External Considering and Good Manners

[Olesya]

Hi, Buddy, I read your post and several questions just popped up. First of all, why are you using abbreviations so much where it, maybe, not so needed? I understand that abbreviations can be useful, for example, if someone's writing a long title of some book or if it's an abbreviation of some scientific terms. What struck me is that you use it a lot. Is it really considerate to other people who are non-English speakers when it comes to simple phrases? Why not to write "in real life" instead of IRL, and "on the other hand" instead of OTOH? I did looked it up. Thank you for that.

I think the only difference between our viewpoints is the number of corrupt rules we see masquerading as good manners, for what it's worth.

I understood what you were saying - at least as it may relate to my experience. As a person with that hunter/gatherer temperament, I don't keep a list of ritual behaviors in my memory to automatically implement upon meeting up with a person or group, and I do see some 'corrupt rules' as needy people putting all the burden for their emotional comfort on me.

What is the hunter/gatherer temperament exactly? Can you please elaborate on that? And maybe, it's an assumption on your part that hunter/gatherers didn't have a code of conduct. Every society has one. And what do you mean by 'corrupt rules'? Please explain. If you mean by that the good manners, why do you think they are corrupt?

Still, through previous exposure to certain behaviors, familiarity with particular social environments and from being quick to pick up body language tells, I can remember or intuit what most people expect in terms of social ritual or whatever and simply do what seems necessary to fulfill some purpose. I'm thinking, here, of situations I want to be in. And I'm thinking of situations I don't want to find myself in: like failing to recognize a case of fetal alcohol syndrome and making an idiot of myself by saying something inappropriate about that person's style of walk or mentioning the "R" word.

What is the "R" word?

And as far as dealing with people I already know, if a friend said he was texting because I was being too boring to talk to, I'd probably hug him for his honesty.

What you've described seems very strange to me. If you see that someone is bored when you're talking, why not just stop talking? And I think that texting while someone is talking is quite rude. There are other ways to let a person know that you're not interested in hearing something. Sometimes a simple request as "Please can we talk about something else" would suffice. And shouldn't someone be even more considerate and perceptive especially when the situation involves your friends? Real friends?

Or, if said friend staying with me woke up in a bad mood and didn't say "shut up" when I teased him a little about his facial expression, his posture or bed-head hair, I'd be suspiciously surprised, but then, after I laughed and offered him breakfast that I already cooked, he would be suitably impressed and grateful.

If your friend woke up in the bad mood and you see it, why then to tease him? So, even after you cooked him breakfast, he might be not so grateful and impressed. This teasing may exacerbate his bad mood and it might linger for a long time with who knows what consequences for someone else. If your friend doesn't visibly show his displeasure, it doesn't mean it's not there.

I guess what I'm saying is that spontaneity and minimal habitual behaviors, even when it comes to manners, tend to be more natural for me and, as I sometimes suspect from my own experience, more natural to some other people too - at least on occasion. So, what constitutes both 'manners' and 'rudeness' depends, and a lack of a certain expression of "manners" doesn't always indicate intended rudeness.

It may be that 'spontaneity', it's just carelessness or lack of mindfulness? And what do you mean by intended rudeness? Open aggression? If you can, please explain it, Buddy.

The important thing for me, IRL, is remembering to pay attention to other people's signs of apparent stress levels and to respond accordingly to see if it's my behavior that will make them more comfortable. I tend to experiment first and ask questions as a last resort if I can't figure something out.

Why would you want to experiment? It's real people we're talking about, right?


Edit: Fixed quotes

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

I think on the one hand you should "treat others as you want to be treated". On the other hand, this should be a baseline only. The other part of it is you consider the sensibilities/expectations of the other person regardless of whether it matches yours or not. If you're not sure, err on the side of caution.

I can think of a few people who, upon hearing "treat others as you want to be treated" will say "well I don't care about this or that, so I didn't think they would either". That's where you should disregard your "lack of care" and instead assume the other person cares about anything and everything that could possibly be rude, inconsiderate, etc, until you know otherwise.

I think the real problem arises is when someone genuinely didn't conceive of something as being possibly inconsiderate - like Laura's guest looking through her kitchen cabinets. To most people such things are blatantly obvious, even intuitive, so it's shocking that someone could be so out of touch with such things.

