External Considering and Good Manners

[loreta]

I believe that thinking about people and treating them a certain way because you place "respect" and that person under the same umbrella is a dangerous way of thinking and can keep one in illusion. I believe admiration can take over one's emotional center and can cloud their intellectual center. I believe that thinking about good manners and treating someone a certain way using the mentality of respect is a slippery slope.

I believe that people have an internal compass and when they grow up they are taught to act and behave a certain way. When they get introduced to "life" more and more they see other ways of acting and behaving. This internal compass now has something to compare and a choice is made. keep with what has been taught to them from early on or act more like the people in their life or muddy the water and a combination of behaviors are now adopted or realize that there is something more than what one has come across and rise above look for a new (psycopaths excluded)

Who said anything about 'admiration' Menna?

For me 'respect' means acceptance of a person's right to be treated with care and without prejudice.

You have implied that I use '...a dangerous way of thinking' and linked that to a '...cloud[ed]... intellectual center' and might be on a 'slippery slope.'

All that on the false premise that by 'respect' I meant 'admiration'

I respect you, Menna, because you are a living, breathing human being, and I have nothing in my awareness that says you have done anything to invalidate that respect. I don't 'admire' you though, because I simply don't know you or about the things you manifest in your life that would evoke admiration.

Respect and admiration are two different dynamics in my perception of them. Now knowing this I wonder if you would repost your response from a more informed standpoint.

I agree with Strawman, respect and admiration are two different things. For example: I respect Laura as a human being and because thanks to her I am aware of many things, I respect her and also I admire her because of her work, she is a good historian and an excellent writer and I admire writers. Two things. And respect, for me, is not to be blind, on the contrary. When I respect someone,even if I don't know this person, I accept this person in his totality, as I see her in this moment. Example: I help a old woman bringing her bags that are heavy. I respect her: I see that she is old, maybe very tired, I help her because I respect old people and this is not an illusion. Old people are real. Many times old people need help, but they are invisible the major part of the time, people don't see them. My compassion for them is first see them, this is contrary to live in a illusion. To be present is living in a state of awareness. My helping her, this old woman with her heavy bags, is good manners and also respect. Helping her I participated in something that bypass respect, who knows. :)

But maybe I did not understood correctly your relation, Menna, concerning respect and illusion.

 

[Jasmine]

I believe that thinking about people and treating them a certain way because you place "respect" and that person under the same umbrella is a dangerous way of thinking and can keep one in illusion. I believe admiration can take over one's emotional center and can cloud their intellectual center. I believe that thinking about good manners and treating someone a certain way using the mentality of respect is a slippery slope.

I believe that people have an internal compass and when they grow up they are taught to act and behave a certain way. When they get introduced to "life" more and more they see other ways of acting and behaving. This internal compass now has something to compare and a choice is made. keep with what has been taught to them from early on or act more like the people in their life or muddy the water and a combination of behaviors are now adopted or realize that there is something more than what one has come across and rise above look for a new (psycopaths excluded)

Who said anything about 'admiration' Menna?

For me 'respect' means acceptance of a person's right to be treated with care and without prejudice.

You have implied that I use '...a dangerous way of thinking' and linked that to a '...cloud[ed]... intellectual center' and might be on a 'slippery slope.'

All that on the false premise that by 'respect' I meant 'admiration'

I respect you, Menna, because you are a living, breathing human being, and I have nothing in my awareness that says you have done anything to invalidate that respect. I don't 'admire' you though, because I simply don't know you or about the things you manifest in your life that would evoke admiration.

Respect and admiration are two different dynamics in my perception of them. Now knowing this I wonder if you would repost your response from a more informed standpoint.

Hi Strawman, I think you made some very good points, but I wonder why you took Mennas post so personally? It looked to me like he had read the last post and started thinking about respect in context of this issue. I don't think it was meant as a personal attack on you. That's probably why you were put off by the word "admiration". It had nothing to do with you or your post. It sounds like menna was freely associating with words to try to make a point.

