situation. Far from saying "I do not feel dread," the process would be acknowledging the full extent of that feeling, then considering how he wants to proceed. OK, so if I feel dread about future interactions with someone who is very critical and negative, I start to consider my options. Since I am committed to a growth path, avoidance would be considered briefly (if at all). Generally, if my emotional reaction is strong, I take it as a signal that I will learn a lot by repeating the interaction. (IOW, my thought is not: "UGH! I hate this, I must find a way to avoid this or force Y to change!" But "ICK! That feels yucky, I am all stirred up and angry. Sign me up for that lesson!!") ![]() The idea here is NOT that you pretend you feel ambiguous, but that you recognize that the EVENT is neutral. It is tempting to say "well, any reasonable person would find it very negative to deal with someone who is critical and negative! Of course the situation is not neutral!" Yet, a reasonable person (let's call him "Z")could meet Y, hear his criticism and negativity as reflections of his own insecurity and self-loathing, remember that we are all seeking the same things in this life: to be happy and loved. Instead of dread, Z feels compassion and love for this person who is so clearly unhappy. Has Z repressed himself in any way? Or is his chosen response simply skillful and aligned with his own values and beliefs?
| |||||||
|
oppositional ![]() Registered: 04/07/05 Posts: 1,133 Loc: aporia Last seen: 16 years, 10 months |
| ||||||
Quote: that's like saying a person chooses what to believe. it's like, i don't choose to believe in gravity, i just believe in it, whether i like it or not. can you choose to stop believing in gravity? Quote: there's three things: the need (for food); the feeling (hunger vs. satisfaction); the object (particular food). what i hear you saying is you can choose the need, the feeling, and the object. i am saying you can only choose the object. if you were right, then people could choose not to be hungry. is this true? Quote: since it sounds like you have a need for approval, and a need to be honest, i wonder if there is a way to find approval without lying, depending on the objects you choose for these needs. why do they have to be mutually exclusive? Quote: if he feels like judging/blaming, and "refrains" from it, then he is repressing his judgement/blame. Quote: following this logic, instead of putting a coat on in the mightiest blizzard, i would walk out naked, accept my feelings of coldness, and start tinkering with them. why would i do this? perhaps i believe the dependancy (on warmth) that being cold implies is a kind of weakness, and my pride would rather not acknowledge my own "weakness". Quote: this sounds right. although i don't see anything wrong with insecurity and self-loathing per se, since they're emotional states that give us information about our needs. Quote: i'm curious how a person makes themself feel something they don't really feel, like compassion. if compassion is important to Z, why doesn't he let himself act compassionately and feel dread at the same time? Quote: he's repressed himself if he "doesn't feel" dread. i'm guessing he might consider his response to be skilful and aligned with his own values and beliefs if he acts in a compassionate way. now, if he thinks it's wrong to feel dread, that sounds like insecurity and self-loathing to me, which is okay. my guess is he feels that dread is bad because he thinks he has to change how he chooses to act if he acknowledges the feeling. -------------------- "consensus on the nature of equilibrium is usually established by periodic conflict." -henry kissinger
| |||||||
|
Registered: 04/15/05 Posts: 11,089 |
| ||||||
Quote: No, I said we cannot choose the emotions which are evoked, but can choose how to respond to those emotions. Just as we cannot choose whether to be hungry, but can choose healthful foods rather than unhealthful ones. Response is the "food," reaction is the "hunger." Quote: They don't have to be mutually exclusive, but if I NEED to have everyone's approval, they often will be! If I want or prefer to have approval, I will not be "forced" to pretend in order to fulfill my need for everyone to approve of me. I can enjoy it when I get it, and appreciate that it is based on my true self. Quote: No, repression (in the unhealthy psych sense) does not apply to cognition, only emotion, and judgment and blame are NOT emotions. Quote: No, following this logic, you would attempt to build strength by lifting only the lightest things you could find, and then feel frustration when you continued to struggle to lift heavier objects. ![]() Quote: Again, I disagree that these are emotions, per se. I see them as interpretations of an emotion (fear) by our cognition. Therefore they are not giving us information about our needs, but about our negative thought habits. Quote:Quote: Z is not "making himself" feel compassion. He naturally feels compassion rather than dread, because he sees the event (Y expressing criticism and negativity) as neutral, and focuses instead on the motivations of the person initiating the event. He does not take it personally, thus has no reason to feel dread. Dread is not a "primary" emotional reaction, but a secondary reaction based upon past emotional reactions. If Z has not had a negative emotional experience of Y, he has no reason to feel dread. No need to repress or deny what you DO NOT FEEL. ![]() Quote: Why does Z have to judge feeling dread at all? The premise was not that he was feeling dread, and acting compassionate, but that the "reasonable person" could feel something else given the same interaction with Y.
