Why is it so difficult to accept things we cannot change?

[Victimorthecrime]

Why is it so difficult to accept things we cannot change and instead act on those that we can change?

It seems so simple and so logical and yet it eludes me. What am I missing?

[mts]

I think because the things we can change tend to be painful/difficult so we avoid them. As for the solution, I couldn't tell you. Mostly I think I'm powerless to do anything, and I just have to wait till bad things happen so I can move forward.

My heart tells me this: what it comes down to trying to move freely in this social world what we need is (strong) contacts, ones that care about us, and that we can care about more than ourselves at times. Family, lover, friends, etc.

And if you don't have contacts, it seems the (my) only way forward is anger. I liked what you said about living well is the best revenge, I'm going to write that on paper and stick it on my wall. For me, anything I can use to make me angry and vengeful, I use it.

Psychology and Self-Help say it's about behavioural habits and freedom/power.

This week is about (to be) as shitty of a week as there has ever been so I'm probably not much use.

[mts]

Maybe I'm being too cynical. I don't know what happened. Last year there were some good days when I felt positive, I was writing, reading affirmations, meditating. I know one thing: "action" beats reading, which I think is another why I'm drawn to this place, it's the action of typing my thoughts into reality. It actually makes a difference to how I feel, where reading does not.

I wish I could write regularly to my family, but it just becomes this kind of "avoid as much serious stuff as possible and make jokes or talk about trivial stuff" they're just not interested in introspective discussion at all, it all becomes about "this book" and "that cd" etc. That's not what family is about I guess. They want to enjoy things, not discuss life and death lol and I can't blame them.

F*ck I don't know. I just don't know anymore. Everything I've tried hasn't worked. I'm totally stuck.

I've turned this debate into my blog. This was not my intention.

[IrmaJean]

Why is it so difficult to accept things we cannot change and instead act on those that we can change?

It seems so simple and so logical and yet it eludes me. What am I missing?

I think a big part of it is a resistance to letting go. I feel that letting go requires a tremendous amount of courage..it's frightening, we want some control...so we cling and hang on. Change can also be frightening.

[Victimorthecrime]

mts feel free to write whatever you want. I find your stuff authentic and insightful. I hear ya about having a shitty week.

[Victimorthecrime]

For me the key is to feel good about myself. If I can do that I can find the energy to take action. Action leads to success, success leads to feeling good and the cycle is reinforced.

Unfortunately it is so much easier said than done.

[mts]

I've been thinking this for a long time, but I've been reluctant to share it on the forums: the idea is to write in the uttermost detail about my fears, with examples and clear possible solutions, and make this a habit. The reason I've hesitated to write this is that it's possible I have "some level of" dysmorphia, which involves elements of delusional thinking, and I thought maybe writing about this could make it worse. But what the hell.

It's been my impression from having social anxiety disorder that the mind when left to its own devices becomes fragmented like a computer, and it needs re-ordering in a sense.

Perhaps you could also use word definitions and metaphors to illustrate ideas.

Just a thought. I'm probably getting carried away.

[Victimorthecrime]

I think we all have a level of dysmorphia in our thinking, a bias stemming from our self image as it has been shaped by our experiences.

I guess the bottom line for me is to invest time and energy in making things better. That done, all one can do is let things play out.

[Resolute]

Why is it so difficult to accept things we cannot change and instead act on those that we can change?

It seems so simple and so logical and yet it eludes me. What am I missing?

i speak for myself when i say: i can "accept" some of the things i can't change, but others are simply unacceptable. i mean you can't expect a sensitive and intelligent being to just go about as if nothing's wrong, when that individual is carrying a massive load of painful problems. especially when the list of things that individual can't change is so long and so heavy that it inevitably crushes that person, and completely destroys anything left of his/her spirit after decades of pressure. a person can only endure so much.

[Victimorthecrime]

i speak for myself when i say: i can "accept" some of the things i can't change, but others are simply unacceptable. i mean you can't expect a sensitive and intelligent being to just go about as if nothing's wrong, when that individual is carrying a massive load of painful problems. especially when the list of things that individual can't change is so long and so heavy that it inevitably crushes that person, and completely destroys anything left of his/her spirit after decades of pressure. a person can only endure so much.

I totally hear what you are saying. When you refer to the long and heavy list of decades old crushing problems that articulates perfectly my concerns over my employment situation. I just say to myself "how much more can I take?".

