Lindaland
  Lindaland Central 2.0
  Being nice vs being yourself (Page 3)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
This topic is 5 pages long:   1  2  3  4  5 
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Being nice vs being yourself
Graham
Knowflake

Posts: 2734
From:
Registered: Apr 2019

posted September 10, 2020 01:00 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Graham     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFKzE52XRmw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-J9BVBjK3o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz7zxh9Bfow

IP: Logged

Kannon McAfee
Knowflake

Posts: 4679
From: Portland, OR - USA
Registered: Oct 2011

posted September 10, 2020 01:21 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Kannon McAfee     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
This is the Astrology 2.0 sub-forum. Is this thread going to involve any astrology?

------------------
Soul Stars Astrology by The Declinations Guy
Expert birth chart rectification

IP: Logged

Graham
Knowflake

Posts: 2734
From:
Registered: Apr 2019

posted September 10, 2020 03:15 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Graham     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Kannon McAfee:
This is the Astrology 2.0 sub-forum. Is this thread going to involve any astrology?


If childhood conditioning is not regarded as an astrological discussion, I guess this thread is unlikely to involve any astrology. ... http://www.astro.com/astrology/aa_article151001_e.htm

I am ok with it being closed, Kannon . ... But,, on which forum board (if any) should it have been opened.

And, is it inappropriate for members to refer to childhood conditioning when replying to astrological threads on this or/and other forum boards?

IP: Logged

PixieJane
Knowflake

Posts: 9709
From: CA
Registered: Oct 2010

posted September 10, 2020 05:22 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for PixieJane     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Graham:
So ... you believe that parents/mentors should [b]consciously engage in 'conditioning' the child?

I believe that too. ... But, what is your opinion about the "astrologer's ethic" of not creating charts for children under the age of 7?[/B]


I've always seen astrological as supplemental and giving insight rather than dictating my life.

I'm not sure what you mean by "conditioning." It sounds to me like you're using it in the loosest possible way, anything that is beyond throwing a kid into a water and expecting them to sink or swim is conditioning (though technically even that would be conditioning of a sorts). I don't know if that's what you mean, but it's how it's coming off to me (so if that's not what you mean then maybe you should clarify before real communication is possible). So with that in mind I'll say that I am authoritative rather than either authoritarian or permissive, as summed up here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parenting_styles#Authoritative

As for charts...I'm not against it, as someone with a Scorpio or Cancer moon can be expected to be a lot more sensitive and need more security than my Sag moon did (I'm pretty sure one manifesting either water moon would not have survived my upbringing and childhood, or would be someone to fear if they did). Linda Goodman had a book on raising children based on their sun sign which included how different aspects modified it, which was designed to take their astrological aspects into account and being aware of, and mitigating, the weak spots so that they're given the strength to overcome them.

For me it was a moot point. When I came into the lives of those children the youngest was 7 anyway.

IP: Logged

Dumuzi
Knowflake

Posts: 3222
From:
Registered: Oct 2018

posted September 10, 2020 06:07 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dumuzi     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
@Graham:

yeah but that's you making a lot of assumptions and creating fictitious people now, and that's not really what you asked in the first place

being conditioned one way doesn't mean that our views lie within that anyway like i was raised to think i always had to put other people first and that having feelings for more than 15 minutes if they were negative wasnt ok etc

i can still experience discomfort on a personal level, but i know logically that it's ******* stupid to teach anyone some **** like that or push it on a child

so yeah i was conditioned in x way but at the same time because i'm capable of thinking i can say "well my upbringing was stupid" and discard the useless **** when it comes to others even if there's a level of personal struggle

so i'm just not really seeing the logic behind speaking about it like it's either/or when that's just sortof senseless

why are your fake people incapable of acknowledging their conditioning and working on themselves? generally speaking most people hit a point where they grow up reflect and learn and even if they personally can't overcome that doesn't come with inflicting those things on others

your entire scenario of making it either or is entirely dependent on very one dimensional imaginary people (and you've sortof moved goalposts even creating them because the initial question wasn't like that at all)

people grow and learn and meet other people and figure **** out over time regardless of conditioning, prime example of this is people who move away from the religion they've grown up with or their culture

i'm not really understanding why you act as if this is a strange thing when it's really pretty common for people to recognize things even if they themselves can't fully release all hangups

freeing yourself from that **** isn't the same as recognizing that life isn't black and white

arguably being nice when it's inauthentic and fake is also a flaw and putting on a facade is wrong in and of itself so in its own way you're just talking about suppressing one perceived flaw for another

being kind being civil being helpful etc all that **** is "nice" right, and i'm not really getting how many scenarios a person could encounter where that isn't sort of just the default anyway rather than something put on

i think the conversation would've been better narrow than morphing into that **** personally because i don't think it really makes much sense to ask "how do people grow over time?" that **** just happens naturally