I had a guest in my parents' house who kept turning off all the lights in the house after everyone went to bed because she was used to sleeping in the dark. We had no guest bedroom and she was sleeping on an inflatable mattress in the living room. First, it was already rude to turn the lights off without asking. Second, my mom turned them back on and told her that they're on for 2 reasons: Our grandma cannot see in the dark and needs the light to make it to the bathroom at night. Second, my brother was out, and he needed the porch light to see the house when he comes home. So her answer to that was, "well he can use a flashlight on his phone or something". Needless to say that didn't go over well with my mom, and her guest status was promptly revoked.

Edit: And it's not as if the house was lit up, just a porch light and a small light in the hallway upstairs!

What is curious to everyone in my family about that situation is how oblivious this girl was to basic etiquette, and how she had no clue that her suggestion that my brother just use a flashlight was completely out of line. So it is interesting how consideration of others comes natural to some people, and is some foreign concept to others. Is it just a case of upbringing or is something more internal that's missing?

 

[RflctnOfU]

So it is interesting how consideration of others comes natural to some people, and is some foreign concept to others. Is it just a case of upbringing or is something more internal that's missing?

I think it isn't as simple as 'this vs that'. Upbringing certainly has a part to play in essence development, or lack thereof. But so does environment and geneology. Gurdjieff, in connection with External/Internal consideration, spoke about the 'need to be sincere' that most people have. This phenomena strikes me as a facet of Narcicism. Perhaps what is missing internally is the ability of introspection?? Due to upbringing, environment etc..? Or even a sort of 'anti-introspection' introspection that is implanted during Oskiano/Education. Here in the states there is a general attitude of entitlement displayed by the population - there could be a connection there as well.

Just my $.02 :)

Kris

 

[Lan8r]

Thank you for this thread. I have been reading it with interest lately, although sporadically, due to the fact that my Mother has been visiting. It has been extremely interesting reading, due to the fact that I am currently a host and have a guest. Now, the guest happens to be my Mother, so that changes the general dynamic a little bit! But the fact that her visit was pretty much last minute gives me pause to remember etiquette.

I always put in for time off around my birthday, which I recently celebrated. This one is a millstone, the big 50! Normally, I spend my birthday celebrating the fact that I am still alive and kicking. This year I had hoped to do a road trip with my pup and visit a dear friend along the way. My financial situation was not really working in my favor however, and then my Mom broke the news that she was planning a trip here because, 'It's not every year that your oldest child celebrates the half century mark'!.

Anyway, that has made me feel like I have been forced into the position of Host. And I imagine that happens to alot of us. Sometimes it's a family member, or maybe a friend coming to town, that needs a place to crash for a few days. Even though we may be very happy to see them, our guests can really cramp our style sometimes. My Mom has, overall, been a 'good guest', in between being the mother. (It is sometimes hard to be made to feel like a child when you're Fifty Years Old!).

But I guess what I have really been considering, is how difficult it is, how much 'work' is required to be a good host when you feel the choice is imposed upon you. 'Imposed' may be too strong a word. It may be more like 'required'. When I realized that the money was more than tight for my 'big plans,' and before I could even figure out a way around that, my Mother announced her own plans. I capitulated. I gave up on my own plans and tried to wrap my head around spending some time with her. I love my Mother, and we are all getting older. But, it is hard to be a good host when I keep thinking of what I might be doing if I had my own way!

Ironically, that has made me think about what kind of guest I have been in the past. And how I can improve on my 'guest-iquette' in the future. I hope that I would be grateful to be welcomed into someone's home and would be careful not to cramp their style or to impose myself.

 

[Lan8r]

Buddy, you posted:

As a person with that hunter/gatherer temperament, I don't keep a list of ritual behaviors in my memory to automatically implement upon meeting up with a person or group, and I do see some 'corrupt rules' as needy people putting all the burden for their emotional comfort on me.

I was wondering if you could extrapolate for me, I am a little slow, on the specifics of the 'hunter/gatherer' temperament. I am sorry, but I do not understand what you mean by that. But then, I am unfamiliar with the accepted model of temperament of 'hunter/gatherers'. I did not even realize that hunter/gatherers did not have ritual behaviors in their memory that were implemented upon meeting up with others.

But then, I have spent too much time in the barn with animals that do have ritual behaviors that are implemented when meeting others, and too much time in the office environment observing ritual behaviors in humans on a daily basis!

So, I guess I am just curious as to what, exactly, constitutes a 'hunter/gatherer' temperament.

 

[Buddy]

So, I guess I am just curious as to what, exactly, constitutes a 'hunter/gatherer' temperament.

