Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

Avala

Dagobah Resident
Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

Laura said:
This really made me chuckle!
My apologies if needed, Laura (don’t know what “chuckles" means, and I don’t have dictionary with me now)

I just tried to tell that your work speaks for you, however you sound, and maybe everyones work and life should speak for that person, and that can be the vector (one of many) to whom may we trust, but again ask and ask.Not be focused on external signs and expressions of the person.This written way of communication may have its advantages because we cant relly our judgements with that how person looks or talks,which envolves many of our preprogramed thoughts and reactions,everyone will imagine different person, although that imagined person will somehow be for us what we expect to be not real one, and maybe if we can be more and more open we will see real person, even in this written way (just my thoughts, and its maybe confusingly written)


Miss Isness said:
No need to be in a hurry, just give people what they are 'asking for' through their actions, and learn to trust yourself.
Found this also constructive.
 

Gandalf

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Avala said:
Laura said:
This really made me chuckle!
My apologies if needed, Laura (don’t know what “chuckles" means, and I don’t have dictionary with me now)
Hi Avala,

My native language is french and when i do not understand a word and ia m on the web, i use a dictionnary on the web.

Here is a link for a dictionnary for many languages translation.

http://www.wordreference.com/enfr/chuckles
 

Avala

Dagobah Resident
Thanks Namaste, I sometimes use online translator machine, didn’t have the time,and was eager to write that later part of my post. Here it is:

chuckle = smesak, smjesak, prigusen smeh zadovoljstva, prigusen smijeh zadovoljstva

It sims good, its ok then :) sorry for off topic
 

Beau

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Networking helps Carpe. If you feel like something that has been said is not true, if it feels "off", then you should definitely speak up. It does not matter if a mod or admin is the one who said or a fresh fish. There are no titles here really. We are all learning and we are all capable of being wrong at any moment. I know I have, and I believe that if I am mistaken, that by sharing it with a group like we have here that my mistake will be pointed out.

Question everything! Except for Atreides ;)
 

Amelopsis

Padawan Learner
Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

beau said:
Networking helps Carpe. If you feel like something that has been said is not true, if it feels "off", then you should definitely speak up. It does not matter if a mod or admin is the one who said or a fresh fish. There are no titles here really. We are all learning and we are all capable of being wrong at any moment. I know I have, and I believe that if I am mistaken, that by sharing it with a group like we have here that my mistake will be pointed out.

Question everything! Except for Atreides ;)
This thread and Beau's comment made me decide to speak up, simply for the sake of sharing my thoughts - so thanks in advance for indulging me!

Carpe Diem's concerns about trust and from whom to take advice strike me as a bit strange. I think some of the comments in between the original post and mine here, do address the issues of critical thought and personal trust in one's self which must be given a great deal of import; however the original notion of immediately trusting the advice of those who registered in Jan '06 or who have a 'V' avatar, etc. simply struck me as naive, and suprised me.

I have visited this forum for a period much longer than I've been registered, and since then I've not been a very frequent commentor/participant. I have been learning a great deal, largely by having been directed to reading material of interest, and I'm also still making my way through many of Laura's books, Mouravieff, and other recommended reading.
My personal feelings are that some of the members here form a very constant, and seemingly tight-knit group. This made me a little trepidatious about sharing, not to mention that my very first post went (and remains) unanswered. (I recognised shortly after that it was likely due to my lack of elaboration, leaving the impression of a quest for answers to my question rather than a discussion on the topic...true networking?)

I'm not certain that I would take anyone's advice 'simply because'....How could I possibly know that their 'thinking hammer' isn't in some state of disrepair? How could I know that they used it at all in giving the advice, no matter who they might be, or how long they may have been here? Certainly though, I would consider the advice carefully....use it to forge my own Hammer and make it more solid, more reliable, more readily useable. Determining who's advice to consider how carefully is where I think the criteria are most usefully applied.

