How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 Philosophy 101
 Can Anyone Other Than A Recluse   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  ]
 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Can Anyone Other Than A Recluse

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


125 posted 08-23-2008 06:55 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Essorant,

           Being able to bring yourself to do so—defending the other side of this particular discussion—and having the knowledge are different things.  You have a moral commitment to keeping the person distinct from the deed which I must admire in you.

     Part of my own difficulty is that I have actually met people who test my actual capacity to make that distinction in practice.  I have met people who have wanted to kill me and who have tried to do so.  These folks I've been able to deal with fairly well, generally being able to understand their side of the situation.  I don't believe everybody has to love me or that I'm always right.

     What I have difficulty dealing with is when some poor soul tries to kill somebody else, or does kill somebody else.  It arouses all my vengeful fury, and I am afraid that I attach it very often to the person who committed the crime.  Intellectually I can see what the Buddhists can call the "hell realm" they live in, but my compassion is horribly limited for them.  They can feel this in me, very often, and they try to play with me a bit on those occasions when I've had occasions to talk with them, since the notion of guilt is something they like to use to toy with people who have any particular sense of right and wrong.  

     "Did I learn that I'd done anything wrong during my time in prison," one guy asked me?

     "Uh Huh," I replied.  Silence would have been a better response, I think now.

     "Yeah," he said; "yeah, I learned something.  I learned not to get caught."

     And this was his little gift to me.  First, something that was probably carrying a bit of the truth to it.  Second, something mean-spirited and cruel, and third, and probably most important in terms of the psychodynamics of the situation, he was giving me a piece of his murderous rage to hold onto for him.  That's what the exchange left me feeling, you see, murderous rage that this guy was so unconcerned about the life of somebody else.

     And that was a lie on his part.  He didn't kill the person in question for no reason, he killed that person because of the feeling he was making me feel at that moment, that huge and horrible and bitter rage, out of all proportion to anything that had actually been said.  I could actually feel my desire to kill him at that point.  The psychological mechanism involved is called Projective Identification, and it is very primitive and very powerful, and very personal.

     It's of these experiences that I think when I try to separate out the person and the behavior.  I think the person I was working with here was trying to make that distinction within himself, but he certainly hadn't yet done so with any success.  Heaven knows he was making an effort, and over the long run I do believe that people will try to move toward love and health most of the time.  I don't know what the result of this guy's treatment was because I wasn't there to see it through, but I have to tell you, I wouldn't feel easy about seeing him on the street today.

     I'm trying here to connect with you as a person about this, and I'm talking about personal experience.  I've kept the other guy disguised enough to be unrecognizable but to present some of the basic issues.  I can't and won't be more forthcoming about the guy, if he is a guy, in any way that might compromise his privacy.  I want this to be more direct and less intellectual, at least on my part, than our last discussion on this stuff, where I felt I wasn't being forthcoming enough to keep the discussion fluid.

Sincerely yours, Bob K
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


126 posted 08-23-2008 08:03 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


There’s a reason we attach the labels of past actions to people - it’s so we can recognise them when we need to deal with them and communicate that recognition to other people.

Take away the label and Bob the builder is just plain Bob and that could be a problem when you factor in Bob the Psychotherapist and Bob the axe murderer. One of them is worth employing to sort out your leaky attic but the other two I wouldn’t recommend, though I have heard that Bob the Psychotherapist is a dab hand at DIY if you get stuck.



Bob the builder builds things, Bob the axe murderer kills things, Bob the psychotherapist tries to work out why. Sometimes the name isn’t important, it’s what they do that matters and if people have a problem with the labels we use for them perhaps they've choose the wrong vocation and have only themselves to blame.

BTW the characters in my comment are totally fictional, and are in no way based on real individuals living or deceased or cartoon - including Bob the builder.

Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


127 posted 08-24-2008 03:40 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.