AD/HD; the "hunter" in Thomm Hartmann's "hunter/farmer" model; neurodiverse in the spectrum that autists' prefer to model as neurotypical/neurodiversity; or whatever is your preferred description for someone who is normally (without deliberate effort) not micro-synced to the minutia of everday neurochemical balancing acts (routine social bonding habits?) between people in social circumstances. The problem with lists is remembering what's on them when the bulleted points really seem pointless.

Hypothetical example: You and I have quite a few shared experiences and have become what we both think of as "good friends." I go away on some project, hobby, or work assignment or special investigation or whatever and you don't see me for 5 or 6 months. Next time we meet, you get all excited, want to hug me, dance with me, shake my hand for 5 minutes, pat me on the back, ask a lot of personal questions like "where ya been, where'd ya go, what'cha been doing, how come you didn't blah, blah, blah..." but you don't do any of that because, just from my act of walking up to you, you've been hit with an impression that I don't, or must not, really care about you or something else like that. And that impression is formed when you notice that when I approached, I started talking to you as if we hadn't been apart for more than 30 seconds or so.

Should you try to ease your discomfort anyway by carrying on, you might get the impression I'm looking at you strangely; like I'm wondering what's wrong with you or what changed in you while I was away that you get all gushy on me and do you even have a life? Because I'm acting like hardly any time has passed and I'm still as good a friend this minute as I was when we parted company and to prove it, I invite you to my house tonight for more of our typical deep conversations about the kinds of things we normally like to talk about (because we're good friends, remember?).

I hope I'm not conveying the wrong impression here. I'm not anti-social as I experience myself internally. You might understand better if you'd read a few of the experiences I've been through as a child. Laura once surprised me with her observation that a certain experience I described was high trauma and that trauma extends to emotional abuse as well as the physical stuff. I mention this because some of who I am today may be due to having had to bury lots of my childhood tenderness, love and openness in favor of survival strategies that were bound to inhibit me socially.

Plus, I was a 'late-bloomer' in every way from sexual maturation to interacting with people who apply all the usual, standard social skills. Plus, I just don't like some people or the stupid (my probably ignorant opinion) activities they engage in. I never had a lot in common with my ordinary peers at any age. I can't stand football or organized sports; I see no sense in car-racing, I don't watch TV unless I'm in front of the set to learn something, I don't hunt animals for sport, I respect all life and don't even litter because it makes me feel bad about myself. So, I don't have a lot of the same habits and behaviors some people do.

So, everything considered, what would we talk about if we weren't already good friends for what we both would have considered to be more important, substantial reasons? :)

As an aside, I'm happy to say I've recovered a lot of my previously buried self already, and I'm not really that bad. I credit the EE program for some personal improvement.

Does any of the above clarify?

 

[darksai]

I can think of a few people who, upon hearing "treat others as you want to be treated" will say "well I don't care about this or that, so I didn't think they would either". That's where you should disregard your "lack of care" and instead assume the other person cares about anything and everything that could possibly be rude, inconsiderate, etc, until you know otherwise.

In addition to that is likelihood that they actually do care and/or want to be treated in a particular way but don't admit it consciously, either to themselves or others. In other words, rationalizing their behavior after, or even in anticipation of, the fact. I don't quite agree with trying to consider anything and everything. If you're overly polite, then others tend to be "nicer" and that makes it harder to figure out what actually offends them, not to mention sniffing out predators. I think it's best to have a reasonable baseline of manners and politeness that most decent people would find acceptable that allows for inflated egos and overly sensitive personalities to show themselves but also adapt to situations where it would be wise to accommodate for particular mores.

 

[obyvatel]

So, I guess I am just curious as to what, exactly, constitutes a 'hunter/gatherer' temperament.

AD/HD; the "hunter" in Thomm Hartmann's "hunter/farmer" model; neurodiverse in the spectrum that autists' prefer to model as neurotypical/neurodiversity; or whatever is your preferred description for someone who is normally (without deliberate effort) not micro-synced to the minutia of everday neurochemical balancing acts (routine social bonding habits?) between people in social circumstances.

Hi Buddy,
This part was quite difficult to understand. Not everybody has read Thomm Hartmann - I haven't.

[quote author=Buddy]
Hypothetical example: You and I have quite a few shared experiences and have become what we both think of as "good friends." I go away on some project, hobby, or work assignment or special investigation or whatever and you don't see me for 5 or 6 months. Next time we meet, you get all excited, want to hug me, dance with me, shake my hand for 5 minutes, pat me on the back, ask a lot of personal questions like "where ya been, where'd ya go, what'cha been doing, how come you didn't blah, blah, blah..." but you don't do any of that because, just from my act of walking up to you, you've been hit with an impression that I don't, or must not, really care about you or something else like that. And that impression is formed when you notice that when I approached, I started talking to you as if we hadn't been apart for more than 30 seconds or so.

