Do you want the truth?

[Resolute]

this 'depressive realism' stuff is also great. who knew our theories were so scientific?

[Resolute]

2 minutes ago, Klingcorn said:

Society is so hateful that it won't even allow people the mercy of leaving when they want. We are nothing but slaves. 

society believes that it's not in the best interest of people to leave when they want. so i don't think it's out of hate. they actually think they're doing those people a favor.

[Resolute]

12 minutes ago, Klingcorn said:

Doesn't make it any easier to deal with though.

i know that all too well, i'm afraid.

[Resolute]

4 minutes ago, Klingcorn said:

I can't escape into anything anymore...movies, books, music, games...really all I've had all my life. None of it works anymore.

i'm sorry, man.

 

4 minutes ago, Klingcorn said:

I want to make a final topic, but I'm having trouble. Guess it's like "whining thread" so I shouldn't bother I guess.

you can post it on my whining thread if you'd like.

[mts]

-

[Resolute]

20 minutes ago, sedsed said:

Nothing wrong with either of them, they just are. We as humans give them value. Yes this includes reality because your reality of a situation is not the same as someone else's reality of that same situation. 

this, unfortunately, is not true. no two realities can be identical. and if they could, it would literally be logically impossible for the outcome (feelings/reactions/etc.) to be any different. in other words, any person would necessarily act/react/feel exactly the same as another person if everything (and i mean everything) about a given situation was exactly the same. yes, it is possible for two seemingly similar situations for two individuals to have significantly different outcomes.

[Resolute]

different interpretations are a direct result of the inevitably different situations/circumstances. in other words, the interpretations are the effects (symptoms if you will), not the causes. although, they, in turn, also play a role in the outcome (feelings/actions/reactions/etc.).

you must understand that by "situations" or "circumstances" i include internal factors/elements (genes, both physical and psychological) as well as external factors/elements (environment, events, etc.). together, these internal and external elements form the situation/reality of an individual.

[Resolute]

19 hours ago, sedsed said:

To bad an honest lion is just fantasy too because in reality it would maul you.

i think "lion" here is a metaphor; i.e., an honest, capable and competent man.

[Small]

Where I part with you Resolute, is that I think people have the ability to act against their most overwhelming natural responses, and that they can adjust the various faculties in their psyches to produce a whole new archetype which carry their own subsets.

[Resolute]

6 minutes ago, Small said:

Where I part with you Resolute, is that I think people have the ability to act against their most overwhelming natural responses, and that they can adjust the various faculties in their psyches to produce a whole new archetype which carry their own subsets.

naturally, since you're a libertarian. but determinism aside, let's say that what you say is possible, or even practical, do you disagree with the "positive illusion" assessment?

[LaLa]

On April 2, 2016 at 3:55 AM, Resolute said:

@LaLa, is there anything you haven't read about ? it's a shame someone like you doesn't participate much in the discussions. i have a feeling that you have much to offer, not only psychologically, but also philosophically.

 

I'm very glad you've found the texts insightful and somehow useful.

Thank you for your compliments. I see why you have such impressions of me. But I think you're idealizing my potential contributions. Others wrote a lot of relevant texts already in a much better, deeper, intelligent ... way than I could ever do it. It's much better to provide links to at least some of their work (at least the small part I've seen and remembered "in the right moment" when I saw a topic here) then to try to write something myself. I used to love writing (I have a blog in my native language, used to publish some articles... long ago, in the university newspaper and elsewhere), but... the last several years, I only feel like... "What's the point??"... Rationally, I know it would be better for me personally to have a totally different attitude, but... I don't know how to change it.  

[Resolute]

2 hours ago, LaLa said:

But I think you're idealizing my potential contributions.

does this fall under that "positive illusions" category?

anyway, i hope you regain your zest for writing, whether here or elsewhere.

here's looking at you, kid.

[LaLa]

Thank you, R.  .

[Small]

@Resolute

 

My understanding of a positive illusory bias is that individuals have an inflated view of themeselves, their future and level of control. Obviously it's a denial based coping mechanism, built on a system that needs to defer anxiety rather than experience it. But so is learned helplessness, in fact, they're the equal opposite of each other if you look beneath the skin because LH seeks the avoidance of exertion & the humiliation of failure, both of which induce anxiety and are subsequently avoided.

 

There are obviously different cognitive & behavioral repercussions, but the long term prognosis for positive illusory bias isn't a good one, if no actual progress is made in the areas of coping or delusion. However, if an individual does make progress, and if the positive illusion isn't inflated to further unrealistic levels then it isn't harmful at all. It's basically an elaborate way of saying hope isn't it? Which can be dangerous when exertion + loss ofresources × number of attempts < progress in the long haul. But obviously resilience plays a role too.

