View Full Version : How do we be good people?
See, I think being nice is a shallow goal. Do you want to be nice to someone who is trying to murder your family, or do you want to kill them first in order to protect your family? I try to be nice as much as I can. I try really really hard, and I just suck at it. I don't know why but I want to criticise everyone all the time. I think it's because I'm really criticising myself. Take Iroquois for example. I project a lot of negative things at him because he treats me like garbage, but a lot of it could also be said about me. Human effort is not the way. I can not become a good person by my own efforts. Maybe I could become good by some other people's standards, but are they necessarily good? What's good about being called good by evil people? I do believe all human beings are inherently evil. And if there is any goodness in me I don't take credit for it. I am not a good person, I'm actually a horrible person. But if there is any goodness in me it is because God is working in my life changing me. But right now I just feel like complete garbage, and I haven't been obeying God much lately. I do talk to him, and I do listen to him, but I really need to get it together and obey him fully. Honestly every moment of my life is filled with joy when I am obeying God and being intimate with him. I've just slacked off so much lately and indulged in so much sin and I'm paying for it in my relationships and my overall level of happiness.
I'm sorry Iroquois and Miss Vicky for berating you guys so much. I really have a hard time tolerating the two of you, and I find that you're both very dishonest with me which is infuriating. I forgive you both, but I really don't like either of you. I'm sorry... that's just the reality of the situation I guess. I don't know what to do about it, and the only help I ever got from anyone here was, "Just don't be a dick." Which was not helpful at all. I often wonder why I even bother coming here... But there are some people I like, and I like movies.
“In the moment when I truly understand my enemy, understand him well enough to defeat him, then in that very moment I also love him. I think it’s impossible to really understand somebody, what they want, what they believe, and not love them the way they love themselves. And then, in that very moment when I love them.... I destroy them.”
― Orson Scott Card, Ender's Game
Love and truth are much nobler pursuits than kindness. I hate it when people tell me nice sounding lies to try and make me feel better. I have a co-worker who does that a lot to me. He gives me a forced smile (only his lips smile, not the rest of his face) and a diagonal nod when he says, "Yeah" because he's trying not to shake his head "no." And when he says "Everything is fine," it lacks the emphasis and impact that he has when he's being sincere. I guess he doesn't realize I can tell when he's lying and thinks that people's feelings are more important than the truth. That's like telling someone they're healthy when they have terminal cancer. It may make them feel better in that moment, but it will hurt them more when the tragedy comes.
Many people have fabricated a definition of "good" and shaped it into what they already are so that they can qualify.
Miss Vicky
08-09-18, 11:44 PM
Really? You mentioned me so that you could tell me in public that you don't like me?
I don't like you either - and haven't for quite some time - but that wasn't something that needed to be said publicly, now was it? (Or at all, really.)
As for your "forgiveness" - I neither want nor need it. I've been nothing but honest with you and have done you no wrong.
The only person not being honest with you is you.
MovieGal
08-10-18, 12:00 AM
One of my favorite quotes is "Do not argue what a good man should be, be one".
and what is a goood man? look inside, see its there and do it.
"That's like telling someone they're healthy when they have terminal cancer. It may make them feel better in that moment, but it will hurt them more when the tragedy comes."
Or it could be a buffer to help you mediate the immediate perceived negative until you are able to recognize and manage it for yourself.
You don't teach a child how to walk by saying, "Idiot baby! You're not even running! Stupid idiot baby!" No. You encourage and honor the effort, at least for as long as that effort is sincere. You may tell them they are doing good, though by your personal standard of walking techniques they may suck in comparison. But relative to the capability of that child, it IS good. Why not highlight that to encourage more effort and eventual progress?
Perhaps you, in this moment, are learning to walk. Your friend is simply offering support for as best as he may know how given your seeming inability to walk this path on your own. At least until you can recognize it on your own.
It depends on how you wish to perceive it though. This glass is simultaneously half empty and half full. We are simultaneously capable of both good and evil. It's absolutely up to you as to what you choose to project.
Humility is a factor. If God is important to you, then you should recognize that we are born of the earth, blemished in sin. You (we) are sheep, ignorant and weak to the harms of this world. Have faith in your shepherd to lead you. Have humility to recognize that you do not have the answers. You are not perfect. Neither is anyone else. Be humble and know that you do not know and make effort to learn. Part of that learning is seeing the best in others, or at least their potential. Build them up (selflessly) and you will find your world view shift. Its not for "me." As it never should be.
Anyhoo. I'm on my phone and I think I may have lost the plot thumbing this out.
Good luck to you through this.
Slappydavis
08-10-18, 02:14 AM
Zotis-
I don't post much, but I have to say:
1) ynwtf's post is insightful and well tailored to you.
2) Vicky's post is not an unfair response to what you said. I think you vacillate in your attempts to build bridges; I think a lot of your posts like this are trying to do two things: A) serve as an open and sincere statement from the heart B) trying to communicate your feelings. Sometimes in your pursuit of sincerity you say things that will be off-putting to the people you try to communicate to, thus the communication will often fail to reach them, and that might feel really crappy because you put honest effort into it.
3) I have a ton of disagreements with you and your stances, but the part of you that's driven to make these sort of vulnerable and strange posts is by far my favorite thing about you. I think you have a cyclical nature, and my earnest advice is that you not ignore it; you tend to transition from stubborn/obstinate/aggressive to reflective/sympathetic/compromising and both of those states can be useful if you factor in the presence of that change. Maybe I'm wrong about it, but it definitely reminds me of myself (though different cycles), and by far the healthiest use I've gotten out of those cycles is leaning into them and trying to keep the progress made by both.
You know I dislike your politics (and I'm not gonna say that doesn't matter either, that's hugely important), and I'm not saying that to take a shot at you, but I honestly hope the best for you because you clearly, clearly have a natural desire to grow; and that recognition of that really good part of you comes despite my disagreements, so it's especially strong :]
To your topic title, I think my answer is also generally applicable (to myself especially): don't rely on epiphanies for growth, because they'll *feel* incredibly productive but unless you put them into a structured course of action, you won't do anything with them (and you'll just keep having more and more epiphanies that feel really good, but don't go anywhere).