Should you try to ease your discomfort anyway by carrying on, you might get the impression I'm looking at you strangely; like I'm wondering what's wrong with you or what changed in you while I was away that you get all gushy on me and do you even have a life? Because I'm acting like hardly any time has passed and I'm still as good a friend this minute as I was when we parted company and to prove it, I invite you to my house tonight for more of our typical deep conversations about the kinds of things we normally like to talk about (because we're good friends, remember?).
[/quote]

Didn't quite get what you are trying to say. You do not like a good friend to express positive emotions and ask about how you have been while you were away after you went away without telling him/her?

 

[RflctnOfU]

So it is interesting how consideration of others comes natural to some people, and is some foreign concept to others. Is it just a case of upbringing or is something more internal that's missing?

I think it isn't as simple as 'this vs that'. Upbringing certainly has a part to play in essence development, or lack thereof. But so does environment and geneology. Gurdjieff, in connection with External/Internal consideration, spoke about the 'need to be sincere' that most people have. This phenomena strikes me as a facet of Narcicism. Perhaps what is missing internally is the ability of introspection?? Due to upbringing, environment etc..? Or even a sort of 'anti-introspection' introspection that is implanted during Oskiano/Education. Here in the states there is a general attitude of entitlement displayed by the population - there could be a connection there as well.

Just my $.02 :)

Kris

This article -- Children are suffering a severe play deficit -- here: http://www.sott.net/article/266793-Children-are-suffering-a-severe-play-deficit -- sheds some light on how upbringing can create, or not, manners and social awareness.

Kris

 

[DreamGod]

I think on the one hand you should "treat others as you want to be treated". On the other hand, this should be a baseline only. The other part of it is you consider the sensibilities/expectations of the other person regardless of whether it matches yours or not. If you're not sure, err on the side of caution.

I can think of a few people who, upon hearing "treat others as you want to be treated" will say "well I don't care about this or that, so I didn't think they would either". That's where you should disregard your "lack of care" and instead assume the other person cares about anything and everything that could possibly be rude, inconsiderate, etc, until you know otherwise.

I think the real problem arises is when someone genuinely didn't conceive of something as being possibly inconsiderate - like Laura's guest looking through her kitchen cabinets. To most people such things are blatantly obvious, even intuitive, so it's shocking that someone could be so out of touch with such things.

I had a guest in my parents' house who kept turning off all the lights in the house after everyone went to bed because she was used to sleeping in the dark. We had no guest bedroom and she was sleeping on an inflatable mattress in the living room. First, it was already rude to turn the lights off without asking. Second, my mom turned them back on and told her that they're on for 2 reasons: Our grandma cannot see in the dark and needs the light to make it to the bathroom at night. Second, my brother was out, and he needed the porch light to see the house when he comes home. So her answer to that was, "well he can use a flashlight on his phone or something". Needless to say that didn't go over well with my mom, and her guest status was promptly revoked.

Edit: And it's not as if the house was lit up, just a porch light and a small light in the hallway upstairs!

What is curious to everyone in my family about that situation is how oblivious this girl was to basic etiquette, and how she had no clue that her suggestion that my brother just use a flashlight was completely out of line. So it is interesting how consideration of others comes natural to some people, and is some foreign concept to others. Is it just a case of upbringing or is something more internal that's missing?

May be you dont remember but you gave me the entrance to this concept of "external and internal consideration", I couldnt find the reference where you gave me the glossary link to this concept, but then again, you have a very clear idea of what you are talking about and you put it in a very clear way.

 

[Menna]

"Treat others as you want to be treated"

As I have learned from this forum and other esoteric psychological books, quotes from the past that made sense or rang true to me no long have that same effect. As far as this quote above goes I don't believe it to be true anymore or to better put it the right way to treat others. The way YOU want to be treated in one certain situation might not be right for the OTHER person in the same situation. We all have programing and wounds from childhood and our internal compass's are off. If we treat others the same way we "Think" we want to be treated it might not be the correct type of treatment for that person in that specific situation. Does this quote sound narcissistic to others like it does to me?

Maybe we could rework this quote to say..."With all of your knowledge, experience and current level of being take time to treat others and learn from mistakes to improve treatment on a daily, weekly, monthly, and year’s basis."