And I apologize if this may sound harsh but was it not arrogant for you to suggest to Menna, that from reading your reply, he now was in a more informed position to re-think and re-post based on what you (assumed he better have learned) after reading your post? After all you assumed his post was attacking you in the first place.

 

[Menna]

According to the dictionary...

"a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements."

Its easier to converse if words are used according to their definition on a forum it is tough to understand what one means when using words if one intends to use a word not by its definition.

Helping her I participated in something that bypass respect, who knows.

I agree seeing the elder women knowing that it would be hard for her to carry the bags because her bones, muscles, joints are weak is more than respect its knowledge its understanding. Understanding and knowledge is closer to the love and light that the C's talk about then respect is. Its next level kinda stuff IMO.

 

[Vic]

I believe that thinking about people and treating them a certain way because you place "respect" and that person under the same umbrella is a dangerous way of thinking and can keep one in illusion. I believe admiration can take over one's emotional center and can cloud their intellectual center. I believe that thinking about good manners and treating someone a certain way using the mentality of respect is a slippery slope.

I believe that people have an internal compass and when they grow up they are taught to act and behave a certain way. When they get introduced to "life" more and more they see other ways of acting and behaving. This internal compass now has something to compare and a choice is made. keep with what has been taught to them from early on or act more like the people in their life or muddy the water and a combination of behaviors are now adopted or realize that there is something more than what one has come across and rise above look for a new (psycopaths excluded)

Who said anything about 'admiration' Menna?

For me 'respect' means acceptance of a person's right to be treated with care and without prejudice.

You have implied that I use '...a dangerous way of thinking' and linked that to a '...cloud[ed]... intellectual center' and might be on a 'slippery slope.'

All that on the false premise that by 'respect' I meant 'admiration'

I respect you, Menna, because you are a living, breathing human being, and I have nothing in my awareness that says you have done anything to invalidate that respect. I don't 'admire' you though, because I simply don't know you or about the things you manifest in your life that would evoke admiration.

Respect and admiration are two different dynamics in my perception of them. Now knowing this I wonder if you would repost your response from a more informed standpoint.

Hi Strawman, I think you made some very good points, but I wonder why you took Mennas post so personally?

How do you mean 'so' personally, Jasmine? Menna's response was either to me personally, or it wasn't. I judged it as the former, and addressed the points he made. As it was me that raised the issue of 'respect' in the previous post I think it was probably a no-brainer that Menna was responding to me. I'm not sure, and I'm not going to assume, why you wrote 'so' personally. It suggests of course an inappropriate degree of response. If that's what you mean then I disagree. I responded to it in the context of how I perceived it. You've done the same in your response to me. But I hope to show that yours is based on assumption rather than fact.

[quote author=Jasmine]
It looked to me like he had read the last post and started thinking about respect in context of this issue. I don't think it was meant as a personal attack on you.
[/quote]

Then why are you talking about an 'attack?' I didn't see it as an attack. I saw it as feedback based on misinterpretation of my comments in that post. I sought to explain that misinterpretation, as well as the implications of that misinterpretation.

[quote author=Jasmine]
That's probably why you were put off by the word "admiration". It had nothing to do with you or your post. It sounds like menna was freely associating with words to try to make a point.
[/quote]

So that's your perception of Menna's post. You have every right to it. But are you saying your perception is the correct one, and mine is incorrect?

What makes you think I was 'put off' by the word 'admiration?' The way I read the post is that Menna regards respect and admiration as interchangeable terms. I don't, and I responded accordingly. I am sure there are people that do regard them as interchangeable terms, but there will be many who don't. When responding to a member's post it is, OSIT, a part of internal considering to do so with care. That would mean, in this case, reading it carefully. May I suggest that you go back and read my post - I clearly defined my interpretation of respect, and it has nothing at all to do with admiration.

[quote author=Jasmine]
And I apologize if this may sound harsh
[/quote]

So you apologise for something that you know may cause offence (harshness) but you carry on and do it anyway. It's a sort of hollow apology, Jasmine. A false one in fact.