I just say to myself there has to be something I am missing. For the present time I am just going to keep working and keep my eyes open. But I am open to suggestions!

[Resolute]

I totally hear what you are saying. When you refer to the long and heavy list of decades old crushing problems that articulates perfectly my concerns over my employment situation. I just say to myself "how much more can I take?".

I just say to myself there has to be something I am missing. For the present time I am just going to keep working and keep my eyes open. But I am open to suggestions!

i hope you don't mind my humor, my suggestion is for you to bang your boss (that mean lady), and if she's the ugly type, just "keep your eyes closed" lol.

if she likes it, you keep your job, if she doesn't, at least you'll be leaving with a "bang".

[mts]

-

[Victimorthecrime]

i hope you don't mind my humor, my suggestion is for you to bang your boss (that mean lady), and if she's the ugly type, just "keep your eyes closed" lol.

if she likes it, you keep your job, if she doesn't, at least you'll be leaving with a "bang".

Don't mind the humor at all and sadly it's probably true although I suspect that an interloper is presently filling that position.

Absent sexual contact she still seems to love having her ass kissed endlessly. So it goes...

[Resolute]

People say always focus on the positive, but when there is no positive all you can do is remove (or let go of) the negative. Thing is, this often welcomes more negative, and you up "under the avalanche", or that's how I see my things from my perspective at least.

if you have no positive, and you "let go" of the negative, you'll have nothing. in theory, that might be better than having just the negatives, but in practice, i think we're wired to cling to something (anything), and in the absence of any positive, all you have left -to cling to- is the negative. it simply sucks.

[mts]

You're right my metaphors were confused and I'm talking nonsense.

[Victimorthecrime]

You're right my metaphors were confused and I'm talking nonsense.

LOL you are not. I got what you are saying - focus on the positive but lacking that try to at least mitigate the negative. If this creates a void then so be it. That is the space in which a new day will dawn.

[mts]

Thanks

[malign]

I tend to frame the reluctance to let go of some "unreal fact" in terms of what it would mean to one's own self-image. If "I", or my image of me, would feel "worse" if reality weren't altered, you can bet I'm going to alter it. It's the easiest thing to do under the circumstances, especially if I think of my image of me as unchangeable, and if I think that my assessment of "worse" is also.

Yet neither is true of real people: we change all the time, yet continually think of ourselves as the same; and we can decide to change our concept of value, and probably do so slowly throughout our lives.

Current popular opinion is that there is only one truth about any given thing, and so popular value attaches to "knowing the truth". This leaves no room for different people's truths, nor for an evolution of our own truth over our lifetimes.

Luckily, we retain the ability to have our own opinion.

[Resolute]

Current popular opinion is that there is only one truth about any given thing, and so popular value attaches to "knowing the truth". This leaves no room for different people's truths, nor for an evolution of our own truth over our lifetimes.

Luckily, we retain the ability to have our own opinion.

malign, i'm disappointed in you, don't tell me you believe in pluralism.

[Victimorthecrime]

I tend to frame the reluctance to let go of some "unreal fact" in terms of what it would mean to one's own self-image. If "I", or my image of me, would feel "worse" if reality weren't altered, you can bet I'm going to alter it. It's the easiest thing to do under the circumstances, especially if I think of my image of me as unchangeable, and if I think that my assessment of "worse" is also.

So is it Ego, my self image, that causes the cognitive distortion where I cannot focus on FACTS, the very thing that could unlock change but rather on regret and fear? If I could just stick to what matters and forget the nonsense. I am referring to my on going job struggles. Grrrr....

[malign]

Res, it depends on what you mean by "pluralism". If you mean, do I believe in a different boiling point of water, then no. If you mean, are there different, equally valid, beliefs about what's good for a person, or to what a person should devote their lives, then I would say, of course. Scientific "truth" is great in the situations to which it applies, which specifically are situations which are repeatable and measurable. Very (and I emphasize that very) few human situations fall into that category. Besides, even scientific "truth" is continually being revised as new experiments are performed; only in some imaginary limit is it absolute.

VB, have you ever read Eckhard Tolle's A New Earth? He describes fairly clearly his idea of ego in it (I don't agree with him about everything, but it's a point of view.) What surprised me as someone who grew up with a very poor self-image was that that can be just as much a manifestation of ego as believing that one is superior to others. Either way, it's a self-concept that allows the person to get by, to cope: the feeling of superiority allows some to ignore insults, and the feeling of inferiority allows others to believe that they were the cause of insults, instead of random victims. Either way, the person uses their ego to believe that they control the outcome, when in fact, no one human controls the outcome of an interaction between two or more humans (or their interaction with "Life", which is similarly not under our control.)

