Thanks, I bookmarked that, and will be more specific.
WhyAsk
Karma: −29
Don’t quit your day job.
Welcome back.
Can you be specific, without paraphrasing? And no ad hominem, please.
At this point you might as well let the cat all the way out of the bag, if there is a cat to be let out.
Am I in physical danger? If yes, from whom?
BTW, this is about the strangest thread I’ve ever participated in. I guess it’s an opportunity to learn, which is what I hope I’m doing on this forum.
We’ve gotten derailed.
All we need do is ask O. Wilde what his or her intentions were in those posts.
Note to readers: I never said it was hypothetical.
And, the textbooks written about my personality type say I have a sensitivity to other people’s issues.
And, I’m not starting from zero; over the years I’ve had office mates and others who acted in a similar way and so I know what works.
Strangely, some of these people may actually have wanted my approval or recognition. Very few get that, even those who are well-behaved. I think I know what causes this, but that info is classified—sorry.
They may have spotted ways that we two are similar. Of course, the idea that I am similar to these verbal bullies is repugnant to me but it’s very likely accurate. In my whole life maybe a half dozen people fit this pattern.
Also, there are books on “Verbal Judo” but they are hard to come by from my local library. I scoop up what I can. As long as all I do is counterpunch, block-then-strike, I feel I have the moral high ground.
But, that aside, if this is a false positive for a mind/head/word game, what do you make of this exchange? Is the literal meaning the only thing going on?
In your whole life, have you ever met someone who “put one over on you”, left you with the feeling that you’ve been “had” and you couldn’t even verbalize how? If yes, in retrospect, what really went on? Did you act optimally? What would you change for future encounters of this type?
Thanks for reading. :)
Analysis of a mind game.
Any comments as to the internal workings of A and B are welcome.
Note that, in the US, a person has the right to confront his/her accuser. In the exchange below, B has done that but the specific accusation has never been clarified by A. Very tricky. I have definitely learned from this exchange.
B: ”. . .women are biologically superior. . .”
A: This says far more about you than you could possibly imagine. I suggest being more cautious going forward.
At this point it is not clear how exactly B can guard against whatever beliefs he holds that are dangerous. In any case A has decided that B is incapable of comprehending the problem. Note that “defining” someone is a form of verbal abuse according to Satir, and possibly others. “Going forward” makes me think that A is a Brit. Since the Brits “invented” English I may be at a disadvantage here. But I’ll go forward anyway.
B: It says that I take for fact what people say who study this type of thing. I suggest that your conduct in this post is offensive.
So B challenges A.
If A is a “sniper” (one who hides behind double or ambiquous meanings), the antidote is to smoke them out, just like a real sniper. Apparently that is what B instinctively did.A: If that is all it says, you have nothing to be offended about.
A still has not said exactly what is wrong with B’s thinking and tells B how B should feel. This is now framed as A the parent and B the child.
B: It’s not your call. Who are you?
It’s not up to A to decide how B should feel. Then B asks for ID, see “smoke them out”, above.
TIA for reading. :D
It’s not your call.
Who are you?
It says that I take for fact what people say who study this type of thing.
I suggest that your conduct in this post is offensive.
Alice should avoid at all costs being drawn onto Bob’s turf. There are several ways to avoid this.
″ Guardian/Colossus then arranges a worldwide broadcast. The supercomputer proclaims itself “the voice of World Control” and declares its mission is to prevent war, as it was designed to do so. Mankind is given the choice between the “peace of plenty” or one of “unburied dead”. It also states that it has detected the attempt to disarm the missiles. It detonates two in their silos “so that you will learn by experience that I do not tolerate interference”.
Guardian/Colossus informs Forbin that “freedom is just an illusion” and that “In time you will come to regard me not only with respect and awe, but with love”. Forbin angrily replies, “Never!” ”
This ^ is where we’re headed.
People need this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom
in order to avoid “paralysis” and go further.
She didn’t provide her reasoning and I was not able to pull up this particular answer to her readers from the Web.
I guess she wants to remove the middleman costs & admin costs from your “donation.” And you get direct feedback on “the fruits of your labor”. There might also be psych benefits in that you can see your troubles might not be so bad in the big picture view of things.
For the class of people who think their troubles are better than anyone’s (e.g., the “inverse pride” of paranoids) I guess I recommend the monetary contribution route.
Am I putting too much stock in Marilyn’s high IQ and that women are biologically superior in any case?
IIRC, Ms. Vos Savant says don’t give money, just go in person to the soup kitchens or whatever and put in your own labor.
Some people hold on more strongly to their original beliefs if someone tries to convince them otherwise. This might have been in the book “On Being Certain.”
I think this kind of persuasion is a lost cause but I am still sometimes drawn into trying, against my better judgement.
Even if you don’t convince the non-rationalists you may learn some new mindgames, based on what they throw at you, their wacky justifications for their illogical ideas and their non-sequiturs.
On the other hand, I might just be off on a tangent. :(
If the person you’re persuading makes a swatting motion, it means you’re not getting through and your persuadee is annoyed.
A lot of what I was sure of, I’m not any longer. . .:D
Why does my Karma score keep increasing when I don’t do anything? It’s a disincentive to post. . .?
:D
The textbooks written about my personality type say I’m “eccentric”.
Let’s say I make six predictions or statements that I believe to be true about someone I’ve never met and I say the statements taken as a whole are true with P = 0.7. Note that I do not claim to be psychic.
The P of each statement must then lie between 0.7 and 1.0, and if they are equal then the P of each statement is 0.7 ^ (1/6) = 0.94. Let’s say 0.9 because I doubt any statement about this type of probability should be reported with two significant figures, and perhaps even one significant figure without an attached tolerance band is a bit of a stretch.
I’d say that a P this high for each statement, given this example, is well nigh impossible.
Agreed?
Maybe I’m not so underqualified as to be unable to enjoy this forum.