I've found that what works for me, is to digest and assess before contributing very quickly. This is also due in no small part to my own nature and personal history...I've worked very hard to overcome my own tendencies to 'speak first, think later' and this is a thing of which I try to maintain a constant awareness because it does a dis-service to both me and the reader.

I hope that my sharing these thoughts might be useful in better explaining 'who' I am, and perhaps also as consideration. (look at me with my lofty intentions!;))
 

Keit

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
beau said:
Networking helps Carpe. If you feel like something that has been said is not true, if it feels "off", then you should definitely speak up. It does not matter if a mod or admin is the one who said or a fresh fish. There are no titles here really. We are all learning and we are all capable of being wrong at any moment. I know I have, and I believe that if I am mistaken, that by sharing it with a group like we have here that my mistake will be pointed out.

Question everything! Except for Atreides ;)
Ohh, yes..Atreides is GOD...no better then GOD...he is a teh admin ;)
The are no titles here, mind you..:)

p.s Sorry for offtopic...
 

Azur

The Living Force
Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

CarpeDiem said:
Nothing is as it seems.
Acquiring false knowledge is worse than not acquiring knowledge at all.
False knowledge in the Work may be deadly
But what to do if reading Gurdjieff / Mouravieff is not enough in practical terms? Whom to trust in Work?
Carpe,

Thank you for posting this: for many reasons. I have gone through the very same thing MANY times while interacting here. It isn't easy to kill that particular monster, the one that wants the answers, the one that wants the answers that will facilitate a salve, or allay that alarming fear, to put it to sleep so that things will feel better.

Many people in this thread have eloquently expressed this, and have done so in other, previous threads (on many subjects), enough so that I was able in crucial times to hold on to a mere speck of understanding, a grain of sand in a personal/interface to the World tornado, that despite so many other pressures, I felt held the only true hope of unraveling why the tornado exists in the first place. It is like this for me, and I think I see the same thing in what you say.

Don't despair. You're interactions here have effects that you might not even be aware of.

Case in point:

CarpeDiem said:
When I read Azur’s post with advice to SAO to do stalking
Azur said:
But I have a question for you SAO: why were you frustrated and sick by this exchange? Was there something bothering you that needed to be resolved? The resolution of the "thing" has indicators that need to be stalked. Has something tickled your emotional center?
It seems that this minor drama has or could be rather a good thing all in all. If everyone could recall their impressions at every instance (as the posts rolled in and changed aspects), it could be beneficial to see how perception (possibly constraining the full set of possibilities) and programs work hand in hand, on an individual basis.
And it bears examining WHY so many people willingly "paid" energy in seeing where this would go. What was at stake? The initial setup certainly held a well crafted hook, i.e. the "carrot".
What was gained, and what was lost by this series of posts, and by whom? (And here I mean those directly involved and more importantly, the OTHERS, as observers).
I understood it one-way: senior member (like QFG) is giving a generous advice in Work to listen to and follow.
What happened next, Azur’s reply to SAO seemed to me a complete appeasement and in direct emotional contradiction to his/her previous post and logically (to me) I had a gut feeling that his/her previous post / advice in Work should be disregarded (if I will ever find myself in the same/similar situation as SAO I would not follow that advice).
I'll break this down, and give you "inside" information, i.e. what I was thinking, as to what this post was really about.

I had read SAO's post (and having read his posts over the years) was surprised (and slightly alarmed) about what he had written concerning his "state of mind", or rather, and this is the important part: what I thought he was saying about his state of mind. I "read" it a certain way, continued with the assumption and asked him to "have a look" to see if this was the case. (Factor: He isn't a newbie to the Work, and I have grown to respect his responses, a lot of what he posts has personal resonance. But even then, I never let that sway me: content, and the weighing of such is the important part.)

