Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (45491)	7/13/1999 11:34:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 108807

In theory, perhaps. But in fact, no. I don't think you can name me a single person who doesn't have SOME hot button that when pushed will make them react even against their conscious will. It's the mental equivalent of the rubber hammer. No matter how hard you try to prevent it, when the doctor taps the right spot on your knee, your leg swings out. It is simply not something you can control. Your mind, of course, is an organic mechanism just as much as your leg is. What you read creates, if my old organic chemistry is still valid, a combination of chemical and electrical forces in your brain matter. That will automatically stimulate certain responses just as the doctor's hammer does. The "flight or fight" response is a physical response which the mind cannot entirely control. You didn't tell me specifically whether, in the case of the client I stated, you believe that after years of abuse at the hands of her husband she would be capable of totally not responding to his threats, having no adrenelin rush, having no sweaty palms, having no sleeplessness. If you really believe that, I want you to say so here--that you believe she could, if she wanted to, totally control all of her physical and emotional responses and feel nothing more than she would feel if somebody told her that the price of toilet paper was going remain stable for the next six months. Can you truthfully say that?

To: greenspirit who wrote (45491)	7/14/1999 12:07:00 AM
From: jbe	Respond to of 108807

Michael, I'd go with you where the "small stuff" is concerned, but Christopher, I think, is right about the "big stuff." Since what prompted this discussion in the first place were posts on SI, let us return to them, if you don't mind. Now, I read petty little posts on SI all the time that make steam come out of my ears, even though they are rarely aimed at me personally. And the urge to give the offender(s) a good swat is almost irresistible. As Blue says, nasty talk can arouse the Fight or Flee response almost automatically. However, I usually manage to restrain myself, to avoid getting sucked into a long sniperfire exchange that would surely make me feel even worse. Sometimes you can head something off at the pass with a little humor; at other times, a soft answer will turn away wrath; most of the time, silence is the best response. So, of course, you do have a range of responses to choose from. But to choose silence, for example, does not mean that you have not been affected -- unless of course you have undergone years of training in a Zen Buddhist monastery. You have been affected; but you have chosen not to let it show. When it comes to the "big stuff" -- the kind of things Christopher listed in his post -- it seems to me you ought to be affected by it. Furthermore, I think you are obliged to respond, especially -- and maybe even only -- when someone else is the target. Take the anti-Semitic stuff that gets hurled around here on SI, for example. In my opinion, we should all be "affected" by it, which means being sensitive to what the targets of that sort of thing must be feeling. And I think it behooves all of us who are not the immediate targets to respond, to protest. (I have to say I am puzzled as to why SI has let EV, for example, get away with spewing such garbage for so many years, but it certainly is not because no one has said anything.) Of course, speech can be harmful. Otherwise there would be no such thing as "libel" or "slander." End of Rant. :-) Next? Joan .

To: greenspirit who wrote (45491)	7/14/1999 12:26:00 AM
From: jpmac	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Great discussion you have going here, Michael. I'm not up to formulating a very clear or complete response, but I'd like to say a little. I think you're on the right track and that there is a bridge between what you are saying and what others are bringing up. Short examples.. As you said, if we are the target of racism, or whatever, we ultimately choose our response, not initially perhaps, but we have that power within us. Now in terms of responding to its use in the world, we do, imo, have a responsibility to respond. It is how we respond that we can work on. Do we respond to nastiness with the same? Or anger with the same, even if inside we feel it? Or sarcasm with sarcasm? It goes on. Martin Luther King is an example of someone who responded but he did so in keeping with his beliefs and his heart. Violence and hatred were responded to with non-violence and love. But there was great strength is his response. I know I'm rambling a bit, or a lot. But that's cool. You've hit on one of my favorite topics, and fields of endeavor. Thanks. It's been a long time since I even tried to put it into words that it is difficult. I've really enjoyed your posts.