Really? You mentioned me so that you could tell me in public that you don't like me?
I don't like you either - and haven't for quite some time - but that wasn't something that needed to be said publicly, now was it? (Or at all, really.)
Actually the reason I mentioned you was to apologize, that's all.
As for your "forgiveness" - I neither want nor need it.
That's nice. I forgive you anyway, and I will always forgive you and everyone else for every wrong thing done to me, percieved or actual.
I've been nothing but honest with you and have done you no wrong.
The only person not being honest with you is you.
Lol, this makes me laugh. Ah it does feel good to laugh about it instead of letting it bother me.
Anyway, I'm still putting you on ignore. I hope you really do enjoy your life. Take care. Goodbye.
Miss Vicky
08-10-18, 04:26 AM
Actually the reason I mentioned you was to apologize, that's all.
Because apologies always sound the most sincere and are most effective when they're immediately followed by words like "I really have a hard time tolerate you," "I find you're very dishonest with me" and "I really don't like you."
Mr Minio
08-10-18, 04:45 AM
Because apologies always sound the most sincere and are most effective when they're immediately followed by words like "I really have a hard time tolerate you," "I find you're very dishonest with me" and "I really don't like you." Well, he did forgive you, but you still have to work for his respect. /s
Mr Minio
08-10-18, 05:26 AM
I'm keeping away from your discords with other users, but:
I hate it when people tell me nice sounding lies to try and make me feel better. Strong words for a believer of a religion.
Besides, I see good base for philosophical discussion in this:
I do believe all human beings are inherently evil. And if there is any goodness in me I don't take credit for it. I am not a good person, I'm actually a horrible person. But if there is any goodness in me it is because God is working in my life changing me. Let's assume that:
a) God exists
b) He is omnipotent
Given a) and b) God knows whether you will go to Heaven or Hell, whether you will be a good or evil person, and also has ways to make you either of those. If you believe any goodness in you is because of God, therefore any evil in you has to be because of God too (because he has ways to stop it, prevent you from doing evil, or giving you more goodness).
To take your dilemmas further.
There is no such decision that can be made without any influence of any external factors. There is no human that can pull levers in his brain. But even if there was, it wouldn't have changed anything. Your brain is a collection of electrons and other chunks that drift along the paths of the least resistance. Decision making process can be unpredictable, but it doesn't mean it's nondeterministic.
The only free will we can talk about is the colloquial "nobody puts a gun to your head and forces you to do something", but in philosophical sense free will is impossible in every and any universe that has consistent laws of physics.
To get back to God and his alleged influence on you as a person.
If somebody could predict your every move, he would have total control over you. Knowing how you're going to react on any given stimulus he could induce any desired reaction. In a way, that would make a human nothing more than a machine controlled by somebody who pushes buttons in order to achieve a desired result. All of this assuming it is possible that there is such an omnipotent being. And according to physics there is not (Laplace's demon).
Therefore, the only goodness in you is the effect of your personal growth and the influence of other people.
Thanks ynwtf and Slappydavis for your encouragement.
I will respond to things you've said in more detail. I'm still mulling over my thoughts.
Because apologies always sound the most sincere and are most effective when they're immediately followed by words like "I really have a hard time tolerate you," "I find you're very dishonest with me" and "I really don't like you."
All those things are true, so I really don't understand how you can think they make it sound less sincere. I don't have to like you in order to forgive you. Aren't you a post-modernist?
Miss Vicky
08-10-18, 06:40 AM
All those things are true, so I really don't understand how you can think they make it sound less sincere. I don't have to like you in order to forgive you. Aren't you a post-modernist?
So much for that ignore list, huh?
I'm not talking about your "forgiveness" - again I did nothing wrong for you to forgive - I'm talking about your empty apology. You clearly aren't sorry for your behavior which is more than evident by the fact that you keep repeating it.
Miss Vicky
08-10-18, 06:58 AM
I really hate it when someone apologizes, but the person being apologized to says, “I can tell you’re not really sorry!”
Sure, there are times someone really isn’t sorry, but I’ve had the, “you’re not sorry!” thing pulled on me before and I don’t like it when I mean my apology.
The man made an entire thread about this topic. Maybe he really is sorry?
Read the original post again. Immediately after saying he is sorry for berating me, he calls me a liar. So sincere.
I really hate it when someone apologizes, but the person being apologized to says, “I can tell you’re not really sorry!”
Sure, there are times someone really isn’t sorry, but I’ve had the, “you’re not sorry!” thing pulled on me before and I don’t like it when I mean my apology.
The man made an entire thread about this topic. Maybe he really is sorry?
Read the original post again. Immediately after saying he is sorry for berating me, he calls me a liar. So sincere.
So by calling you a liar, I'm still berating you, therefore my apology isn't genuine? But you're also calling me a liar and saying you haven't done anything wrong. So if I call you a liar it's wrong, but if you call me one it's okay?
Miss Vicky
08-10-18, 10:52 AM
So by calling you a liar, I'm still berating you, therefore my apology isn't genuine? But you're also calling me a liar and saying you haven't done anything wrong. So if I call you a liar it's wrong, but if you call me one it's okay?
What have I done wrong? When have I lied to you? All of our interactions have been public. Quote it.
Strong words for a believer of a religion.
Oy. Can we ditch the blithe generalizations about religion? I think I've seen 3-4 of these in the last couple of months, sometimes in almost totally unrelated threads. If you deliberately want to argue about religion, cool: start a thread. I'll participate, guaranteed.
Of course, that'll require more of you than these kinds of drive-by skepticisms:
Given a) and b) God knows whether you will go to Heaven or Hell, whether you will be a good or evil person, and also has ways to make you either of those. If you believe any goodness in you is because of God, therefore any evil in you has to be because of God too (because he has ways to stop it, prevent you from doing evil, or giving you more goodness).
...or the good of the ability to diverge from God's will is judged a greater good than the mere existence of evil. Or you're making an argument about time, cause, and effect and trying to apply it to a Being that exists outside of time. Or a dozen other possible explanations for this very, very old argument that people have been grappling with for thousands of years, all of which are available with a light Googling. Assuming the desire is to really philosophically consider these questions rather than smack a religious person on a message board.