His response clearly indicated that I had read it wrong, and that was that. Except for these very important other aspects: when something is stirred within that goads me to write, a long distillation process occurs. Not so much for proper grammar or any such, but the internal analysis of what it is that stirred me to respond, what it is that I feel/think should be communicated, why the communication should take place and what it really is that I'm really doing by doing so. I've probably deleted or abandoned 80% or more of the posts I was going to make since signing on here because of the understanding that came out of this process (posting was no longer necessary). Anything that makes it through, feels "right" or at least clear. The thing is, at any one point, although it may look like advice is being given, it may actually be the reverse! When you fully, as you are, think you reach "clarity" and post, it is absolutely fantastic when the response shows you something that you HADN'T seen yourself. (And here I mean in your assessment of the situation).


There are three things here that were important when I finally posted (some of these postmortem, no pun intended):

1) Was my assessment correct?
2) Why I was alarmed that SOA (under my bad read) might feel the way I thought he/she was about the M'adventures posts?
3) Why did I put a particular member "on the spot"?


On 1), the response laid that to rest. Result? Data for understanding how to further calibrate my "reading" instrument. (It may be I wasn't bringing to bear full discernment here, lulled into a false sense of previous "good" content by "automatic previous good content rating", and didn't really look further than the words, as I usually do.)

On 2), This speaks directly to what you are saying in this thread. I was dismayed (before knowing it was a false assessment, a mis-read on my part), that such a person, not only familiar with the material, and working it (as so many threads and posts of a revelatory nature indicated), would be so "duped". (Again, the response cleared up my bad assessment). Why was this important that someone (apparently) stalking so well, and seemingly falling prey to such an obvious display of BS? Because it is of utmost importance to me that as many as possible succeed here. Even if I never achieve it personally, I harbor a wish, a hope, whatever you want to call it, that someone can do it. I will verily help anyone who attempts, regardless of whether I can or not. I will die happy if I can help someone else over that last rung in the ladder, in whatever form it takes. This was my concern. (And this actually explains a lot of my "sharp tongued" posts over the years, it's another program, verily.)

On 3), the conciliatory tone in my response, realizing (happily) that my read was wrong, was because even though it seemed I was "presenting" a mirror, I was really asking for one myself [Edit: Was I gushing because SOA didn't "tear me a new one". No. That would have been easier and welcomed because there would have something to work on that was pointed out. The reason is feeling bad for "poking" someone over a bad read. I'm grateful SOA took it in good stride.) And SOA obliged, impeccably. As many others here have obliged in the past. He/she actually evaluated what I said, had a look within, and returned valuable feedback. It is of utmost importance to have such an honest network of willing people: understanding isn't cut and dried, discordance rules. There is perseverance here, despite that, and because of the understanding of it.


And one of the most important things you may not know, Carpe, is that you spotted something in my response. Now you know why. Had that scenario (as explicated in 2)) occurred to you when you read it? It's almost impossible to fully understand the total possibilities, but to appreciate their existence goes a long way. (others have said this exact same thing in this thread, in other words).


The other thing that you could possibly not know of, and that I will share here is this: you've assumed that I was a senior member of QFS, and I can say that I'm not such. I had applied 3 years ago, while in a frenzied discovery (and related reading binge and finally drinking from a fountain that bore explanations), and during the process realized something very important: at that time I was actually running programs (while in knowledge of what that meant) that sought a refuge and secondly, personal validation. When I realized this and disengaged, I repaired to address this. The first was fairly easy, as it was something I have always felt was an escape (even before finding the concepts of the Work). The second, I discovered was so deeply rooted, and having multiple reasons from circumstance and previous life experiences, that it looked like an interminable rabbit hole. This has been, for me, identified as a "marker" program that has engendered most of the other programs (but certainly not all).

If you had not shared your thoughts here, I would not have known to what extent I had been successful in killing that second program. Can you see how valuable, even if you cannot always see it firsthand, your involvement in a network can bear fruit?


Thank you, BTW.

Cheers.
 

