Where is the limit

[Apei]

Hello everyone,

Im creating this subject because I'm in a kind of a dilemma, so I am asking here for help. Please direct me toward a subject already answering my query if this one is deemed unnecessary.

Sometimes I give my point of view to different people in an open space like many people. Since many people are gathered I try to stay the most objective possible because of the many beliefs or confusions present in the listeners. You might say I try to not hurt feelings and avoid conflict no matter the subject, and when people disagree I simply respect their point of view.
It is their free will to have beliefs and I respect that. But the dilemma is that when your very existence/identity create biases toward people, how can you respect that ? If your existence infringe their free will to believe in certain idea ?. I mean before I would certainly confront that person, but now I'm not sure how to react to that, I don't want conflict. Should a person just disappear if its very existence doesn't respect the beliefs of another ? Where is the limit ...

Thanks!

 

[3DStudent]

I think you just have to practice external consideration and not say anything that you know people will not want to hear. This means that you will need to know a little about the people you're speaking to. And if you don't and you want to try to be objective about what you're saying, throw subtle hints and see how they're received. And if they don't seem receptive, then talk about something else. And sometimes you can frame things in a different perspective, like a religious one if the person is religious. Basically, speaking their language. Being understood is pretty hard sometimes, when you think about the Tower of Babel and the things Gurdjieff says.

Not sure I understand this part below, but sometimes it's best to just not engage. Each situation will be different.

But the dilemma is that when your very existence/identity create biases toward people, how can you respect that ? If your existence infringe their free will to believe in certain idea ?. I mean before I would certainly confront that person, but now I'm not sure how to react to that, I don't want conflict.

 

[Joe]

Hello everyone,

Im creating this subject because I'm in a kind of a dilemma, so I am asking here for help. Please direct me toward a subject already answering my query if this one is deemed unnecessary.

Sometimes I give my point of view to different people in an open space like many people. Since many people are gathered I try to stay the most objective possible because of the many beliefs or confusions present in the listeners. You might say I try to not hurt feelings and avoid conflict no matter the subject, and when people disagree I simply respect their point of view.
It is their free will to have beliefs and I respect that. But the dilemma is that when your very existence/identity create biases toward people, how can you respect that ? If your existence infringe their free will to believe in certain idea ?. I mean before I would certainly confront that person, but now I'm not sure how to react to that, I don't want conflict. Should a person just disappear if its very existence doesn't respect the beliefs of another ? Where is the limit ...

Thanks!

If you could give a specific example of what you mean that would probably help others to give an appropriate response.

 

[Apei]

Okay, I'll try to give a specific example. I'm not a native english speaker so please bear with me.
Imagine if you will someone giving a quick presentation of what is stoicism and its main charactristics.
You could say that the people present are random and most of them are not familiar with philosophies. The presentation ends and the orator asks if there are any questions.
"You say people following stoicism should fight their emotions to reach true happiness, but do you think that a more efficient way would be to understand and accept your emotions ?" I ask.
Another speak up, quite old, adress me and say "What are you speaking about emotions being this and that, this is not a fairy tale, pay attention. You are too young to understand anyway".
Nobody say anything for a few seconds. So at this point I just say that I respect his point of view and apologize if I've broken any beliefs/concepts.
The old man starts to gets angry because I think I didn't agree with him and start to explain how I shouldn't be even here or , and this is the point, even "exist" and how I'm not a normal thinking person.
At this point I'm kinda in shock, I wasn't even angry, maybe a little sad. What is the answer to that ? Should I apologize for breaking is free will to believe that I exist ? Should I continue to speak at all ?
The old man has made some of the audience agree with him and the rest stay silent, so this is a tricky situation. In the past I would've certainly be angry at anyone treating me like that, but now I simply was truly accepting/respecting what that person was.
In the end the orator answered my question in an evasive manner and carried on. Now this raise the question, If a person is projecting his beliefs on you, how much should you accept/respect them, what is the limit ? is there a limit ? And what would be your response if the limit is broken ?
I understand this is kinda an extreme case here in this example. But this same situation made me ponder about it. Don't hesitate to ask further if any of this is not clear.

 

[Joe]

Okay, I'll try to give a specific example. I'm not a native english speaker so please bear with me.
Imagine if you will someone giving a quick presentation of what is stoicism and its main charactristics.
You could say that the people present are random and most of them are not familiar with philosophies. The presentation ends and the orator asks if there are any questions.
"You say people following stoicism should fight their emotions to reach true happiness, but do you think that a more efficient way would be to understand and accept your emotions ?" I ask.
Another speak up, quite old, adress me and say "What are you speaking about emotions being this and that, this is not a fairy tale, pay attention. You are too young to understand anyway".
Nobody say anything for a few seconds. So at this point I just say that I respect his point of view and apologize if I've broken any beliefs/concepts.
The old man starts to gets angry because I think I didn't agree with him and start to explain how I shouldn't be even here or , and this is the point, even "exist" and how I'm not a normal thinking person.
At this point I'm kinda in shock, I wasn't even angry, maybe a little sad. What is the answer to that ? Should I apologize for breaking is free will to believe that I exist ? Should I continue to speak at all ?
The old man has made some of the audience agree with him and the rest stay silent, so this is a tricky situation. In the past I would've certainly be angry at anyone treating me like that, but now I simply was truly accepting/respecting what that person was.
In the end the orator answered my question in an evasive manner and carried on. Now this raise the question, If a person is projecting his beliefs on you, how much should you accept/respect them, what is the limit ? is there a limit ? And what would be your response if the limit is broken ?
I understand this is kinda an extreme case here in this example. But this same situation made me ponder about it. Don't hesitate to ask further if any of this is not clear.