There is no such decision that can be made without any influence of any external factors. There is no human that can pull levers in his brain. But even if there was, it wouldn't have changed anything. Your brain is a collection of electrons and other chunks that drift along the paths of the least resistance. Decision making process can be unpredictable, but it doesn't mean it's nondeterministic.
The only free will we can talk about is the colloquial "nobody puts a gun to your head and forces you to do something", but in philosophical sense free will is impossible in every and any universe that has consistent laws of physics.
Agreed. But you haven't established that only the physical exists.
All of this assuming it is possible that there is such an omnipotent being. And according to physics there is not (Laplace's demon).
That's not what Laplace's demon means at all. Laplace's demon is about the philosophical implications of materialism, and how it inevitably implies determinism. To that end it's useful, and it's a concept I've found myself invoking in religious debates quite frequently (as you do above, in pointing out the incompatibility of materialism and free will). But it's not an argument for materialism as opposed to any metaphysical concept, and it definitely doesn't mean that "physics" says an "omnipotent being" isn't possible.
What you're basically saying is "assuming only the physical exists, the metaphysical can't." Which is totally true, but also tautological.
Agree with most everything Slappy said, BTW. I believe your desire to improve yourself is genuine, and to that end I hope you take the constructive criticism to heart.
I think a big part of that personal growth is going to be making distinctions between what passes through your head and "truth." Because it is indeed important to speak the truth, but that doesn't mean you need to say everything you're thinking, either. Speaking the truth means not lying, or withholding opinions just to spare people, particularly on things that matter. But it does not obligate you to voice any criticism in any context.
There's something to be said for not sharing every thought that comes to mind. I think your approach to conversation may be key here. There's almost a weird math involved in how I read you. Like there has to be some type of equation balance for it to work. Compliment then criticize. Honest insight followed by offense. I envision you with a stick in hand as you say something like "You hurt me. I don't want to hurt you." then you hit them with the stick. I'm joking sort of, but reading your posts there's a similar dynamic playing out.
It would help bridge these gaps you have with some users to simply stop at the sincere comments and not continue---at least not until more established and positive conversations are shared. Be mindful of how others may interpret your words. I mean, it's already damn difficult to communicate with someone who's even on the same page with us. Especially via text. All the cues are gone and it is just so easy to project our assumptions onto the text of others. Especially when those words are so critical and biting, even if the writer of those words may be looking at the matter from a scientific observational posture. There may truly be no ill intent behind the words, but the words do have weight regardless of what you may have intended them for. Not everything must be stated. If you wish to mediate that gap with other users, then edit yourself to avoid the risk of offending. Even if that's not your desire to offend. I mean, I don't mean to offend by pissing on the sidewalk, but I've learned that most people find that offensive. So, to accommodate society, I've agreed to not do it. People smile at me now instead of throwing things :)
When we meet new people most, I think, would not first address their faults. Even if prefaced with "I mean no disrespect. This is simply an observable fact but...." No! You get to know them first through casual conversation. At some point you learn if that person has the personality for deep analytical dives and philosophical reflections. If so? Great. Pose your thoughts and discuss. If not? Then keep it, else you might offend.
Look. I don't know you man. I've had some fun with you in the drunj thread a while back and we've had a few minor back-and-forth comments in random threads. I'm only responding to the few comments I'm seeing here, your interactions with Vicky and Iro, and the confusing mix of sincerity and biting opinions. This post is just to point out a few things that I've noticed and offer another perspective. Maybe it can help. Maybe not. I think you do mean well, but I also think you may have a difficult time is seeing where lines should probably be drawn.
Also worth noting that just as "the truth" is not a synonym for "any impression of someone I get," speaking it does not require that what you say be perfectly blunt or incendiary.
"I don't appreciate this unnecessary hostility" is expressing the same "truth" as something like "you're a horrible bitter shrew." Pretty big difference in how it's received, however.
Chypmunk
08-10-18, 12:32 PM
Even bigger difference if in fact one of you is an actual shrew :yup:
(just tryna stand up for one of my fellow scurrying species against these outlandish generic slurs)
Mr Minio
08-10-18, 12:34 PM
Oy. Can we ditch the blithe generalizations about religion? Might be harsh, but OP himself said he wants the harsh truth instead of sweet talk. I maintain my point. It's not about faith per se, but about religion. And (almost?) all religions offer such sweet lies (or at the very least non-proved made-up explanations) to make the believers feel better. For example you can believe in Heaven, but you can't be sure how it is really -- and the perspective of just nothing, the end is scary, so people came up with the idea of Heaven to minimize their fear of death.
You know, religion will exist as long as it has believers. In order to make new believers arrive it's best to tempt them by sweet promotion (today you get redemption absolutely for free!). And in order to make current believers stay, you threaten them with eternal damnation.
You can destroy and erase from people's memory all science and knowledge, but sooner or later it will return in exactly same form and shape. However, if you destroy and erase all religions, those will never return in the same form and shape.
Faith itself is of value, but religion has just way too many bad things to go with.
If you deliberately want to argue about religion, cool: start a thread. I'll participate, guaranteed. I always post these at work when bored. When I get back home I have other things to do. :(
...or the good of the ability to diverge from God's will is judged a greater good than the mere existence of evil. Don't understand. :(
Or you're making an argument about time, cause, and effect and trying to apply it to a Being that exists outside of time.
That's not what Laplace's demon means at all. Laplace's demon is a hypothetical creature that has all the knowledge about the position and momentum of elementary particles, so according to quantum physics using such knowledge you theoretically can (with sufficiently large computing resources) deduce everything there is to know about world. From what I understand it's simply impossible for such being to exist due to the law of conservation of energy. This is because the world works in a way experiments that led to Heisenberg's principle show. To fulfill this law the world needs to have all the definitions in it at the same time. So in order to create knowledge (the definition of momentum and position) you need to sacrifice energy, and energy is not limitless.