Also just reading through the thread it seems to me that some people are overly sensitive and take things personally. This is obviously my personal opinion and not a factual statement but just want to bring this up. Personally SAO if I had a guest over it was night time and he/she was going to bed and turned off a light I would simply say my grandma needs light on to go to the bathroom sorry for the inconvenience I don't consider this internal consideration or similar to Laura’s example of someone clearly invading privacy. If someone does something where in most parts of the world its acceptable and healthy to do said thing (book recommended on the forum "Lights out") Then I believe the external consideration is on the person that wants to tell the friend to not do said “normal” habit.

 

[Laura]

I would say that "treat others as you want to be treated" has a deeper context. That is, you want other people to know you, know what you like and don't like, know what you need or don't need, and maybe, if they really care for you, know when to tell you "no" because they know something is not good for you and you will thank them later.

Otherwise, treating other people "as you want to be treated" can become just an exercise in projection.

Think about it this way. If someone gives you a gift, very often, they give you something that THEY would like. If you are really paying attention and care about this person, when time comes for you to give them a gift, you will remember what they gave you and look for something similar. Because, in a sense, we all usually give what it is we want or need, even in terms of affection etc. So, if we are paying attention in this way, it can be pretty easy to figure out how another person actually does want to be treated and not assume that they want to be treated as you do which could be very wrong.

 

[Menna]

I would say that "treat others as you want to be treated" has a deeper context. That is, you want other people to know you, know what you like and don't like, know what you need or don't need, and maybe, if they really care for you, know when to tell you "no" because they know something is not good for you and you will thank them later.

Otherwise, treating other people "as you want to be treated" can become just an exercise in projection.

Think about it this way. If someone gives you a gift, very often, they give you something that THEY would like. If you are really paying attention and care about this person, when time comes for you to give them a gift, you will remember what they gave you and look for something similar. Because, in a sense, we all usually give what it is we want or need, even in terms of affection etc. So, if we are paying attention in this way, it can be pretty easy to figure out how another person actually does want to be treated and not assume that they want to be treated as you do which could be very wrong.

Exactly...Without looking deeper into the quote and at its deeper meaning I believe most look at the quote and then use it as a projection on to others...It is true that others usually give what they want and its very interesting that in terms of affection we give what we want. THis gives me a great chance to observe myself when being affectionate as in this time emotions are running high and my observing factor is being clouded by my emotions and it is tough to catch myself and thing "is this what the other wants at this time." D you know why when a persons intimate emotions are running on high its tough to observe oneself? This is a big part of the work that I can see I need to work on because if someone says something to me the wrong way or a peson cuts me off in traffic I have progressed to the point where I can catch myself or the negative emotions don't even arise but when being intimate the intimate emotions cloud my ability to remember myself and the situation and the other. Is it because the emotional center at that time is not balanced with the others?

(SAO Forgive me I just reread the last page of this thread and your post...After you explained that the light had to be on so the elder could see and at that very point when the guest talked back then the guess crossed the line IMO)

 

[Vic]

Hi Menna

Something that you wrote struck me:

"some people are overly sensitive and take things personally"

I absolutely agree, but then I started wondering about who it is that judges the 'overly' scale - what is 'underly.' or even 'normally' sensitive?

Even if a person doesn't 'take things personally' they are certainly 'giving things personally' when they judge another to be exceeding the acceptable level of sensitivity - especially when there is no universal law on an acceptable level. Not to my knowledge anyway.

Be grateful for your thoughts on this.

 

[Menna]

Even if a person doesn't 'take things personally' they are certainly 'giving things personally' when they judge another to be exceeding the acceptable level of sensitivity - especially when there is no universal law on an acceptable level. Not to my knowledge anyway.

Be grateful for your thoughts on this.

I understand what you are saying and in my first post I said.

Also just reading through the thread it seems to me that some people are overly sensitive and take things personally. This is obviously my personal opinion and not a factual statement but just want to bring this up.

What I meant by saying what is bolded above is exactly what you said that there is no universal law that this is just based on who I am and what I see. I only say this because once you have been through a certain number of painful or hurtful experiences you start to guage what impacts you in a negative way, what you have to address and what you can just shake off and not let the comment or action drain your energy

and no most people aren’t giving things personally they are giving things mechanically to be giving things personally the giver has to be a person not a machine

G goes over this in one of his books I am going to mess up his quote as I read this a while ago and lent the book to a friend but he says something like....If a fool disrespects me I don't care because he is a fool.

Now each situation is different if you have to work with this person, he or she is a friend or family then the situation should be handled using external consideration but if its a passer byer (stranger) whats the big deal?