@everyone who talks about being nice as if it's equivalent to being fake:

i'm not understanding this how hard is it to just not be a dick all the time or some **** ? just damn what's wrong with you people 🤣

people always tell me i'm nice and laid back and **** , especially in person, it's not fake or anything i don't have a filter so i just act however i'm gonna without thinking

i find that people who perceive kindness as something fake generally have a lot of ******* issues and are overly suspicious of everyone for no real ******* reason

also to appease kannon maybe my strong libra/venus **** is why i'm just not getting why this **** is so off balance and why civility and **** isn't just default

i'd have to go out of my way to cause conflict in like 90% of situations

IP: Logged

PixieJane
Knowflake

Posts: 9709
From: CA
Registered: Oct 2010

posted September 10, 2020 06:40 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for PixieJane     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
And one can fake being mean and domineering, aloof and uncaring, scandalized and self-righteous, with it being as much of an act as kindness (because they feel they're supposed to, a defense mechanism, or it's what gets them status, just like those who fake kindness and compassion). People can also fake being all these things, cruel in some situations and kind in others, because of that's what gets them their doggie treat (thumbs up on Facebook, acceptance at their church, aiming for that office promotion by stamping on competition while kissing up to others, etc). All emotions, positive or negative, can be faked just as they can be sincere (and conflicting emotions are also very possible).

IP: Logged

Ayelet
Moderator

Posts: 3546
From:
Registered: Sep 2010

posted September 10, 2020 07:07 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ayelet     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by PixieJane:
And one can fake being mean and domineering, aloof and uncaring, scandalized and self-righteous, with it being as much of an act as kindness (because they feel they're supposed to, a defense mechanism, or it's what gets them status, just like those who fake kindness and compassion). People can also fake being all these things, cruel in some situations and kind in others, because of that's what gets them their doggie treat (thumbs up on Facebook, acceptance at their church, aiming for that office promotion by stamping on competition while kissing up to others, etc). All emotions, positive or negative, can be faked just as they can be sincere (and conflicting emotions are also very possible).

I definitely agree. I faked being tough in order to survive going after what I thought I wanted or needed the most. Now I can't use that facade anymore.
I was not raised to be "nice", I was raised to be a fighter. And boy did I fight, until I discovered there are things and situations in which this conditioning does more harm than good.

IP: Logged

Dumuzi
Knowflake

Posts: 3222
From:
Registered: Oct 2018

posted September 10, 2020 11:01 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dumuzi     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by PixieJane:
And one can fake being mean and domineering, aloof and uncaring, scandalized and self-righteous, with it being as much of an act as kindness (because they feel they're supposed to, a defense mechanism, or it's what gets them status, just like those who fake kindness and compassion). People can also fake being all these things, cruel in some situations and kind in others, because of that's what gets them their doggie treat (thumbs up on Facebook, acceptance at their church, aiming for that office promotion by stamping on competition while kissing up to others, etc). All emotions, positive or negative, can be faked just as they can be sincere (and conflicting emotions are also very possible).

yeah that too, not sure why nice would be the thing that comes with stigma and suspicion

there's a difference between being nice and being phony anyway

also being yourself 100% always just isn't workable for plenty of situations just how life is if you expect to function and exist around people

work me is different than me around friends, granted i still play around and keep **** light but i'm also going to act a bit different because of the environment

people need to learn balance and that different situations call for different things, this isn't inauthentic it's just part of life

you can be you without letting everything hang out 100%

if that weren't the case i'd put "really good at handling drugs" on my resume under skills along with "never been arrested in spite of doing plenty of dumb illegal **** "

that's **** that served me well when i was on heroin and around other junkies but you know outside of that not so much

IP: Logged

Dumuzi
Knowflake

Posts: 3222
From:
Registered: Oct 2018

posted September 10, 2020 11:09 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dumuzi     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Stawr:
I have this problem. I was raised to be nice. I have a hard time finding middle ground.

I'd rather file a noise complaint because in the heat of the moment I am like "what's wrong with you!?"


i see filing a noise complaint as worse than the heat of the moment **** personally, to me it's ultimately better/more respectful to go straight to the person and say some **** than go over their head and involve others

because one way you're being straight up (even if you handle it poorly) and giving the person a chance to correct something, in the other you're going over their head without giving them a chance first

not cool imo

i've had to deal with plenty of noise complaints over the years and it's honestly just annoying, and if i'm within my legal rights i'm unlikely to comply

however if someone came directly to me and was like "can you make that lower i work nights so i need day sleep" i'd change what i was doing no problem

even if in the first situation i later became aware of a legit reason for the complaint (like sleeping days for work) i'd still just be like "**** it" because in my view not confronting me directly to level comes with a loss of respect

IP: Logged

Graham
Knowflake

Posts: 2734
From:
Registered: Apr 2019

posted September 11, 2020 12:45 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Graham     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Originally posted by
quote:
I'm not sure what you mean by "conditioning." It sounds to me like you're using it in the loosest possible way, anything that is beyond throwing a kid into a water and expecting them to sink or swim is conditioning (though technically even that would be conditioning of a sorts). I don't know if that's what you mean, but it's how it's coming off to me (so if that's not what you mean then maybe you should clarify before real communication is possible).