To simplify, in order to know everything about world you need a brain bigger than the world, and if you actually allow such illogical thing as truth, then the definition of truth loses its meaning, and you can basically say anything, including God who knows and doesn't know everything at the same time, that there's an infinite number of gods in infinite number of worlds etc. ad absurdum. Anyway, the knowledge itself does not imply the influence of that knowledge on human beings (to continue on free will).
Of course God is beyond all this, he has superpowers, we are too stupid to understand him etc. I'm just a puny human being, so I'm basing everything on knowledge, and God is beyond knowledge etc. Fine, maybe that's true, but the thing is you can't prove God exists, and proving he doesn't exist is against logic. Anyway, there are no proofs for God, and no proofs for magic. Therefore, following this way of thinking, magic might exist too. And dragons. And Cthulhu. And what nots.
PS: Feel free to point any fallacies in my thinking or misunderstandings (I'm physics layman). I'm still learning. Meanwhile... I took time off work, so I will probably spend more than a week watching films instead of MoFoing, so don't be surprised if I don't reply.
PS2: Make it a new thread if you want. Even if I give up this discussion maybe other people will join in.
Citizen Rules
08-10-18, 12:37 PM
I like you Zotis, because you never have intentionally tried to wrong me.
I judge people by how they treat me, not by their viewpoints. I'm self assured in my own viewpoints so another person's viewpoints are interesting to hear, but they don't upset me if it's different than my own.
I think most people's problems on the internet stem from insecurity and they get defensive when others have viewpoints that conflict with their own ideas. If everyone kept that in mind when interacting, the internet would be a better place.
I'm not sure why you thought it'd be a good response to "can we ditch the blithe generalizations?" by listing half a dozen more. I'm skeptical of the value of responding to them at all, but I'll reply to a couple:
Might be harsh, but OP himself said he wants the harsh truth instead of sweet talk. I maintain my point. It's not about faith per se, but about religion. And (almost?) all religions offer such sweet lies (or at the very least non-proved made-up explanations) to make the believers feel better. For example you can believe in Heaven, but you can't be sure how it is really -- and the perspective of just nothing, the end is scary, so people came up with the idea of Heaven to minimize their fear of death.
How nice to be able to dismiss the foundational beliefs of 95% of humanity with one pat, condescending generalization about the fear of mortality.
Watch how cheap and easy it is to do this in reverse: maybe the thought of being judged for their actions is scary, so people rejected the idea of God to minimize their guilt of misbehavior. Or maybe the thought of being at the mercy of something so powerful is scary, so people rejected the idea of God so they could think of themselves as the most powerful and intelligent creatures. If you think people form their beliefs out of emotion, that can rationalize their skepticism just as easily as their belief.
Oh, and note that this dismissal is pretty much totally odds with (usually co-existent!) complaints about religion's oppressiveness and the burdens it places on its adherents. If people were just trying to make themselves feel better, there's a lot of easier, more hippie-ish conceptions of the supernatural they could go with. The fact that they don't proves that the explanation above is false at worst and comically reductive at best.
You know, religion will exist as long as it has believers. In order to make new believers arrive it's best to tempt them by sweet promotion (today you get redemption absolutely for free!). And in order to make current believers stay, you threaten them with eternal damnation.
You can destroy and erase from people's memory all science and knowledge, but sooner or later it will return in exactly same form and shape. However, if you destroy and erase all religions, those will never return in the same form and shape.
Yes, I've seen this canard floating around the Internet for years. Doesn't really hold up if you think about it for more than a moment, since basically every society in human history has had some form of religion. And since, from your perspective, religion grew naturally out of human thought and development to begin with.
The only accurate version of this would be to say no highly specific conception of religion would be reproduced, which might be true but is completely irrelevant as to its truth or falsity. Not only does this not conflict with Christianity, for example, but the idea of "revealed" truth is a huge part of Christian thought, for example. It's something people have been talking about for millennia, if you care to go looking for it.
As shocking as it may seem, people have actually put a lot of thought into this belief system that, ya' know, spread across the entire world over thousands of years. They didn't just all go "DUR DEATH SCARY" and make up a happy rainbow land.
I always post these at work when bored. When I get back home I have other things to do. :(
So, you only have time for the facile stuff, and not to have a real discussion? :skeptical: I'm skeptical, as that smilie face suggests. But if this is indeed true, that's a good argument not to engage in these philosophical drive-bys in the first place.
Don't understand. :(
Yeah, that's kinda the point. You've obviously done the first-pass skepticism stuff. Now maybe poke around and see what some of the smartest people in the history of the world have said in response, yeah? Believe it or not, most of them actually thought of all this stuff, and even (!) formulated intelligent answers to it. I don't know how many of those answers exist in pat meme form or get passed around subreddits, but they're there.
Laplace's demon is a hypothetical creature that has all the knowledge about the position and momentum of elementary particles, so according to quantum physics using such knowledge you theoretically can (with sufficiently large computing resources) deduce everything there is to know about world.
Correct, except I'm pretty sure the word "quantum" doesn't belong there. I think boring old physics demonstrates the principle just as well. In fact, when I've advanced this argument in other discussions, materialists often use quantum mechanics as a sort of escape hatch to avoid accepting determinism (which doesn't work, but requires a different response).
From what I understand it's simply impossible for such being to exist due to the law of conservation of energy. This is because the world works in a way experiments that led to Heisenberg's principle show. To fulfill this law the world needs to have all the definitions in it at the same time. So in order to create knowledge (the definition of momentum and position) you need to sacrifice energy, and energy is not limitless.
I'm not quite sure if this is accurate, but whether it is or not, it's still just describing physical realities. It does not touch any consideration of whether things exist outside the physical.
Of course God is beyond all this, he has superpowers, we are too stupid to understand him etc. I'm just a puny human being, so I'm basing everything on knowledge, and God is beyond knowledge etc. Fine, maybe that's true, but the thing is you can't prove God exists
"You can't prove God exists" is a totally different statement than "physics says an omnipotent being can't exist." There is/was no basis for that claim, and it's pretty much a non-sequitur, since it implies a link between the physical and the non-physical that is definitionally impossible.
Anyway, there are no proofs for God, and no proofs for magic. Therefore, following this way of thinking, magic might exist too. And dragons. And Cthulhu. And what nots.