 

The long term prognosis of failure is ironically, probably learned helplessness (Or deeper delusion depending on PP or DD dominance), unless the individual is able to successfully attribute failure to realistic variables. Considering the unmeasured nature of a positive illusory bias I'd think most probably lack in being analytical, but for those that are able to stay realistic with their over estimation of their levels of control, ability and future, it probably won't result in learned helplessness at all.

 

These people make up that annoying faction of the population that are optimistic, but intelligent as opposed to the stereotyped happy & stupid group (that weren't smart enough to attribute failure to specified variables, but didn't fall into LH due to other positive qualities that feed their self esteem).

[IrmaJean]

But why is an optimistic person annoying? Is that about the person deemed as annoying or the person who feels annoyed?

The problem I have with the original post, Resolute, is there seems to be an assumption that we can know how others feel and what their experiences are like, what their level of pain or struggle might be. The difficulty with this I think would be that we are perceiving another person's experiences through our own lens. This is unavoidable, but it does need to be taken into account I think. We can try to understand others as best as possible, but we can't walk in their shoes or be in their skin. What is the purpose of judging? Why put energy into this instead of how to help ourselves?

Seddy, if I'm being honest with myself, I agree with you about what happens when we die. That's what I think too...which is sad, but I fear it is reality. I am open to being wrong. I hope I'm wrong. I do think that our essence remains after we die because our essence is intangible. For those who have connected with our essence while we were living, will see and feel it after we are gone. And the spirit of who we were remains in the hearts of those who we touched during our lives, with those who have loved us.

 

[Resolute]

1 hour ago, Small said:

@Resolute

 

My understanding of a positive illusory bias is that individuals have an inflated view of themeselves, their future and level of control. Obviously it's a denial based coping mechanism, built on a system that needs to defer anxiety rather than experience it. But so is learned helplessness, in fact, they're the equal opposite of each other if you look beneath the skin because LH seeks the avoidance of exertion & the humiliation of failure, both of which induce anxiety and are subsequently avoided.

are you saying that exertion and humiliation of failure should be sought and not avoided?

[Small]

1 hour ago, IrmaJean said:

But why is abecauseisimistic person annoying? Is thent about the person deemed as annoying or the person who feels annoyed?

I meant that Intelligent + optimistic are a nuisance to the pessimistic because the general rhetoric of the latter group Is that the former are unmeasured and unintelligent. In another thread Robert attributed my beliefs on "trying" to the stereotyped naive happy go lucky Idiots that cant process pain adeqauately. It's really quite typical. The thought of emotionally IntellIgent people that persevere through hardship whilst accurately processing the gravitas of their pain, shakes the belief system of most pessimists.

[Resolute]

1 hour ago, IrmaJean said:

The problem I have with the original post, Resolute, is there seems to be an assumption that we can know how others feel and what their experiences are like, what their level of pain or struggle might be. The difficulty with this I think would be that we are perceiving another person's experiences through our own lens. This is unavoidable, but it does need to be taken into account I think. We can try to understand others as best as possible, but we can't walk in their shoes or be in their skin. What is the purpose of judging? Why put energy into this instead of how to help ourselves?

beth, as long as you refuse to accept that not everything is relative and unmeasurable, we will continue to go in circles. i've never claimed that i can know exactly how another person feels or what their exact experiences are. i do, however, assert that we (at least some of us) can relate to many events in the lives of others and their experiences. the more extensive, accurate and reliable data we have about an individual, the more we can 'measure' his pain or pleasure. i maintain that it is empirical, like psychology, psychotherapy, psychoanalysis etc.. by relativising it, you seek to obscure it.

 

1 hour ago, IrmaJean said:

I do think that our essence remains after we die because our essence is intangible. For those who have connected with our essence while we were living, will see and feel it after we are gone. And the spirit of who we were remains in the hearts of those who we touched during our lives, with those who have loved us.

i disagree with this, but that's fine.

[Resolute]

17 minutes ago, Small said:

I meant that Intelligent + optimistic are a nuisance to the pessimistic because the general rhetoric of the latter group Is that the former are unmeasured and unintelligent. In another thread Robert attributed my beliefs on "trying" to the stereotyped naive happy go lucky Idiots that cant process pain adeqauately. It's really quite typical. The thought of emotionally IntellIgent people that persevere through hardship whilst accurately processing the gravitas of their pain, shakes the belief system of most pessimists.

is that so?

[Small]

@Resolute

Firstly it depends on the situation. Should a man with late stages of bowel cancer facing imminent death, spread his cheeks beggingly to some low level doctor in the hope of a miracle? No, probably not. But avoid hypocrisy here, if you're condemning Positive Illusory Bias then the equal opposite should also be aknowledged as dangerous because the avoidance measures do lead to the development of similar symptom processes that are unhealthy.