| |||||||
|
oppositional ![]() Registered: 04/07/05 Posts: 1,133 Loc: aporia Last seen: 16 years, 10 months |
| ||||||
Quote: i agree that a person can choose which foods or objects to fill their needs. Quote: i disagree. we do not see what has no meaning for us. emotion and cognition are an inseparable continuum. cognitions are one kind of emotion in this larger sense, emotions one kind of cognition. repressing thoughts- don't cognitions such as blame or judgment have a meaning for a person? Quote: i suppose it depends on whether a person will grow stronger through an act; walking out in the cold makes no one stronger; lifting heavy weights does. Quote: we fear pain. is there a better example of the way cognition and emotion are inseparable? Quote: but Y causes him pain; the pain is real regardless of Y's motivations. Quote: i don't understand what you're saying here. Z doesn't feel dread? Quote: ah, so you're saying Z never had the bad experience with Y in the first place, so he has no dread prior to the meeting. so yes, a reasonable person might have a different interaction with Y, given different circumstances. are you saying that X ought to feel no dread because Z wouldn't? but X's circumstances are different; he has a very good reason to dread Y- X knows Y always puts him down. -------------------- "consensus on the nature of equilibrium is usually established by periodic conflict." -henry kissinger
| |||||||
|
Registered: 04/15/05 Posts: 11,089 |
| ||||||
|
OK, rather than do a point-by-point response again, I will ask you a question:
Are you content with the way you respond to challenging situations in your life? If so, you have no reason to work on your emotional responses! If not, (and this is most definitely still the case for me!) you will gain so much through developing these skills! I realize that you have a conflict about emotional repression seemingly being a part of this choice factor. Perhaps you can experiment with the techniques and see for yourself whether it feels repressive? My experience has been that I do not need to repress my emotions, and I do not feel victimized by them anymore. When I felt out of control and "robotic" in my responses to intense emotions, I often repressed them in order to feel safe. When a professor suggested to my class that we could pause for as long as we wanted between an emotion being activated and our response to it...I thought he was a nut! But, being a scientist, I had to try the experiment and prove him wrong. ![]() So my suggestion to you is this: don't believe anything I say. If you are interested in the ideas I have expressed, and what you read from Keyes and Ellis, experiment with them in your own life. to you, dear one.
| |||||||
|
oppositional ![]() Registered: 04/07/05 Posts: 1,133 Loc: aporia Last seen: 16 years, 10 months |
| ||||||
|
honestly i've done this before and found it limited. recently, i've stopped treating happiness as my object in life, so much; i'm less afraid of fear, pain, sadness, etc; i try to treat these feelings as teachers themselves- what can i learn about my relationship to the world (and myself) from the fact i feel so hopeless one day (for example)?
any barrier to emotion is repression. "choosing" away certain thoughts- as if thoughts have no emotional context- this is repression too IMO. i think repression can be useful if a person doesn't know how to deal with the emotion (i don't always know how to deal with mine, and i admit to using repression as a tool sometimes). yet repression is repression and an unlocked door to growth. in the end, what i feel i gain from my perspective, is that i'm more open to myself- if i don't like something, i'm more frank about it, i'm more apt to open my mouth, rather than trying to second-guess myself. example, if i say 'my suspicion doesn't mean this person's not out to screw me' when i feel suspicious- gotta be honest, in those situations, i didn't pay my suspicion any mind, and ended up getting screwed. Quote: safe from what? -------------------- "consensus on the nature of equilibrium is usually established by periodic conflict." -henry kissinger Edited by crunchytoast (09/22/05 07:37 PM)
| |||||||
| |||||||
| Shop: |
|
| Similar Threads | Poster | Views | Replies | Last post | ||
![]() |
Music = Math + Emotion ( = The Development of Man...?) ( |
2,756 | 29 | 06/10/05 09:00 AM by fireworks_god | ||
![]() |
do you believe in Choice? *DELETED* ( |
2,219 | 40 | 06/04/04 10:59 AM by Zoekend | ||
![]() |
Emotions vs. Reason | 829 | 7 | 06/09/03 08:22 PM by Murex | ||
![]() |
Morality & Choice ( |
1,944 | 35 | 12/19/02 05:39 PM by Swami | ||
![]() |
Emotional Vulnerability ( |
3,341 | 22 | 01/08/05 12:16 PM by incubaby_421 | ||
![]() |
Logic, Emotion, Mathematics, and the Universe ( |
5,474 | 47 | 02/23/04 07:29 AM by raytrace | ||
![]() |
Emotions Blah Blah Blah.... | 801 | 6 | 05/22/04 12:23 PM by Zero7a1 | ||
![]() |
There are **NO** Dualities or Polar Opposites in Emotions..... | 2,011 | 13 | 02/18/05 10:13 AM by gettinjiggywithit |
| Extra information | ||
| You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum 2,704 topic views. 1 members, 5 guests and 4 web crawlers are browsing this forum. [ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ] | ||




to you, dear one.