Yeah, the old "I don't believe in God for the same reason I don't believe in unicorns" silliness. It's busted logic for more reasons than I have time to enumerate, but the most obvious (and relevant to the quotes above) is that if dragons and unicorns are real, then they're physical creatures for which we would reasonably expect physical evidence to form the basis for belief. That simply has no relationship to how you consider the question of whether things exist outside of physical reality.
The biggest and most significant data point we have in all this is the mere existence of the universe. And I'd kinda like to hear you describe how that went down, because I'm pretty sure if you do it's gonna sound suspiciously like "magic" at some point.
PS: Feel free to point any fallacies in my thinking or misunderstandings (I'm physics layman). I'm still learning. Meanwhile... I took time off work, so I will probably spend more than a week watching films instead of MoFoing, so don't be surprised if I don't reply.
PS2: Make it a new thread if you want. Even if I give up this discussion maybe other people will join in.
Well, you just said you might not even reply, so I'll start a new thread if and when you do.
MovieGal
08-10-18, 01:59 PM
Because we are typing on a forum, body language and eye contact is not feasible, that's why words lose their context of sincerity. Body language plays an important role in communication. That's when you show true feelings of forgiveness on both parts, the giving and accepting.
When typing to each other, words can be misconstrued. That creates another set of dialog, either words thrown in anger or trying to understand what the original words really meant.
Good luck to all involved. Hopefully it will turn out to be positive.
MovieGal
08-10-18, 02:03 PM
I judge people by how they treat me, not by their viewpoints. I'm self assured in my own viewpoints so another person's viewpoints are interesting to hear, but they don't upset me if it's different than my own.
You must really not like me.....
;) :p
But it does not obligate you to voice any criticism in any context.
Well, that is precisely what I'm grappling with, and I find it extremely difficult. I think that a lot of people, not just here but everywhere in my life, are acting like I should be able to completely reverse behaviour patterns I've had for decades instantaniously with zero effort. Okay, that is an exaggeration to illustrate point. I believe that's close to true, but I know it's not exactly true. I'm so infinitely frustrated that I can't even describe it with words. I'm so hopelessly lost, and I don't even know why I don't just cry out to God and obey him in everything. But I don't believe in free will, and I understand that life is a process. In all my mistakes God is teaching me and leading me gradually closer to him. So, I am trying to submit to the process, to surrender my will to God.
I did appreciate the post comment you sent me. I don't know what to do. My goal was to apologize and that's all. Why do I know suddenly have to defend my apology? I am done. If Vicky doesn't want to accept it, and wants to say she does nothing wrong despite priding herself in being the resident bitch, that's fine too. I don't mind. The beauty of forgiving people is they don't have to do anything to deserve it or feel they need it. Yes I believe she is a liar. I asked if she was a post modernist because I was going to try and prove that she is a liar, but she didn't answer me, yet she's demanding I prove it. So no, I won't defend myself anymore as if I'm on trial. I will be judged by God alone, and when we all die then we'll all know who was right and who was wrong. And if, as some people assume, we cease to exist altogether, then it doesn't matter anyway.
Minio can read C. S. Lewis or watch Kent Hovind if he wants to know the responses to his arguments that I side with. I don't feel like doing the googling for him.
So by calling you a liar, I'm still berating you, therefore my apology isn't genuine? But you're also calling me a liar and saying you haven't done anything wrong. So if I call you a liar it's wrong, but if you call me one it's okay?
What have I done wrong?
Why ask that? If you answered my questions we could work towards it. Your making demands of me while simultaneously thwarting my attempts to meet those demands.
Anway it doesn't matter. I unblocked you and Iro. I feel better now and I don't feel like blocking you anymore, but I also don't think you have the authority to judge me, so I don't have to defend or explain myself to you. As far as I'm concerned we've both stated our oppinions and we disagree. We don't have to agree. I am just tired of the battle. I want peace.
Sexy Celebrity
08-11-18, 07:51 PM
If Miss Vicky won't accept your apology, forget her, honey.
You tried. She doesn't believe you. She can't believe you (or chooses not to believe you) for reasons that have to do with her alone.
I suggest buying her a rat. She likes rats. Or pay for chemotherapy for one of her rats when it gets cancer. Either of those things will get you on Miss Vicky's good side.
Miss Vicky
08-11-18, 07:52 PM
Why ask that? If you answered my questions we could work towards it. Your making demands of me while simultaneously thwarting my attempts to meet those demands.
Because you are making accusations that you refuse to support while bitching about feeling like you're the one on trial. You do like to paint yourself as a victim though, don't you?
As to your questions, what questions? The one about postmodernism? I didn't answer that because I don't know what postmodernism means (and the definitions I found required looking up too many other definitions and frankly you're not worth that kind of effort).
I hate postmodernism. I much prefer most Potterisms, like "muggle" and "expelliarmus".
MovieGal
08-11-18, 08:46 PM
These quotes tend to help me through many things. They teach me that I am responsible for my own actions and thoughts. Perhaps they can help here too.
"When you wake up in the morning, tell yourself: the people I deal with today will be meddling, ungrateful, arrogant, dishonest, jealous and surly. They are like this because they can't tell good from evil. But I have seen the beauty of good, and the ugliness of evil, and have recognized that the wrongdoer has a nature related to my own - not of the same blood and birth, but the same mind, and possessing a share of the divine. And so none of them can hurt me. No one can implicate me in ugliness. Nor can I feel angry at my relative, or hate him. We were born to work together like feet, hands and eyes, like the two rows of teeth, upper and lower. To obstruct each other is unnatural. To feel anger at someone, to turn your back on him: these are unnatural."
MovieGal
08-11-18, 09:39 PM
I don't feel responsible for my thoughts and because of that, I don't really feel responsible for my actions. I've realized that my thoughts just come to me and often I'm doing things I wish I wasn't doing -- like posting on this damn forum, for example.
I am nothing but a computer program playing out in a human body. I'm often quite unhappy with this program and even this body. But I cannot escape from either of these things, unfortunately. I have to accept what I have, what I am and hope my program keeps playing out well. Some people's programs are terrible. Some are fantastic.
I think this is b/s and you do feel responsible for your actions or you would have never apologized to me.