ScioAgapeOmnis

The Living Force
Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

Azur, you may be surprised that when I read your post above, I really had no idea what you were talking about when you said I presented you with a mirror. I was scratching my head going "I did?". Come to think of it I'm still not 100% on this... do you mean that paragraph where I pretended to be arguing for argument's sake to make some convoluted point (that was actually much better expressed in that South Park quote)? It seems that the question about you putting me "on the spot" stuck with you, even though I never intended it to be seriously considered. It kinda reminds me of what cops do on highways. 20 people speed at 75 miler per hour, but of course there's only 1 cop, and he pulls over only 1 speeder out of those 20 - it's always the guy/gal who gleefully assumed it'll be one of the other 19 that gets pulled over. A popular question is "well they were doing it too, why did you stop me and not them, why does god hate me so?". Well, there's only one cop, and he had to stop somebody, so today it just happened to be you. This question of "Why me?" just seems to be so self-important. So if you're trying to answer it, you gotta consider the source/validity of the question too. Sometimes the answer could simply be "Why not?"

I think putting others on spots, and putting self on spots as Carpe did in this thread, is really what we do around here, and when done with sincerity it seems to always be a beneficial thing, never detrimental to anything but ego. I know Carpe is by far not the only one to share his concerns, but it is through putting himself "on the spot" (which clearly wasn't easy) that this was brought to light and discussed and others come out and say they have/are experiencing something similar. And he definitely put himself on the spot because at the end he surmised that his thread contains abusive content and felt the need to apologize for it and even suggested deletion of his own post. But he was sincere, I don't think he was abusive, and I honestly see absolutely nothing that he should be sorry for - he is simply at a point where I think each one of us either has been, is, or will be in the process of our growth. And I don't think that's anything to be sorry for.

Anybody can do a book or movie review, or discuss theoretical aspects of the Work and remain in a nice comfy shell while at it. But although Carpe's post might've lacked some clarity and most likely had several problems with the specific content of it, he opened himself up, allowed himself to be "vulnerable" to post it, and it kinda shook him up a bit as he kinda had to overcome his "safety protocols" to do it. So me putting you on the spot, or you putting me on the spot can only be bad for our ego and self-importance and personality shell, but if you're sincere, I don't think a question like "Why ME!?" or "Who does HE think he is, he should look at himself first!" will be in control of the response. It might pop into your mind, but it's just an echo to remind us of a past program, not something that controls our thinking or feeling after having dealt with that program. This is kinda why I could write that paragraph as you say "so well", because all those stupid programs that were evident in the paragraph still have echoes in my head. I might not be controlled by those particular programs, but I know what they are, and can "call them up" at will as their echoes remain. It's like knowing what a psychopath might think in a particular situation because you have been reading ponerology (or watching South Park and/or the Simpsons...), and not because you are a psychopath and really think that way.

Laura told a story I think on casschat(?) a long time ago, the details of which I mostly forgot but can never actually forget the essence of it because it really touched me. The gist of it was that this girl was given a mirror by Ark and she reacted really badly at first and probably used a couple dozen swear words along the way and figuratively stormed out and slammed the door. Then she actually allowed herself to consider what was said and emailed him again. In that email she was saying a bunch of stuff and mentioned something like "I'm sure by now you must be really angry and probably hate me and you'd be justified to hate me, but please let me say just one thing - I thought about what you said and actually began to question my own initial reaction to it and where it came from...". (And the rest, as they say, is history). So long story short, Laura said to the group (as she's recounting this story to the group) that Ark wasn't angry at all, but the opposite, he was smiling, as it is always a happy moment when somebody is waking up. And usually it is not a "smooth process", it is often accompanied by a lot of kicking and screaming of our personality, ego, predator, etc, but if you can overlook that and see the essence and what comes from the essence, you can't help but wanna laugh/cry and hug the person for being able to do that, for overcoming what most people on the planet have not overcome. Sorry if I totally mangled that story!