Yes. ... I am using the term loosely. ... And mean it to include any/every influence that a child receives from loved-and/or-respected authority figures during childhood and adolescence. ... However, in my opinion, suppression of our "socially unacceptable" behavioural traits occurs only if displaying them during childhood/adolescence results in a traumatic and emotionally painful experience at that time.


quote:
I've always seen astrological as supplemental and giving insight rather than dictating my life. ...... So with that in mind I'll say that I am authoritative rather than either authoritarian or permissive, as summed up here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parenting_styles#Authoritative

Thank you for this. ... I am finding the linked article interesting, informative/enlightening and requiring several reads (for me) to fully understand/"take in".


quote:
As for charts...I'm not against it, as someone with a Scorpio or Cancer moon can be expected to be a lot more sensitive and need more security than my Sag moon did (I'm pretty sure one manifesting either water moon would not have survived my upbringing and childhood, or would be someone to fear if they did). Linda Goodman had a book on raising children based on their sun sign which included how different aspects modified it, which was designed to take their astrological aspects into account and being aware of, and mitigating, the weak spots so that they're given the strength to overcome them.

For me it was a moot point. When I came into the lives of those children the youngest was 7 anyway.



I have mixed feelings about the astrological community view that one should not attempt to use astrology to influence the development of a child under the age of 7. ... it is based upon the Jesuit belief that the core personality is fully developed during the first 6 years of life, plus the belief of some/many astrologers that the core personality is that which is "promised" in the natal chart. ... So, since some/many astrologers believe the soul reincarnates (in the current lifetime) to work on the issues that are promised in the natal chart, that core personality should be allowed to fully develop before any other soul/ego/person attempts to use astrology to influence the child's behaviour.

IP: Logged

Hikaru29
Knowflake

Posts: 3256
From: Asia
Registered: Nov 2018

posted September 11, 2020 02:23 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Hikaru29     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Graham:
I agree with all that you say above. ... But, if conditioning is preventing the other person from seeing their flaws/need for self-improvement, should those-with-knowledge-of-astrology attempt to help them do so?

Certainly astrology can help someone understand themselves but how many times have you seen half-ass interpretations floating around? These actually can mislead people more than guide. On the other hand, there are also people who are not receptive to accepting negativities shown in their charts. They only want to hear good things. At the end of the day it's largely about self-awareness. Some are more easily enlightened while others are not.

IP: Logged

Graham
Knowflake

Posts: 2734
From:
Registered: Apr 2019

posted September 11, 2020 02:39 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Graham     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Originally posted by Dumuzi :-

quote:
[/b] yeah but that's you making a lot of assumptions and creating fictitious people now, and that's not really what you asked in the first place[/b]

Is that not an essential part of an open-minded discussion? ... One asks a question; mindfully reflects upon the answers/feedback received and modifies the question - whilst making clear any assumptions that he/she is making in doing so.


quote:
being conditioned one way doesn't mean that our views lie within that anyway like i was raised to think i always had to put other people first and that having feelings for more than 15 minutes if they were negative wasnt ok etc

i can still experience discomfort on a personal level, but i know logically that it's ******* stupid to teach anyone some **** like that or push it on a child

so yeah i was conditioned in x way but at the same time because i'm capable of thinking i can say "well my upbringing was stupid" and discard the useless **** when it comes to others even if there's a level of personal struggle


I agree fully with what you say above - and was also raised/conditioned to believe "others should always be put first". ... However, it was not until over the age of 40 that I recognised this childhood conditioning of my beliefs - by which time, adhering to that conditioned belief had resulted in me being on the verge of a breakdown of physical health.

So ... although you are currently well under the age of 40 ... at what age did you recognise that conditioning in yourself, and what effect did it have on your life prior to that?


quote:
so i'm just not really seeing the logic behind speaking about it like it's either/or when that's just sort of senseless

Before recognising your childhood-conditioned belief - was "putting others first" and "not putting others first" an either/or choice for you? ... Or, as a child, were you able to do both (as/when the situation warranted it) from as far back as you can recall - despite having been conditioned to "always put others first"?


quote:
why are your fake people incapable of acknowledging their conditioning and working on themselves? generally speaking most people hit a point where they grow up reflect and learn and even if they personally can't overcome that doesn't come with inflicting those things on others

your entire scenario of making it either or is entirely dependent on very one dimensional imaginary people (and you've sortof moved goalposts even creating them because the initial question wasn't like that at all)



I am expressing my personal view/opinion that - if one has been conditioned to the point of suppressing a socially-unacceptable behavioural trait, he/she will be unable (rather than incapable) of recognising that trait in himself/herself (and will probably project it onto others).