Sexy Celebrity
08-11-18, 09:43 PM
I think this is b/s and you do feel responsible for your actions or you would have never apologized to me.
I do feel responsible for making you upset. I apologized because I actually do care about you and want you to feel okay.
MovieGal
08-11-18, 09:44 PM
I do feel responsible for making you upset. I apologized because I actually do care about you and want you to feel okay.
Awww you lub me.
Sexy Celebrity
08-11-18, 09:46 PM
Awww you lub me.
I always did.
Because you are making accusations that you refuse to support while bitching about feeling like you're the one on trial. You do like to paint yourself as a victim though, don't you?
As to your questions, what questions? The one about postmodernism? I didn't answer that because I don't know what postmodernism means (and the definitions I found required looking up too many other definitions and frankly you're not worth that kind of effort).
I'm not refusing to support them period. But I don't have to prove anything to you. You seem to want me to do it your way. I'm going to do it my way. If you don't have the patience for it then I'm fine with dropping it altogether. We can agree to disagree or we can look for common ground, but you can't force me to do anything. You say, "Prove it." But I think if I tried to you'd just say, "Prove it," again. I can't prove anything to you that you don't want to believe. Honestly saying you've done nothing wrong shows a great lack of self-awareness. You know you're not perfect, no one is. We alldo things that are wrong. I've wronged you, and I am sorry for it, but you won't acknowledge the same. It's okay though, you don't have to. I'm not bitching. I've let go of all my resentment towards you. And I don't require you to believe me.
I really had the impression you were a self professing postmodernist. You certainly sound like one when you say things like, "Quality is subjective." Basically postmodernism is the idea that there is no absolute truth, and all truth is relative.
The other question I wanted you to answer in supporting what I said was the following:
So if I call you a liar it's wrong, but if you call me one it's okay?
Innovation
08-11-18, 09:50 PM
https://i.imgur.com/6bLWiqL.png
MovieGal
08-11-18, 09:57 PM
Can't you guys just stop calling each other liars and start saying nice things to each other?
That's the first step.
~ Dr. Phil
No...Dr. Celebrity
What happened to your therapy thread?
MovieGal
08-11-18, 09:58 PM
I should start another one. I could probably be a damn good therapist now.
I'm happy with Meditations...not medication.
These quotes tend to help me through many things. They teach me that I am responsible for my own actions and thoughts. Perhaps they can help here too.
"When you wake up in the morning, tell yourself: the people I deal with today will be meddling, ungrateful, arrogant, dishonest, jealous and surly. They are like this because they can't tell good from evil. But I have seen the beauty of good, and the ugliness of evil, and have recognized that the wrongdoer has a nature related to my own - not of the same blood and birth, but the same mind, and possessing a share of the divine. And so none of them can hurt me. No one can implicate me in ugliness. Nor can I feel angry at my relative, or hate him. We were born to work together like feet, hands and eyes, like the two rows of teeth, upper and lower. To obstruct each other is unnatural. To feel anger at someone, to turn your back on him: these are unnatural."
That was a really interesting quote. Putting someone on ignore does feel to me like turning my back on them.
Captain Steel
08-11-18, 10:02 PM
I use the manual ignore button - it's always at the ready for instantaneous use within the computer I keep inside my cranium! ;)
Captain Steel
08-11-18, 10:04 PM
I make my last statement with a certain smugness of self-satisfaction because on some level it makes me feel like I'm better than the rest of you (when in reality a person's worth is hardly determined by whether they use an ignore setting on a social media discussion board)! ;)
MovieGal
08-11-18, 10:05 PM
That was a really interesting quote. Putting someone on ignore does feel to me like turning my back on them.
Zotis...you might want to read Meditations by Marcus Aurelius....it can't change your way of thinking overnight but they may help you to understand how we are truly responsible for our thoughts and actions.
Captain Steel
08-11-18, 10:06 PM
Why do I always feel compelled to tell the absolute truth - it makes me appear so inferior.
(Now I'm just "fishing for compliments" to boost my self esteem.)
...Damn! Did it again! But feel that making it a parenthetical sub-statement will somehow lessen the blow!
MovieGal
08-11-18, 10:08 PM
MoFo Therapy (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=57597)
I'm waiting to help you.
Can I use my Stoic quotes?
MovieGal
08-11-18, 10:10 PM
Stoic quotes, coloring books, crayons, notepad, anything you need to bring to our therapy session.
No...my quotes can be useful to the person in need....Im in need of nuffin'
Miss Vicky
08-11-18, 11:04 PM
I'm not refusing to support them period. But I don't have to prove anything to you. You seem to want me to do it your way. I'm going to do it my way.
Yeah, when you make accusations against other people, you kind of do have to prove it. That's not my way, that's more like society's way.
Honestly saying you've done nothing wrong shows a great lack of self-awareness. You know you're not perfect, no one is. We alldo things that are wrong. I've wronged you, and I am sorry for it, but you won't acknowledge the same.
I find it absolutely hilarious that you're preaching to me about a lack of self-awareness.
I won't acknowledge having "wronged" you, because I genuinely don't know what you're talking about. So help me out by providing me with evidence to support your claim instead of just assuming that I won't accept your argument.
Here, I'll help you out. Here is a summary of the negative interactions that have occurred between us, as I recall them. I've provided links as well. If I've forgotten something, like another incident, fill me in.
1. In my movie log, you misunderstood something I said about There Will Be Blood. (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1470133#post1470133) You then insinuated that I am incapable of recognizing "quality" in movies that I hate. I explained that I can admire certain aspects of any film, but quality as it relates to art is subjective. This then set you off on a tirade where you said "It honestly feels like you're not even speaking English. I can't understand. Quality is by definition objective. If it isn't measurable, then it isn't quality." Since I don't appreciate being talked to like I'm stupid, I responded by telling you to take your condescension elsewhere.
2. Later, and without any provocation, you came into my thread again and said that I am a plebian with horrible taste and no appreciation for art. (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1481652#post1481652) I did not respond to your posts - though after seeing your "TarkovskyBegmanGodard" hashtag, I was tempted to point out that I am, in fact, an admirer of Bergman (since you think your appreciation of him and other such directors makes you superior).