And Azur, I'm not sure if it was a "bad read" on your part or that I expressed myself poorly. I mean, even if this was a "bad read" does it make it a "bad mirror"? I mean for one reason or another, I gave you a certain impression about my thoughts/feelings that prompted you to inquire about it. And that inquiry prompted me to think about not only what I was thinking/feeling at the time, but also about what I actually wrote and whether what I wrote accurately describes what I was thinking/feeling or not. Maybe the question "Why do you ask me and not anyone else who expressed similar frustration?" was also useful for you to contemplate too, even if the source of such a question, had it been a genuine question, would've probably been self-importance and assumption on my part. I mean, let's say this was a true question I had - the first thing I'd have to do is pose it to myself before asking you (external consideration), and only ask if I truly cannot find an answer. But instantly the answer in my mind is "Why not?". Because if you think about it, let's say 10 people express frustration with something - what is wrong with picking a random person out of the 10 and asking that person specifically why THEY feel frustrated (you might intend to ask the others later, but you have to start with someone!). If that persons says "Why do you ask me and not the others?" this would never yield an answer to your question. You could then go ask others and they would also say "But why do you ask me?" and in the end nothing good comes of it because you still won't have an answer, all because each one of them assumed that there must've been some malicious and/or personal reason that you asked THEM and not any of the others, which would've been an indication of a program running in each of them (that pesky "this is unfair!" program), osit. So I think that if both parties are sincere, it's ok to have a "bad read" or a "poor expression" if the intent is get to the truth.

Am I over-analyzing this? Not sure, please let me know if I am, but those are some thoughts I had.
 

Rich

The Living Force
Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

To add to the pot, off topic (more of a rant really) in that it is not directly concerning trust - except i suppose trusting myself..It is good to hear some honest reflections from all on this post..something I had read rang true with me when SAO referred to the following on the Esoquest thread
a.saccus said:
This leads to a second problem. Of all the posts I have written, I have received but four or five responses, which causes me to stop posting every time and ask why. I have not yet come up with any answers. I feel like I've got the cybernetic equivalent of body odor or halitosis--or worse. Here are all the possible reasons I can think of for the meagre responses I got:

1. I am so ignorant about the issues under discussion, and people are so busy that they simply don't have any time to answer. OK. If that's it, then I'll remain silent in the future and keep on learning--if that's permitted. But, isn't that considered "lurking"? Don't I have to speak up once in a while to be on a Forum? I don't know.

2. No answer IS an answer. I have no answer to that; but I have seen that the Forum leaders remove false posters and nuisance creators, so I don't think that's it. I think you'd tell me if you wanted me to go.

3. I am a "useful idiot". Nobody thinks they're an idiot, but that doesn't mean I'm not one. I don't want to be a "noise generator".

4. I am COINTELPRO. No.

5. I am a psychopath. I don't know. I hope not. My father used to regularly beat my mother and verbally abuse her, and I have never forgiven him for it. After my mother died of a stroke, he married two other women in quick succession before he found the love of his life. It is my impression that these two marriages were made out of sheer ignorance rather than a desire to manipulate, as he suffered both emotionally and financially from them. After ten years, when the love of his life passed away from cancer, he married her sister, and is happy. Anyway, it's his life, not mine. I was only married once, for five years. I have never beaten anyone, but I cannot deny my genetic connection to him. I do drive fast sometimes. I do function best under pressure. I can appear to be confident. I can be charming. I have a certain facility with words. I do feel shame. I am dogged and persistent about the things I consider important. I empathize with victims and underdogs. I give myself a score of 6 on Hare's PCL:SV test, p. 27 "Snakes in Suits."

All of the above could just be words, but it's not. In any case, I am confident of your ability of putting me to the test. I would rather know the truth about myself now than live with an illusion.

With the world going quite rapidly to hell in a hand basket, I would like to work with those who are trying to slow that descent. But if you think that I am a psychopath--from your long study and experience of the subject, and if that is the reason for the minimal response to my postings--then I shall defer to your judgement.