But ... why are you irked by my moving/changing/creating the goalposts during the discussion? ... (In my opinion, that is an essential part of any psychologically healthy discussion.) ... Might you have been conditioned to believe that doing so is "unacceptable"?


quote:
people grow and learn and meet other people and figure **** out over time regardless of conditioning, prime example of this is people who move away from the religion they've grown up with or their culture

I agree. ... And cannot recall either stating or implying anything other than that during this discussion.


quote:
i'm not really understanding why you act as if this is a strange thing when it's really pretty common for people to recognize things even if they themselves can't fully release all hangups

freeing yourself from that **** isn't the same as recognizing that life isn't black and white[/b]



I "get" that you are not understanding my point of view ... but cannot see why/how you are doing so.

quote:
arguably being nice when it's inauthentic and fake is also a flaw and putting on a facade is wrong in and of itself so in its own way you're just talking about suppressing one perceived flaw for another

I am talking about the suppression of "flaws" of any kind. ... And I am fully aware that "always being nice" and "always being yourself" are equally indicative of a person that is socially maladjusted.


quote:
being kind being civil being helpful etc all that **** is "nice" right, and i'm not really getting how many scenarios a person could encounter where that isn't sort of just the default anyway rather than something put on

ALWAYS "being kind, civil, helpful" is (imo) an indication of someone that is socially-maladjusted.

quote:
i think the conversation would've been better narrow than morphing into that **** personally because i don't think it really makes much sense to ask "how do people grow over time?" that **** just happens naturally

But ... might you have been conditioned to think that way, rather than in the way which (in this case) I happen to think?

quote:
@everyone who talks about being nice as if it's equivalent to being fake:

i'm not understanding this how hard is it to just not be a dick all the time or some **** ? just damn what's wrong with you people 🤣

people always tell me i'm nice and laid back and **** , especially in person, it's not fake or anything i don't have a filter so i just act however i'm gonna without thinking

i find that people who perceive kindness as something fake generally have a lot of ******* issues and are overly suspicious of everyone for no real ******* reason



I agree fully with you on this ... but my focus here is upon those who have been conditioned to always display ONLY their socially-acceptable behavioural traits.


quote:
also to appease kannon maybe my strong libra/venus **** is why i'm just not getting why this **** is so off balance and why civility and **** isn't just default

i'd have to go out of my way to cause conflict in like 90% of situations



Why do you feel a need here to "appease" an authority figure?

IP: Logged

vansio
Knowflake

Posts: 1704
From: the outskirts of Delphi
Registered: Dec 2017

posted September 11, 2020 03:21 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for vansio     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Graham, from a general somewhat rhetorical view, what do you suppose people might gain from atoning the warranted effect of behavior caused by perpetuation (compulsive, promotion) of their false self? The answer, to unpack / resolve an issue of honest self-evaluation and contradiction, is reminded in a guiding book by Eckhart Tolle, A New Earth. If you have yet read this writing, recommend you give it a whirl. If you cannot find a hard copy, here is http://www.apnamba.com/Ebooks-pdf/A%20new%20Earth.pdf
Please enjoy.

Also, more appropriately yet controversially, where/how might you suppose this false self, it’s condition, is seen within the birthchart?

IP: Logged

Graham
Knowflake

Posts: 2734
From:
Registered: Apr 2019

posted September 11, 2020 03:32 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Graham     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by PixieJane:
And one can fake being mean and domineering, aloof and uncaring, scandalized and self-righteous, with it being as much of an act as kindness (because they feel they're supposed to, a defense mechanism, or it's what gets them status, just like those who fake kindness and compassion). People can also fake being all these things, cruel in some situations and kind in others, because of that's what gets them their doggie treat (thumbs up on Facebook, acceptance at their church, aiming for that office promotion by stamping on competition while kissing up to others, etc). All emotions, positive or negative, can be faked just as they can be sincere (and conflicting emotions are also very possible).

Some Companies/Corporations/Organisations actually train managers (at departmental head level and above) to fake their emotions, as a mechanism for motivating staff.

So ... (as a heads-up to anyone not yet at that level) ... start observing/noting how a disapproving 'parental' look from someone who is at that level influences the "unacceptable behaviour" of the recipient. ... Then, mindfully reflect upon why the recipient was influenced by "just" a disapproving look from a respected authority figure.