3. You created a thread called Content Doesn't Matter (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=47201). In your opening post, you said "I know that quality is subjective" and I called you out on it. This re-ignited the argument from incident #1, during which you accused me of being "dishonest" and provided nothing to support that accusation.
4. In the Is Movie Forums DYING? (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1933100#post1933100) thread, you said (to Iro) "Maybe you'll actually be a decent person some day... maybe you will come to your senses and start being a half decent person as unlikely as that may be." That's a really crappy thing to say to somebody and I told you as much. You then lashed out at me for not "minding my own business" despite the fact that I was responding to a public post, as is my right to do and I told you as much. You then supposedly put me on ignore.
5. Pretty much immediately afterwards, you created this thread and put my name in a mention, thus resulting in me getting a notification. You apologized for past transgressions, but then transgressed again by calling me a liar - again with nothing to support that accusation. This resulted in our current argument.
So tell me when and where in all of that did I wrong you or lie to you.
I really had the impression you were a self professing postmodernist. You certainly sound like one when you say things like, "Quality is subjective." Basically postmodernism is the idea that there is no absolute truth, and all truth is relative.
What I'm getting from this is that you made an assumption about me and because some things I've said or done don't quite fit with your assumption, I'm somehow being dishonest. I do not believe nor can I recall ever saying that there is no absolute truth. I said quality as it relates to art is subjective.
The other question I wanted you to answer in supporting what I said was the following:
So if I call you a liar it's wrong, but if you call me one it's okay?
You calling me a liar is wrong because you haven't bothered to support that claim, even when asked repeatedly to do so. The reasons for me calling you a liar are so self-evident that even you recognize the source of the accusation:
So by calling you a liar, I'm still berating you, therefore my apology isn't genuine?
MovieGal
08-11-18, 11:42 PM
“The best revenge is to be unlike him who performed the injury.”
Miss Vicky
08-11-18, 11:51 PM
My goodness, Miss Vicky. You certainly come armed and dangerous with your ammunition and fact checking.
I'm just doing what I've asked him to do.
I would wonder if maybe you are simply holding onto grudges very strongly with this?
Not really. I recall the first incident very easily because "it's like you're not even speaking English" has become an inside joke between myself and another MoFo. As to other past incidents, my being able to quote them is a result of me trying to find my alleged wrong doing.
'Cause I need this to be a happy place and no longer a weird, disturbing, dark cesspool.
Welcome to reality.
You know, I've always liked you SC even though I've never felt close to you. And you are a bit strange to me, but also very interesting. I kind of think of you as a mascot for this forum. I love how you make fun creative threads and get things going.
That was a really interesting quote. Putting someone on ignore does feel to me like turning my back on them.
Zotis...you might want to read Meditations by Marcus Aurelius....it can't change your way of thinking overnight but they may help you to understand how we are truly responsible for our thoughts and actions.
I firmly do believe that we are responsible. When I see a hot chick on the streets sporting it all on display, I take full responsibility for my thoughts, and I think I succeed when I divert my eyes and keep my thoughts as pure as if she was my own sister. When I fail to do so, when I let myself look and lust, I consider that a failure. Well that's just an example, but yes I do consider every thought, word, and deed my moral responsibility. And I believe that when I die I will stand before God and have to give account for every single thing I've ever done in my whole entire life.
matt72582
08-12-18, 09:47 AM
Honesty
Yeah, when you make accusations against other people, you kind of do have to prove it. That's not my way, that's more like society's way.
I don't have to prove anything. Society means less than nothing to me.
Zotis
You’re fine to have your own beliefs about things... but good grief. Your beliefs place a lot of pressure and burden on you, it seems.
Hmm... I'm not sure what to make of this, but yeah when I see that most people are heading towards hell I do want to warn them and help them. Like even the way so many people eat cancerous foods and act so niave about the horrible painful death their going to face.
Miss Vicky
08-12-18, 11:03 AM
I don't have to prove anything. Society means less than nothing to me.
That's a pathetic response to my post.
This is the sort of thing that someone who can't prove their accusations says, because the accusations were fabricated in the first place. Can't say I'm surprised, though.
LeDarius
08-12-18, 11:30 PM
I listen to a lot of Tony Robbins lol.
"Good" is subjective but you definitely are responsible for your own suffering, which is based off your definition of good. Could be an influence of society, or just how you define things. Just figure out what positive means to you and how it affects you, and everything around you...stay true to that in the most unselfish way possible.
MovieGal
08-12-18, 11:47 PM
“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.”
“Whenever you are about to find fault with someone, ask yourself the following question: What fault of mine most nearly resembles the one I am about to criticize?”
I don't have to prove anything. Society means less than nothing to me.
That's a pathetic response to my post.
This is the sort of thing that someone who can't prove their accusations says, because the accusations were fabricated in the first place. Can't say I'm surprised, though.
Oh well. I'm just done arguing with you. Take it or leave it. I'm going to move on with my life and keep trying to learn and grow and become a better person. You can do whatever you want. That's freedom.
Zoltis I’ve had a few interactions with you and safe to say you have a lot to work on but I want to see you improve. Now I recommend buying my book, it’s a pyramid scheme, very effective but doesn’t come cheap, private message me for details. Also miss Vicky is a swell gal - you’ll understand one day that she has helped you in your journey....the journey to complete the steps of my pyramid scheme of success!
Well, that is precisely what I'm grappling with, and I find it extremely difficult. I think that a lot of people, not just here but everywhere in my life, are acting like I should be able to completely reverse behaviour patterns I've had for decades instantaniously with zero effort. Okay, that is an exaggeration to illustrate point. I believe that's close to true, but I know it's not exactly true.
I think it's a bit more than an exaggeration. They're simply saying your behavior is your responsibility. It might be hard, but who else is going to do it? And how much of it is inevitably hard, and how much is hard because bad habits have been indulged over years, or even decades? It may feel almost impossible now, but maybe that's because it's been allowed to ossify into habit via a thousand little choices about whether to look internally or externally. Most seemingly insurmountable problems start off easy off, and grow through our own fear of confronting them.