I only ask--what am I to do? I'm already convinced that you of QFS and this Forum have found the most valid way of working toward the truth about our existence that I have seen in our time.
CraigS
Craig gives some honest feelings about his intrepidation in contributing to the forum that I could relate to. I have had similar concerns at certain times myself and it was reasurring to see these written. My personal worry is that sometimes if feels as if i'm not really networking but just adding noise. I suppose i am slowly getting to understand the different personalities on this forum. i sometimes write, edit and re-edit for about an hour then delete it - uncertain as to whether it is relevant or not. This type of reflection and sharing I believe is more appropriate on casschat - correct me if i'm wrong - but from Vietnam yahoo groups are blocked so I am limited. Apologies for talking about myself but i do feel that it hasn't really felt appropriate to reflect in this way until now. Chiefly because the discussion about opinions and use of 'I' lead me to censor myself more -AHhhh feel better now-
 

Azur

The Living Force
Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

ScioAgapeOmnis said:
Azur, you may be surprised that when I read your post above, I really had no idea what you were talking about when you said I presented you with a mirror. I was scratching my head going "I did?". Come to think of it I'm still not 100% on this... do you mean that paragraph where I pretended to be arguing for argument's sake to make some convoluted point (that was actually much better expressed in that South Park quote)? It seems that the question about you putting me "on the spot" stuck with you, even though I never intended it to be seriously considered.
There you go. There really was nothing there from your side (as you say), but I had to consider it. I had to ask myself if there was something I missed, something I didn't see internally about my real intent, as much as I thought I was being sincere.


ScioAgapeOmnis said:
I think putting others on spots, and putting self on spots as Carpe did in this thread, is really what we do around here, and when done with sincerity it seems to always be a beneficial thing, never detrimental to anything but ego. I know Carpe is by far not the only one to share his concerns, but it is through putting himself "on the spot" (which clearly wasn't easy) that this was brought to light and discussed and others come out and say they have/are experiencing something similar. And he definitely put himself on the spot because at the end he surmised that his thread contains abusive content and felt the need to apologize for it and even suggested deletion of his own post. But he was sincere, I don't think he was abusive, and I honestly see absolutely nothing that he should be sorry for - he is simply at a point where I think each one of us either has been, is, or will be in the process of our growth. And I don't think that's anything to be sorry for.
Absolutely. Carpe has nothing to be sorry for, and I didn't understand why he felt that way when I read the post. Putting yourself on the spot, done with sincerity, and having others assist you by pointing things out is jumping into the crucible. I've done this consciously and unconsciously here many times, and the end results have always been for the better. Even when it is done passively, such as when you see an exchange, form some thoughts about it and don't actually say anything, only to see as it unwinds that you were way off. Examining how you were "off" is beneficial, too.


ScioAgapeOmnis said:
Anybody can do a book or movie review, or discuss theoretical aspects of the Work and remain in a nice comfy shell while at it. But although Carpe's post might've lacked some clarity and most likely had several problems with the specific content of it, he opened himself up, allowed himself to be "vulnerable" to post it, and it kinda shook him up a bit as he kinda had to overcome his "safety protocols" to do it. So me putting you on the spot, or you putting me on the spot can only be bad for our ego and self-importance and personality shell, but if you're sincere, I don't think a question like "Why ME!?" or "Who does HE think he is, he should look at himself first!" will be in control of the response. It might pop into your mind, but it's just an echo to remind us of a past program, not something that controls our thinking or feeling after having dealt with that program. This is kinda why I could write that paragraph as you say "so well", because all those stupid programs that were evident in the paragraph still have echoes in my head. I might not be controlled by those particular programs, but I know what they are, and can "call them up" at will as their echoes remain. It's like knowing what a psychopath might think in a particular situation because you have been reading ponerology (or watching South Park and/or the Simpsons...), and not because you are a psychopath and really think that way.