IP: Logged

Graham
Knowflake

Posts: 2734
From:
Registered: Apr 2019

posted September 11, 2020 03:54 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Graham     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Hikaru29:
Certainly astrology can help someone understand themselves but how many times have you seen half-ass interpretations floating around? These actually can mislead people more than guide. On the other hand, there are also people who are not receptive to accepting negativities shown in their charts. They only want to hear good things. At the end of the day it's largely about self-awareness. Some are more easily enlightened while others are not.

I agree that attempting to help can often be fruitless, for reasons including those you refer to above.

In my opinion though, one should always attempt to help those whom he/she perceives to need help ... especially if one can see that he/she may be a physical embodiment of a progression or transit to the other person's natal chart.

Often - if the time is right - even a half-ass interpretation can "awaken" the other person. ... And, if the time is not right, "putting/leaving the interpretation/observation/comment on-the-table" can result in the other person getting the message as/when the time is right for him/her.

IP: Logged

Graham
Knowflake

Posts: 2734
From:
Registered: Apr 2019

posted September 11, 2020 04:13 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Graham     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by vansio:
Graham, from a general somewhat rhetorical view, what do you suppose people might gain from [b]atoning the warranted effect of behavior caused by perpetuation (compulsive, promotion) of their false self? The answer, to unpack / resolve an issue of honest self-evaluation and contradiction, is reminded in a guiding book by Eckhart Tolle, A New Earth. If you have yet read this writing, recommend you give it a whirl. If you cannot find a hard copy, here is http://www.apnamba.com/Ebooks-pdf/A%20new%20Earth.pdf
Please enjoy.

Also, more appropriately yet controversially, where/how might you suppose this false self, it’s condition, is seen within the birthchart?[/B]


I have not previously read this book, but will do so now. ... However, it looks like a lengthy read, so it may be some time before I feel able to comment on it.

With regard to identifying the false self in the natal chart, I'd expect the astrological indicators to differ for each person/individual. ... But, I would start my search by looking at the chart ruler - because, in my own case/experience, that is what the child-self identifies with until the adult-self recognises that he/she is "something which extends beyond the boundaries imposed by Saturn/childhood-conditioning".

IP: Logged

Dumuzi
Knowflake

Posts: 3222
From:
Registered: Oct 2018

posted September 11, 2020 09:52 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dumuzi     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
@Graham

i recognized it late teens early 20's, it still affects my life to some degree however recognition and understanding the need for balance is there thus the mentality wouldn't be put on others (this conversation was about raising children afterall recognition of issues is all that's needed to not teach others the same and parents generally strive to be better than their own)

the person you created was rather unrealistic and by moving goalposts you shifted the conversation away from the original discussion at hand but did it in a rather dishonest way implying that was always the nature of the discussion

i personally prefer discussion that flows but maintains the integrity of the question at hand and when it's shifted having that be addressed in a more honest manner

was that taught to me as a child? no, opposite i've spent much of my life around people who subtly shift conversations in order to be right while similarly lacking the ability to keep it logical

by moving goalposts you're not addressing what's said but only furthering your own views (which have then shifted) which i'd argue isn't a psychologically healthy way to have a discussion, opposite actually, and one that doesn't maintain the integrity of anything that's said

to change the topic very early on (as soon as responded to) defeats the purpose of having the initial discussion in the first place because you cease to address it immediately

your attempt to pick me apart and examine me is amusing, but you're off the mark

also as i've already stated many people can look at things they were raised with and recognize things within themselves that are affected by that, that's normal

you implied that when you said someone would be "unable" to recognize their conditioning and put that onto others, much of your discussion was you implying that inability being the default in how people operate to back up your "either/or" perspective

my lack of understanding comes from the very black and white nature of the way you express both your point of view and your initial question

in my view it's absolutely nonsensical to express these things in the way you have from the very beginning

cool that you're fully aware of that, but your initial question operated on the principle of either extreme and not something in between

my use of the word "many" was meant to indicate "not always" meaning being kind,civil etc is generally a default for human interaction but leaving room for that fact that there is no "always"

nothing to do with conditioning graham, arguably i was taught to be rather dishonest and appeal to feelings no logic and to always gain the upperhand even through manipulation (often flirting as well) these are things i personally reject though

my reason for thinking that would make for a better talking point is because of how quickly your initial point becomes distorted even by you, something that's a better talking point would not get warped so quickly into other discussions

being able to stick to a point is generally seen as a plus when having a discussion

that last part of the conversation was addressed to other people not this discussion so reiterating your point was unnecessary, just genuinely finding it amusing how many people find the word "nice" to be a bit of a sore spot

that being said generally speaking in social situations it's best to display socially accepted behaviors unless a person is prepared for the natural consequences of going against the grain

understanding those exist and accepting their weight is all well and good however