 

I'm not saying humiliation itself should be sought, but exertion builds character in that it usually liberates the conscious mind and to some degree the subconscious set up, of the self destructive thought loops that result in LH formation. Provided this isn't draining their financial resources or physical health, it's a pragmatic way of chiselling the psyche. Anxiety in this context can be likened to lactic acid during a workout session. It's uncomfortable to experience, but the discomfort itself is due to replacing Bad characteristics (fat?) with good ones (burning fat/building mmuscle)

If an athlete gives up in the early stages of discomfort they wouldn't get far. But those that accept & process the pain form the very muscle that create greater resilience for future efforts.

[Resolute]

you accept that at a certain point, exertion, hope, chiseling, etc. become pointless. we simply disagree on what/where that point is. you might consider it to be at immanent death type scenarios, whereas i believe it to be at much earlier stages.

i think this depends largely on the type of philosophy by which one--involuntarily--lives. accepting or not accepting the existence of--any--freewill, immanent and/or ultimate justice ("just world" fallacy), and so on all play a significant role in how we assess things.

you of all people know the importance of reward following effort. i'm sure you also understand the importance of proportionality of these two. when an adequately intelligent and experienced person assesses that the uncertain reward for a given task is completely negatively disproportionate to the effort/exertion/pain, he wouldn't be unjustified in giving it the finger.

[Small]

Well, philosophies change with experience & circumstances. A poor man's philosophy today wouldn't be the same philosophy should he be wealthy tomorrow. (Reducto ad absurdium to demonstrate a point). They exist only to provide scope or significance to current situations, and by that definition, opportunities shouldn't be rejected on account of it. It's synonymous with a homeless man rejecting a roof over his head, after forming a philosophy of home is with the heart is to make street living easier to process.

 

About the line, yes I agree it's purely subjective. We draw the line in different places, but what I object to is the narrative that progress was impossible (in the scenarios it was just difficult) and those that did advance were either lucky or didn't have it bad to begin with. This seems to be another thought that has been consistent with those with LH.

 

The reward/punishment paradigm isn't that important imo and I think the CBT over emphasises it. A duality occurs, and although effort that's reinforced with failure does create negative associations in the cognitive schema which might trickle down to the preconscious, it's very easy to uncondition. Parallel to this, the anxiety inducing patterns adjust in the subconscious psyche which is a far greater benefit than a loss, in my opinion. 

 

This is all abstract, in your particular situation I understand because it's remarkably shitty. I'm speaking generally.

 

[Resolute]

1 hour ago, Small said:

I'm not saying humiliation itself should be sought, but exertion builds character in that it usually liberates the conscious mind and to some degree the subconscious set up, of the self destructive thought loops that result in LH formation. Provided this isn't draining their financial resources or physical health, it's a pragmatic way of chiselling the psyche. Anxiety in this context can be likened to lactic acid during a workout session. It's uncomfortable to experience, but the discomfort itself is due to replacing Bad characteristics (fat?) with good ones (burning fat/building mmuscle)

If an athlete gives up in the early stages of discomfort they wouldn't get far. But those that accept & process the pain form the very muscle that create greater resilience for future efforts.

this is based on the presumption that there is in fact a reward for tolerating the exertion and humiliation. so if there turns out to be no reward, then this person would have essentially sought exertion and humiliation, specially if he knew that from the beginning.

[Small]

Well even if he fails, the reward is a stronger, more resilient character. This puts him in a position where he could either apply this mental strength in coping with his life or if he wanted, could try again another time. Where consciously he might have associated hard work as pointless (and to a lesser degree punishment) the collaboration of his subconscious and preconscious adjust, as well as the cognitive schema which colloquially speaking, gives him the ability to live in the trenches without as much discomfort or anxiety.

[Resolute]

9 minutes ago, Small said:

Well, philosophies change with experience & circumstances. A poor man's philosophy today wouldn't be the same philosophy should he be wealthy tomorrow. (Reducto ad absurdium to demonstrate a point). They exist only to provide scope or significance to current situations, and by that definition, opportunities shouldn't be rejected on account of it. It's synonymous with a homeless man rejecting a roof over his head, after forming a philosophy of home is with the heart is to make street living easier to process.

i agree that philosophies are a result of experience and circumstances, and that sometimes they change should the circumstances change, but that isn't always the case. sometimes a philosophy can become permanently ingrained, and in some cases conforms to reality.

 

9 minutes ago, Small said:

About the line, yes I agree it's purely subjective. We draw the line in different places, but what I object to is the narrative that progress was impossible (in the scenarios it was just difficult) and those that did advance were either lucky or didn't have it bad to begin with. This seems to be another thought that has been consistent with those with LH.

one thing you're not taking into account is what constitutes progress/advancement. what you consider progress/advancement might be considered regress to someone else.