Laura told a story I think on casschat(?) a long time ago, the details of which I mostly forgot but can never actually forget the essence of it because it really touched me. The gist of it was that this girl was given a mirror by Ark and she reacted really badly at first and probably used a couple dozen swear words along the way and figuratively stormed out and slammed the door. Then she actually allowed herself to consider what was said and emailed him again. In that email she was saying a bunch of stuff and mentioned something like "I'm sure by now you must be really angry and probably hate me and you'd be justified to hate me, but please let me say just one thing - I thought about what you said and actually began to question my own initial reaction to it and where it came from...". (And the rest, as they say, is history). So long story short, Laura said to the group (as she's recounting this story to the group) that Ark wasn't angry at all, but the opposite, he was smiling, as it is always a happy moment when somebody is waking up. And usually it is not a "smooth process", it is often accompanied by a lot of kicking and screaming of our personality, ego, predator, etc, but if you can overlook that and see the essence and what comes from the essence, you can't help but wanna laugh/cry and hug the person for being able to do that, for overcoming what most people on the planet have not overcome. Sorry if I totally mangled that story!



And Azur, I'm not sure if it was a "bad read" on your part or that I expressed myself poorly. I mean, even if this was a "bad read" does it make it a "bad mirror"? I mean for one reason or another, I gave you a certain impression about my thoughts/feelings that prompted you to inquire about it. And that inquiry prompted me to think about not only what I was thinking/feeling at the time, but also about what I actually wrote and whether what I wrote accurately describes what I was thinking/feeling or not. Maybe the question "Why do you ask me and not anyone else who expressed similar frustration?" was also useful for you to contemplate too, even if the source of such a question, had it been a genuine question, would've probably been self-importance and assumption on my part. I mean, let's say this was a true question I had - the first thing I'd have to do is pose it to myself before asking you (external consideration), and only ask if I truly cannot find an answer. But instantly the answer in my mind is "Why not?". Because if you think about it, let's say 10 people express frustration with something - what is wrong with picking a random person out of the 10 and asking that person specifically why THEY feel frustrated (you might intend to ask the others later, but you have to start with someone!). If that persons says "Why do you ask me and not the others?" this would never yield an answer to your question. You could then go ask others and they would also say "But why do you ask me?" and in the end nothing good comes of it because you still won't have an answer, all because each one of them assumed that there must've been some malicious and/or personal reason that you asked THEM and not any of the others, which would've been an indication of a program running in each of them (that pesky "this is unfair!" program), osit. So I think that if both parties are sincere, it's ok to have a "bad read" or a "poor expression" if the intent is get to the truth.
Yes, well said! Sometimes it is hard to know the difference between being on the mark, or being totally out to lunch. But if you don't ask, you'll never know. But still sometimes I wonder if I'm being simply self-serving and not adding to the discussion for the good of all. But then there's no better place than here that I know of where that will be brought to light, if it is the case. Tread lightly, but you have to tread, or you remain in stasis.



ScioAgapeOmnis said:
Am I over-analyzing this? Not sure, please let me know if I am, but those are some thoughts I had.
Maybe we're both overanalyzing this one. :)

And thanks for your thoughts, they are beneficial. (I hope that doesn't sound like another love-fest. :) )



Cheers.
 

radish

The Force is Strong With This One
Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

Avala said:
I just tried to tell that your work speaks for you, however you sound, and maybe everyones work and life should speak for that person, and that can be the vector (one of many) to whom may we trust, but again ask and ask.Not be focused on external signs and expressions of the person.
It is amazing how our impressions of people can form one way and change so quickly with more information. Not being French or a native speaker, I was once in France, in Blois (town with chocolate factory?), where I caught up with a tour of the local chateau. Before I was able to look at the guide I heard her voice. She sounded very unappealing, haughty perhaps. But when I then saw her and her whole comportment, she was suddenly a very sweet person (while not sounding any different than before).

Avala said:
This written way of communication may have its advantages because we cant relly our judgements with that how person looks or talks,which envolves many of our preprogramed thoughts and reactions,everyone will imagine different person, although that imagined person will somehow be for us what we expect to be not real one, and maybe if we can be more and more open we will see real person, even in this written way (just my thoughts, and its maybe confusingly written)
Written communication certainly makes it possible to share important information and explore our reasons, but I can't help wondering if all those words words words sometimes conceal things that would be plainly visible in the light of day.
 
Top Bottom