there are many scenarios where there's no need to go against the grain

i felt the need to appease kannon not because he's a mod (i couldn't give a **** about that) but because i felt he was right

while it is natural for conversation to drift away from astrology, generally speaking there not being any in a place for astrology discussion isn't what this particular space is for

by making an attempt in bringing astrological points to this i tried to give the discussion some sort of purpose in being here and to explore a different facet of the discussion because i found an amusing pattern while reading this in regard to both libras and virgos (and i'm assuming others like me who probably have some blend of the two) also because i was curious about whether or not there's some pluto or scorpio influence in the people who are immediately distrustful of "'nice" suspecting ulterior motives

my ex was very much like that and had some hard pluto aspects and a scorpio stellium

if i disagree with someone i don't care if they're "authority" and if i agree with them me attempting to shift something in their proposed direction has nothing to do with them being "authority"

i find it funny that you went there with it though because you're speaking to a person who has never had an issue with openly going against authority figures

i've argued with cops before, that carries a lot more risk than anything a mod on a site i use rather infrequently does

someone can be right outside of a rather meaningless title they have attached to their name

IP: Logged

Dumuzi
Knowflake

Posts: 3222
From:
Registered: Oct 2018

posted September 11, 2020 09:55 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dumuzi     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Hikaru29:
Certainly astrology can help someone understand themselves but how many times have you seen half-ass interpretations floating around? These actually can mislead people more than guide. On the other hand, there are also people who are not receptive to accepting negativities shown in their charts. They only want to hear good things. At the end of the day it's largely about self-awareness. Some are more easily enlightened while others are not.

i just share negatives and positives regardless of what other people want because i'm reading it

very often i've noticed reading tarot cards or charts comes with a deep discussion about a person's personal life and childhood and so on

IP: Logged

Graham
Knowflake

Posts: 2734
From:
Registered: Apr 2019

posted September 11, 2020 10:29 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Graham     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Dumuzi:
@Graham

i recognized it late teens early 20's, it still affects my life to some degree however recognition and understanding the need for balance is there thus the mentality wouldn't be put on others (this conversation was about raising children afterall recognition of issues is all that's needed to not teach others the same and parents generally strive to be better than their own)

the person you created was rather unrealistic and by moving goalposts you shifted the conversation away from the original discussion at hand but did it in a rather dishonest way implying that was always the nature of the discussion

i personally prefer discussion that flows but maintains the integrity of the question at hand and when it's shifted having that be addressed in a more honest manner

was that taught to me as a child? no, opposite i've spent much of my life around people who subtly shift conversations in order to be right while similarly lacking the ability to keep it logical

by moving goalposts you're not addressing what's said but only furthering your own views (which have then shifted) which i'd argue isn't a psychologically healthy way to have a discussion, opposite actually, and one that doesn't maintain the integrity of anything that's said

to change the topic very early on (as soon as responded to) defeats the purpose of having the initial discussion in the first place because you cease to address it immediately

your attempt to pick me apart and examine me is amusing, but you're off the mark

also as i've already stated many people can look at things they were raised with and recognize things within themselves that are affected by that, that's normal

you implied that when you said someone would be "unable" to recognize their conditioning and put that onto others, much of your discussion was you implying that inability being the default in how people operate to back up your "either/or" perspective

my lack of understanding comes from the very black and white nature of the way you express both your point of view and your initial question

in my view it's absolutely nonsensical to express these things in the way you have from the very beginning

cool that you're fully aware of that, but your initial question operated on the principle of either extreme and not something in between

my use of the word "many" was meant to indicate "not always" meaning being kind,civil etc is generally a default for human interaction but leaving room for that fact that there is no "always"

nothing to do with conditioning graham, arguably i was taught to be rather dishonest and appeal to feelings no logic and to always gain the upperhand even through manipulation (often flirting as well) these are things i personally reject though

my reason for thinking that would make for a better talking point is because of how quickly your initial point becomes distorted even by you, something that's a better talking point would not get warped so quickly into other discussions

being able to stick to a point is generally seen as a plus when having a discussion

that last part of the conversation was addressed to other people not this discussion so reiterating your point was unnecessary, just genuinely finding it amusing how many people find the word "nice" to be a bit of a sore spot

that being said generally speaking in social situations it's best to display socially accepted behaviors unless a person is prepared for the natural consequences of going against the grain

understanding those exist and accepting their weight is all well and good however

there are many scenarios where there's no need to go against the grain

i felt the need to appease kannon not because he's a mod (i couldn't give a **** about that) but because i felt he was right

while it is natural for conversation to drift away from astrology, generally speaking there not being any in a place for astrology discussion isn't what this particular space is for

by making an attempt in bringing astrological points to this i tried to give the discussion some sort of purpose in being here and to explore a different facet of the discussion because i found an amusing pattern while reading this in regard to both libras and virgos (and i'm assuming others like me who probably have some blend of the two) also because i was curious about whether or not there's some pluto or scorpio influence in the people who are immediately distrustful of "'nice" suspecting ulterior motives

my ex was very much like that and had some hard pluto aspects and a scorpio stellium

if i disagree with someone i don't care if they're "authority" and if i agree with them me attempting to shift something in their proposed direction has nothing to do with them being "authority"

i find it funny that you went there with it though because you're speaking to a person who has never had an issue with openly going against authority figures

i've argued with cops before, that carries a lot more risk than anything a mod on a site i use rather infrequently does

someone can be right outside of a rather meaningless title they have attached to their name