[quote author=Jasmine]
but was it not arrogant for you to suggest to Menna, that from reading your reply, he now was in a more informed position to re-think and re-post based on what you (assumed he better have learned) after reading your post?
[/quote]

No, I don't think it was arrogant of me. If Menna's post was based on his definition of respect, and that differed from mine, as it was my post/comments that he responded to, wouldn't he be able to respond more accurately now that he was 'informed' that my definition of respect was different to his? That's not arrogance. It's adjusting assumptions to improve the dynamics of a discussion. Without that everyone continues to debate from inaccuracies. Where does that get anyone?

[quote author=Jasmine]
After all you assumed his post was attacking you in the first place.
[/quote]

Now there's arrogance, don't you think? As mentioned above I didn't see Menna's post as an attack. The assumption is yours, Jasmine, not mine. Regarding your own assumptions as truth is a dangerous game.

Was the Huh? emoticon that you end with necessary? Does it enhance the points you made?


Jasmine, I see that you have jumped on members of this forum before. I followed one such exchange and felt sad that the person you jumped on seemed to collapse under your weight. You seem to rush in and take no prisoners. I confess that I used to do the same. One thing I have learned is to let other people deal with their own growth where possible. It's all very well mentioning something to somebody. But 'mention' is the key word. Bludgeoning them is surely abridging free will. I'm fortunate to have a hard head, developed after years of bludgeoning. Not everyone has though, so it might be worth thinking about your motivation before wading into people.


Mod edit: fixed quotes

 

[Vic]

According to the dictionary...

"a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements."

Come on, Menna, raise the level here. I can give you definitions of 'respect' from other dictionaries that differ from the one you quote. Do we really want to get into a childish tit-for-tat game here. I am not talking about dictionary definitions of respect. I gave my definition in the first post, but I think you missed it, because it has nothing at all to do with admiration.

At least you have confirmed that you were responding to my post though.

Menna, what do you think of my post in response to yours about respect? Let's ignore the noise, and discuss it like relatively mature people. If we have misinterpreted each other it is a great opportunity to use external considering and come out the other end all the richer.

 

[Menna]

Menna's response was either to me personally, or it wasn't

Actually it wasn't any of the above it was more in the middle. (Look at the thread on splitting.) I was using a word by its definition that contains an emotional aspect. I was trying to make a point not just for YOU but for anyone and everyone who comes across this thread.

 

[Menna]

Do we really want to get into a childish tit-for-tat game here

I understand that you were using a different definition however the traditional definition does involve an emotional component. In the future I will avoid using your posts as a base to bring up other points because I don't want to cause you any more negative or frustrating emotions. I am sorry and I was not using external consideration when making my point as I should of used a disclaimer of sorts...Good Day :)

 

[Vic]

Do we really want to get into a childish tit-for-tat game here

In the future I will avoid using your posts as a base to bring up other points because I don't want to cause you any more negative or frustrating emotions...Good Day :)

You've extracted part of what I wrote to you and placed it into a different context. That's a wasted opportunity, Menna. For me, if not for you.

 

[Menna]

See edited post above. I understand what you were trying to convey in your post about respect I was using piggy backing on your post to make a point. I didn't consider how it might impact you. My bad

 

[Vic]

See edited post above. I understand what you were trying to convey in your post about respect I was using piggy backing on your post to make a point. I didn't consider how it might impact you. My bad

:) Thanks, Menna. In my introduction I tried to convey how I think and write in a way that avoids emotion, in order to keep discussions purely intellectual. The emotional has its place of course. But when I see something that I perceive to be a misunderstanding or misinterpretation I have this need to redress it - like a dog with a bone as they say.

Every box has to be ticked for me. Perhaps our exchange has highlighted this as something I need to work on. In terms of research you have to be like a dog with a bone, but maybe there are times when the bone can be left alone.

Please don't avoid using my posts as a base from which to raise issues. If it impacts on me negatively then that is my issue to deal with.

At the risk of sounding cheesy, I now admire you as well as respect you. Your response is admirable and something I hope to match.

 

[Jasmine]

:) Thanks, Menna. In my introduction I tried to convey how I think and write in a way that avoids emotion, in order to keep discussions purely intellectual.