As always, The Simpsons has an especially funny and perceptive take that I think about a lot:
46900
I'm so infinitely frustrated that I can't even describe it with words. I'm so hopelessly lost, and I don't even know why I don't just cry out to God and obey him in everything. But I don't believe in free will, and I understand that life is a process. In all my mistakes God is teaching me and leading me gradually closer to him. So, I am trying to submit to the process, to surrender my will to God.
I'm sorry to hear all that, but absent getting explicit instructions from God, your next best option is to listen to the people around you, the ones who've interacted with you for years, and see what they say. Nobody can check themselves and improve without the corrections of others. It's how we navigate the world literally, and emotionally. We are all each other's ballast. If you don't avail yourself of that, you're going to drift.
I did appreciate the post comment you sent me. I don't know what to do. My goal was to apologize and that's all. Why do I know suddenly have to defend my apology? I am done.
You say your goal was to apologize and that's all...but obviously you said all sorts of things other than your apology, and those (not your apology) are what you're being asked to "defend." Try actually just apologizing and see if you don't get a different response. I bet you would. :)
If Vicky doesn't want to accept it, and wants to say she does nothing wrong despite priding herself in being the resident bitch, that's fine too. I don't mind. The beauty of forgiving people is they don't have to do anything to deserve it or feel they need it.
The beauty of forgiving people is that you do it without thinking about whether they deserve it. If you're auditing their response, I'm not sure that's really forgiveness. I'm also not sure it's forgiveness if you make a show about doing it, so you can seem magnanimous. It's easy for us to say "I forgive you" in a way that aggrandizes our generosity and belittles the person we're forgiving. Even forgiving someone has to be done with care and tact.
So no, I won't defend myself anymore as if I'm on trial. I will be judged by God alone, and when we all die then we'll all know who was right and who was wrong.
You could apply this same "God will judge us" logic before deciding whether or not to publicly accuse someone of being a liar, too. Or, you could accept that people can and will express opinions about each other here on earth (as you have), and not dismiss critiques simply because a fuller accounting is coming in some other life.
cat_sidhe
08-13-18, 12:05 PM
do it without thinking about whether they deserve it.
That's how I forgive.
doubledenim
08-13-18, 12:33 PM
Doing good is doing what is hardest.
Citizen Rules
08-13-18, 01:13 PM
Doing good is doing what is hardest.Why?..Can't it be, doing good is what is often the easiest?
Why?..Can't it be, doing good is what is often the easiest?
Because every last one of us is broken.
cat_sidhe
08-13-18, 01:20 PM
Because every last one of us is broken.
<3
Citizen Rules
08-13-18, 01:20 PM
Because every last one of us is broken. I'm not sure I understand, why do you say that?
I don't mean anything subtle or symbolic about it, really. Every person is deeply flawed, inherently selfish, and has an almost limitless number of issues that they are mostly incapable of completely solving. "Good people" are the ones who recognize this and keep trying. The same way the wise man is the one who knows the extent of his ignorance, the good man is the one who knows how much better he could be.
As a whole, I think humanity is beautiful, and a force for good in so many ways. But as individuals we are all broken. I think any worldview needs to start with that fact, and move right on to the question of whether we can be redeemed, and if so, how.
cat_sidhe
08-13-18, 01:25 PM
I don't mean anything subtle or symbolic about it, really. Every person is deeply flawed, inherently selfish, and has an almost limitless number of issues that they are mostly incapable of completely solving. "Good people" are the ones who recognize this and keep trying.
As a whole, I think humanity is beautiful, and a force for good in so many ways. But as individuals we are all broken. I think any worldview needs to start with that fact, and move right on to the question of whether we can be redeemed, and if so, how.
I was about to say that I find that beautiful about people. Only managed a heart, though. :blush:
Chypmunk
08-13-18, 01:26 PM
Hey, I'm not broke.
Got 85c and a half-used tissue in just me right-hand shorts pocket alone!
Citizen Rules
08-13-18, 01:43 PM
I don't mean anything subtle or symbolic about it, really. Every person is deeply flawed, inherently selfish, and has an almost limitless number of issues that they are mostly incapable of completely solving. "Good people" are the ones who recognize this and keep trying. The same way the wise man is the one who knows the extent of his ignorance, the good man is the one who knows who much better he could be.
As a whole, I think humanity is beautiful, and a force for good in so many ways. But as individuals we are all broken. I think any worldview needs to start with that fact, and move right on to the question of whether we can be redeemed, and if so, how. Thanks for explaining:)
Citizen Rules
08-13-18, 02:22 PM
Why?..Can't it be, doing good is what is often the easiest?Maybe my post was not clear. To me personally, it's more rewarding to do good to another person than doing bad. If I can make someone happy that then makes me happy. If I intentionally do bad to someone, that makes me feel guilty which equals=bad. I'd image most people find doing good easier than doing bad (if bad is equated to doing morally wrong things)....However if we equate bad with having one too many slices of pizza, then I'm evil:eek:
doubledenim
08-13-18, 02:26 PM
Why?..Can't it be, doing good is what is often the easiest?
It would be nice, but that would be advice given outside of my point of view.
In my life, the "for the greater good" has always been the hardest. By this I mean the thing you don't get positive reinforcement from that nurtures your ego. I make a cake for someone, people love and appreciate it, but "doubledenim" swells because everyone is feeding his ego.
Say I'm looking forward to seeing a movie...The Predator, because it is part of a franchise spawned by the greatest action not a scifi movie ever. I really get excited about things. An acquaintance (not a friend) asks me to help them move, but I have to cancel my movie plans. That's hard.
A person needs money to pay the bills. They have small children, but you also know they have a pill habit. They promise they will pay you back and it means so much. This person's history indicates they will never call on you unless they need something. You pay the bill, knowing that you will not see that money. Can you stifle the resentment, the hard feelings you will suffer from, to help someone else?
Effort, whether emotional or physical is the greatest thing we can give. That's what I am trying to say CR.
Citizen Rules
08-13-18, 03:51 PM
It would be nice, but that would be advice given outside of my point of view.
That's what I am trying to say CR.
That's cool, and I can see how that could be your personal viewpoint. I thought you meant something else.
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.