You and I differ in our views of what constitutes a psychologically healthy discussion, Dumuzi ... and in whether or not childhood conditioning is a valid topic for discussion on an astrology board.

However ... I'm ok with that, since obtaining (and reflecting upon) different viewpoints is (imo) a psychologically healthy thing to do.

quote:
by moving goalposts you're not addressing what's said but only furthering your own views

Actually, I am in the process of questioning (rather than furthering) my own views.

So, with that in mind, why do you think Kannon is right about a discussion of childhood conditioning not belonging on an astrology board? ... What is your definition/interpretation of the word "appease"? ... And why is it ok for you to "shift something in a particular direction", but 'dishonest' if done by me in this discussion?

IP: Logged

Dumuzi
Knowflake

Posts: 3222
From:
Registered: Oct 2018

posted September 11, 2020 11:22 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dumuzi     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Graham:


So, with that in mind, why do you think Kannon is right about a discussion of childhood conditioning not belonging on an astrology board? ... What is your definition/interpretation of the word "appease"? ... And why is it ok for you to "shift something in a particular direction", but 'dishonest' if done by me in this discussion?[/B]


moving goalposts is by definition not a way to have a proper discussion

if you ask a question and i give my opinion then you change the initial point in response we aren't actually getting anywhere, because what i responded to initially is lost entirely and i'm being asked to meet you somewhere else

to consider alternative ideas is one thing but it's the manner in which it's done that alters whether or not a discussion is being had in good faith

i'm strictly talking about moving goalposts not being a sound way to have a discussion, not considering alternative ideas or expanding on a discussion

if you can't see the distinction between these things i can only assume it's due to the black and white manner in which you've presented other issues and would be a waste of effort on my part to pick apart the many shades of gray involved here

but since i'm all about wasted effort... when i've shifted the topic in other directions i've done so while keeping my initial point and responding as such adding these things in addition to what i've said rather than as a replacement for what i've said

this distinction drastically alters the manner in which the discussion is being presented

i've addressed your points, stuck to mine, and offered additional topics of discussion whereas what you did was different in nature because you shifted the initial question i responded to by creating a fictitious person whom you could use to "prove" your viewpoint rather than addressing the general nature of people

everything you say can be backed up by this character you created who is one dimensional for your purposes but doesn't encompass the reality of the discussion

by doing so you cease to have a discussion in good faith

how things are said changes their nature, 2 people can do something similar but it will not be exactly the same if they go about it in a different manner

again it's only black and white thinking that would make them the same and not actually weighing out all aspects of what's said and addressing that

i am addressing the nature of your responses not claiming to fully understand your psyche and what's behind your discussion style, of course it's possible to question things while speaking in a manner that comes off self assured and so on never claimed otherwise

if you'll notice i never made a claim about you as a person (though you have implied things about me as a person in your responses) if i comment on something you've said it's just that, a comment on what you've said

well your initial statements had nothing to do with astrology, technically many discussions can relate to astrology, but with zero astrological points being brought up they're not relevant to astrology

we can discuss the nature of morality for example, and what makes an individual adhere to traditional morality based on culture over personal subjective morality based on an inner compass

now this discussion doesn't at all have to do with astrology in and of itself, but if we were to add in say points about saturn, jupiter, and uranus and specific signs etc then we have a discussion about the same thing but it's regarded through an astrological lens

for a while this discussion had no astrological lens to look through, and the initial point did not address one

that's why there's no relation to astrology, because you put it on other people to choose whether or not there are astrological implications and only brought them up later on

i define appease by its definition how else would one define it? i conceded to what kannon asked in an attempt to give this conversation astrological relevance where there was none because i agreed that it was nonsensical to speak about it here without that

as for your other points i believe i already addressed them in explaining distinctions between moving goalposts and raising alternative discussions

like i said these things are only "the same" if your views are black and white and don't have any room for individual distinctions

i do not operate in that manner and won't because life doesn't work that way, shades of gray all things needing to be picked apart and balanced on a scale to be objectively looked at

to not acknowledge distinctions is failure to think critically in my view

edit: btw if someone who wasn't a mod pointed out what kannon did i would have reacted similarly because it's in my nature to do so