Sounds like you pushed the buttons of that older guy for whatever reason. And it sounds like he gave a great example of how many people cannot control or accept their emotions. He was 'triggered'!

Best thing to do is just ignore him and use the opportunity to observe your own emotional reaction.

 

[Ellipse]

Best thing to do is just ignore him and use the opportunity to observe your own emotional reaction.

Or push further if you want the opportunity to be more intense ;) .

For what I understand, the goal is to stay balanced. So you can great him to give you the opportunity (which you certainly semi-consciously asked). Without exercises, no real progress. So the limit seems to be what we are able to sustain.

 

[Adaryn]

Sounds like you pushed the buttons of that older guy for whatever reason. And it sounds like he gave a great example of how many people cannot control or accept their emotions. He was 'triggered'!

Best thing to do is just ignore him and use the opportunity to observe your own emotional reaction.

I agree. You did nothing wrong, you just asked a question honestly, in a respectful manner. His own disproportionate, a bit hysterical reaction is his problem, not yours. It's got nothing to do with you and you shouldn't change the way you are/what you are - while still applying external consideration to the best of your abilities - for fear of "triggering" nutzoids. These things happen, it's pretty common actually. I had several episodes in the past where I was verbally attacked or laughed at by someone without any particular reason. I was just standing there not talking to them, not looking at them or anything. But somehow my presence (or existence?) seemed to trigger them. Well they were the ones with the problem, not me (took me a long time to figure that out). However as Joe said, this kind of incident offers a good opportunity to observe ourselves and the emotions triggered by such 'encounters' with nasty people.

 

[Gawan]

I concur with what others have said here and there is no need to change you in this situation, because when you are a listener at a lecture you cannot consider everyone and if someone got triggered by your imo good question that it is their own problem. You shouldn't take it personal too and eventually that guy just had a bad day. A long the line and since you mentioned stoics:

“Why then are we offended? Why do we complain? This is what we’re here for.” — Seneca, On Providence, 5.7b–8

And is something the old man should have remembered :).

 

[nature]

Best thing to do is just ignore him and use the opportunity to observe your own emotional reaction.

Or push further if you want the opportunity to be more intense ;) .

For what I understand, the goal is to stay balanced. So you can great him to give you the opportunity (which you certainly semi-consciously asked). Without exercises, no real progress. So the limit seems to be what we are able to sustain.

excellent!

 

[Apei]

These situations bring much challenges to me ! and bring these intense emotions which are indeed worth to look at. I didn't saw it like that because I think I was too much focused on this guy instead of myself.
Now I agree with what was said here, but to push the guy further :/ I mean he was basically speaking to himself ...

Thanks everyone for the advices and the quick answers ! much appreciated :)

 

[Ina]

Is there a way to think/rationalize emotions with the objective of understanding them? Unfortunately this begs a bigger question. Assuming that there would exist a universal 'language' (words, morphology, syntax) in a universal culture that would make necessary to develop a way to mentally capture the full meaning and dynamics of an emotion or a complex of emotions, what would one do with that explicit and prescribed knowledge? What would be the purpose of comprehension? This btw is more or less a heated subject of discussion in contemplating AI.

Can you create a method to observe and study emotions, a method that would expose 'stuff' that is usually supressed? It is currently being done, however, the current understanding does not bring any significant 'aha' in one's path of self discovery. The more one talks about 'it' the bigger the confusion.

There are two sayings, 'He who knows does not speak' and 'You should never ask a question if you don't know the answer'. One could write essays about the above, but I would like to briefly point to what I think it might help your dilemma. Ponder on the skill of listening and the meaning of creating individual quick fix learning expectations in heterogenous group context.

I hope it helped.

 

[Phill4]

Age and working on emotions have nothing to do, to me he simply wanted to make the point that his "experience" and his word, for the sake of being his word, is what counts.

In any case, he is pretty much victim of his own anger and his own ways to control a situation. A situation that bothers him because he thinks he knows better or that is the image he wishes to imprint by force.

What I think is that you probably need to gain awareness of how these type of dynamics occur on people so that you understand where they are coming from, without letting their point of view discard your point of view or get to you. Maybe he was trying to test your emotions, but he doesn't seem to have control of his own, sounds like he was merely reacting.

Mastering emotions of oneself is not the same as letting everyone run you over, it is the conscious application of emotions and becoming conscious of emotions what the goal is.