Oh really?? I would never of guessed that based the rage and inaccuracy you unleashed in your post to me. I used much care and external consideration to you in my post. However, your reply post was completely devoid of it. You were downright rude! My only hope for you is that you would re-read this entire thread more than once.

Perhaps our exchange has highlighted this as something I need to work on.

Well at least some progress was made. Good for you Strawman!

 

[Carl]

:) Thanks, Menna. In my introduction I tried to convey how I think and write in a way that avoids emotion, in order to keep discussions purely intellectual.

Oh really?? I would never of guessed that based the rage and inaccuracy you unleashed in your post to me. I used much care and external consideration to you in my post. However, your reply post was completely devoid of it. You were downright rude! My only hope for you is that you would re-read this entire thread more than once.

Perhaps our exchange has highlighted this as something I need to work on.

Well at least some progress was made. Good for you Strawman!

Actually Jasmine, Strawman's initial reply to Menna wasn't particularly harsh, although it it could have been written in a different way and this whole minor misunderstanding could have been cleared up in a few words.


However you took it upon yourself to reprimand him after seeing his reply through your own distorted lens, and from here it looks like you were posting with emotional energy and making assumptions, jumping to conclusions, and generally being rude. Considering this is a thread on manners, it's pretty interesting to see. You could have instead said something like:


"Strawman, I think I see you getting defensive and nitpicking here but I could be wrong, could somebody else please chime in?"


But instead you went straight ahead and took your view of the situation as objective reality. Why do you think that is?


Your self importance is showing a lot more strongly than Strawman's in this latest reply.

 

[Jasmine]

:) Thanks, Menna. In my introduction I tried to convey how I think and write in a way that avoids emotion, in order to keep discussions purely intellectual.

Oh really?? I would never of guessed that based the rage and inaccuracy you unleashed in your post to me. I used much care and external consideration to you in my post. However, your reply post was completely devoid of it. You were downright rude! My only hope for you is that you would re-read this entire thread more than once.

Perhaps our exchange has highlighted this as something I need to work on.

Well at least some progress was made. Good for you Strawman!

Actually Jasmine, Strawman's initial reply to Menna wasn't particularly harsh, although it it could have been written in a different way and this whole minor misunderstanding could have been cleared up in a few words.


However you took it upon yourself to reprimand him after seeing his reply through your own distorted lens, and from here it looks like you were posting with emotional energy and making assumptions, jumping to conclusions, and generally being rude. Considering this is a thread on manners, it's pretty interesting to see. You could have instead said something like:


"Strawman, I think I see you getting defensive and nitpicking here but I could be wrong, could somebody else please chime in?"


But instead you went straight ahead and took your view of the situation as objective reality. Why do you think that is?


Your self importance is showing a lot more strongly than Strawman's in this latest reply.

Awe thanks Carlisle for mirroring back my behavior to me.

However I don't respect the way you presented it. And I don't agree with the rest of your post.

I made a special effort to be extra EC with my post to Strawman as it was a touchy subject. And I didn't see that same effort reciprocated in his rude reply or yours. So everybody can just take responsibility for their own actions here.

I will however try to take extra care in forming my comments in the future.

Thank you

 

[Menna]

I made a special effort to be extra EC with my post to Strawman as it was a touchy subject. And I didn't see that same effort reciprocated in his rude reply or yours. So everybody can just take responsibility for their own actions here

I do see where you are coming from Jasmine however you showed Strawman EC because it was in you to do…This is your current being or because you expected a certain type of action/reaction in return or a combination of things? People can only act based on how they know how to and what they have learned so far. Everyone on the forum is learning. I liked your post to Strawman and when I read it I said to myself that was well written but was the care unconditional strictly for strawman and the others who read it and can learn from it or where there other intentions/investments/attachments in the care taken?

I don't know you so I can't objectively say thats why I am asking questions.

 

[RflctnOfU]

It seems as though we get a demonstration of the topic of the thread, or at the least it's inverse, in the thread itself. This is a wonderful learning opportunity everyone, IMO.

Kris