IP: Logged

vansio
Knowflake

Posts: 1704
From: the outskirts of Delphi
Registered: Dec 2017

posted September 11, 2020 11:47 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for vansio     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
it should already clear to everyone, that this topic had been posted into an ‘incorrect’ sub forum. OK.
doesn’t negate OP from having a valid thread, nor sense of argument, anyone’s for that matter, neither is this working against our enjoyment of this forum as a platform. soon too, this topic, shall pass. to be frank, I’ve seen more utterly ridiculous one-liners posted by desperate users on astrology 2.0 than bearing witness to this heated discussion.

please carry on. or moderator impose yourself. doesn’t matter

if we’re meant to cater to the rules regarding the circumstances of this topic, contextually, even socially, then it has imploded. qualifying the only value of contribution as utilitarian... again, seen some dumb sh*t on this sub forum.

IP: Logged

Dumuzi
Knowflake

Posts: 3222
From:
Registered: Oct 2018

posted September 11, 2020 12:09 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dumuzi     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
@vansio

i only pointed out why it was irrelevant because graham questioned it, do i necessarily care all that much? nah

while i do agree with kannon that this doesn't belong here i engaged in the discussion initially without bothering to point that out because i wasn't personally bothered by it (if you'll notice my initial response was entirely void of astrology)

when kannon raised that point though i was like yeah ok true let's mention it and see where that goes

looks like you edited out the rest of what you said about my drug use and so on so i can't properly respond to it, that was pretty quick but i did catch it 😁

i think you'll find that i run my mouth at great lengths on any given topic because it's just what i do, i'm like that

i wouldn't call this "heated" though, that implies you're reading more emotion than what i feel into my words

i just make noise tbh, simply put give me something to make noise about anything and i don't even need a stake in it i'll go on about it just to do it

i don't even need to share any of my actual opinions when i do it, it's just about going through the motions

way to stimulate myself, nothing more nothing less

edit: btw i don't care if this gets moved or not, i was only pointing out i understood kannon's point of view and figured we may as well bring astrology into it because well... we're all interested in astrology to some degree or we wouldn't be here right?

if it gets shut down i'll do something else if not i'll continue, but i have no strong opinions on whether or not this discussion should remain open

IP: Logged

vansio
Knowflake

Posts: 1704
From: the outskirts of Delphi
Registered: Dec 2017

posted September 11, 2020 12:21 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for vansio     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I’m glad you caught it (i only edit out, if a point within a paragraph I’ve made doesn’t make sense coherently, I need to be concise with my writing) wasn’t about your drug use per say , but about how I’ve seen users on LL quickly invalidate your astrological interpretations / input based off of your apparent addiction, as if they could be separated—which I think is exactly Graham’s counterargument about childhood and astrology: what purpose does it serve to neuter each other, or ourselves.

edit: see, this is why I don’t like to be quoted. I edit so many times! consider all my recent comments first drafts lol. havent figured out how to make “please don’t quote” my LL signature—someone quick, fwd me to the appropriate subforum, my life depends on it

IP: Logged

Dumuzi
Knowflake

Posts: 3222
From:
Registered: Oct 2018

posted September 11, 2020 12:29 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dumuzi     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by vansio:
I’m glad you caught it (i only edit things if they don’t make sense to me for my point) it wasn’t about your drug use, but about how I’ve seen users on LL invalidate your astrological interpretations based off of your character, as if they could be separated—which I think is exactly Graham’s counterargument about childhood and astrology. What purpose does it serve to neuter each other?

well my character is questionable to some degree so it's expected, and i don't take it personally tbh i see it as a grasping at straws sort of thing when someone goes there

can't prove a point some other way bring up that and i consider it more of a loss on their part than anything

i only got to read through it once so i'm sure i missed some of what you said, i have a tendency to skim then read more thoroughly as i respond

it's like i said though pretty much anything can be discussed through an astrological lens if we put one there, when we don't though it just isn't an astrological discussion

personally i think this forum really suffers from not having just a general discussion area, it's loaded in all these very specific subcategories that rarely get used but then more generalized topics and discussions aren't "fit" to have anywhere

like graham asked kannon initially "where could this go?" and the answer is "well it fits absolutely nowhere because things are broken down to a million specific categories but nowhere is for more generalized **** " which in my view is problematic and can take away from interesting discussions that can be had

IP: Logged

vansio
Knowflake

Posts: 1704
From: the outskirts of Delphi
Registered: Dec 2017

posted September 11, 2020 12:46 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for vansio     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
it would go in Lindaland Central 2.0 👻🎉

while we’re at this... the LL categories aren’t even alphabetical... 😬

IP: Logged


This topic is 5 pages long:   1  2  3  4  5 

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright 2000-2021

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a