Interestingly, you're even taking this cognitive distortion as another opportunity to blame yourself, when it's actually extremely common. I would even suggest that the "nonsense" coming from those around you is the result of their cognitive distortions, so it's not as if you're the only one.

Some models of the psyche (defined as the total mental experience of a person) suggest that the ego is only a small part of the whole. It's the part that's conscious, that is aware of its own thoughts. That's far from being our total capability, though. The problem is that, from the ego's point of view, everything else that happens, whether it happens in the unconscious portion or in the outside world, appears to be external.

That makes us assume that other people are thinking what our unconscious is thinking, a process that is called "projection". If we get enough exposure to a given person to actually find out what they're thinking (therapy is one way), we often find that it's quite different from what we assumed they were thinking (in fact, we often find that when we thought they were thinking something bad about us, they weren't thinking about us at all.)

I have often had the experience of seeing a person come up to me with a scowl on their face. When I was younger, I assumed they were scowling at me, for some reason I was never able to understand, but of which I assumed I was the cause. Now, I'm aware that I have no idea why they have that expression on their face, that it often has more to do with some passing thought (hey, maybe about their ex-wife?), and I'm more inclined to ask (if I care) what's bothering them. Even if it is about me, that gives me the opportunity to do something about it, or to correct whatever misunderstanding exists.

[Resolute]

Res, it depends on what you mean by "pluralism". If you mean, do I believe in a different boiling point of water, then no. 1- If you mean, are there different, equally valid, beliefs about what's good for a person, or to what a person should devote their lives, then I would say, of course. Scientific "truth" is great in the situations to which it applies, which specifically are situations which are repeatable and measurable. Very (and I emphasize that very) few human situations fall into that category. Besides, 2- even scientific "truth" is continually being revised as new experiments are performed; 3- only in some imaginary limit is it absolute.

1- how the hell did you determine that they're "equally valid"? it's logically impossible for two (or more) different (contradicting) things to be true (any level of truth) at the same time in any given situation. that would simply contradictory. one must be absolutely true, the other, absolutely false, period.

2- any scientific "truth" that can be revised is nothing more than a scientific theory, not truth. absolute truth (about anything) can't be revised.

3- in reality (actuality, which might be different than what we think, believe, feel, etc.) absolute truth applies to absolutely everything (every single case, incident, circumstance, etc.), even if you and i can't "measure" it, or replicate it, someone/something (even if it's only a hypothetical entity) can.

[IrmaJean]

I think when it comes to human beings things are not always black and white. Human behavior and our understanding of it is constantly evolving and changing. In my studies of personality theory, I could find what seemed to be some truth or validity, from my personal perspective, in many of the different models...behaviorist, humanistic, psychodynamic etc. The ideas don't necessarily have to be contradictory, they may simply be different ways of looking at things or organizing them. Theories may be just that and never more when it comes to fully understanding the workings of the human mind. I'm not sure human psyche can be accurately measured or defined; interpretations can even be subjective.

These are my opinions only, resolute, with respect to yours.

[Victimorthecrime]

No I have not read Eckhard Tolle, malign, but I've read a lot of stuff where the ego is discussed like Alan Watts, Ken Wilbur Ram Dass, etcetera, and yes they all say what you said that ego is ego regardless of whether the person is a narcissist or suicidal.

My attempts to transcend my ego brought me to the threshold of madness! Ok that was overly dramatic but it was unsettling.

[Resolute]

1- I think when it comes to human beings things are not always black and white. 2- Human behavior and our understanding of it is constantly evolving and changing. In my studies of personality theory, I could find what seemed to be some truth or validity, from my personal perspective, in many of the different models...behaviorist, humanistic, psychodynamic etc. 3- The ideas don't necessarily have to be contradictory, they may simply be different ways of looking at things or organizing them. Theories may be just that and never more when it comes to fully understanding the workings of the human mind. 4- I'm not sure human psyche can be accurately measured or defined; interpretations can even be subjective.

5- These are my opinions only, resolute, with respect to yours.

1- agreed.

2- agreed.

3- in some cases, maybe, but sometimes, they definitely contradict each other.

4- maybe not by us mere humans, but there must be someone who can, and with no subjectivity.

5- you put that in there to avoid my wrath, didn't you?