"Bob the builder builds things, Bob the axe murderer kills things, Bob the psychotherapist tries to work out why."

Is each Bob a consequence of choices
freely made?  Would any of the Bobs
be as he is if he was born with
fifty million in a trust account?

.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


128 posted 08-24-2008 05:13 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

quote:
Is each Bob a consequence of choices
freely made?


Yes, but within limits dictated by circumstance.

quote:
Would any of the Bobs be as he is if he was born with fifty million in a trust account?


They could be if that’s what they choose to be, having fifty-million is a circumstance that increases the possible choices but it doesn’t remove those you already have.

Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


129 posted 08-24-2008 05:17 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


Grinch,


How many here, if they had fifty million,
would be what they are now?

Fifty million allows for being anything, (short of murderer),
including nothing to the world with pleasure.

.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


130 posted 08-24-2008 05:40 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
How many here, if they had fifty million,
would be what they are now?


No idea -  I suppose it would be precisely the same number that chose to be what they are now.

Is this going somewhere?

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


131 posted 08-25-2008 02:48 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Don't know, but whoever this Bob guy is, he'd better stay out of any dark Alley.  He sound mean and nasty.  Hope he gets what he deserves.  The sooner the better.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


132 posted 08-25-2008 08:08 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


I beleve most of us are compelled
to choose within a very limited range of choices.
Given the absolute freedom of great wealth
or an imminently terminal disease I doubt
most of us would be what we are defined as now.

I would certainly not spend my one life in any way
as an accountant.

.
Earl Robertson
Senior Member
since 01-21-2008
Posts 753
BC, Canada


133 posted 09-01-2008 06:09 PM       View Profile for Earl Robertson   Email Earl Robertson   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Earl Robertson

What we are is not determined by our range of choices but what we would (or do do) with those choices.
Thus yes what you would do with unlimited choices is different than what you do with your limited ones. But that has no hold on who you are.
Who you are is about what you would do and how hard/easy it would be to do that.

Be who you are
And say what you feel
'Cause those who mind don't matter
And those who matter don't mind
-Dr Suess

Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


134 posted 09-01-2008 06:49 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


Great

So the open expression
of the real me
is buried by degrees
of degrees of choice
I had in that real world
which couldn't care less.

.
Earl Robertson
Senior Member
since 01-21-2008
Posts 753
BC, Canada


135 posted 09-02-2008 11:46 PM       View Profile for Earl Robertson   Email Earl Robertson   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Earl Robertson

Exactly. And there's a reason it couldn't care less - it would go crazy trying.

Be who you are
And say what you feel
'Cause those who mind don't matter
And those who matter don't mind
-Dr Suess

Earl Robertson
Senior Member
since 01-21-2008
Posts 753
BC, Canada


136 posted 09-02-2008 11:50 PM       View Profile for Earl Robertson   Email Earl Robertson   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Earl Robertson

Also open expression is a myth. We use all kinds of shorthand which is best summed up by a quote from (ironicaly enough) "Batman Begins"

"It's not what you are on the inside but what you do that defines you."

But the inside is still who you are.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


137 posted 09-11-2008 02:01 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


I believe
true being of am
is beyond expression
in any language
including that of silence

and yet
is immediately
comprehensible,
(and remembered after),
in experience


.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


138 posted 09-11-2008 02:43 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



And yet somehow I failed to understand what you were saying.  With all the difficulties you mention, I would still be pleased if you'd try to make yourself clear enough for me to follow.

Bob K.
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


139 posted 09-11-2008 05:20 AM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

I like that, Huan, and it makes sense to me.
oceanvu2
Senior Member
since 02-24-2007
Posts 1007
Santa Monica, California, USA


140 posted 09-28-2008 05:27 PM       View Profile for oceanvu2   Email oceanvu2   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for oceanvu2


Hi John -- re your most recent post above:  I agree with you completely about language being a barrier between the nature of “am,” existential notions of “am-ness”, and the experience of “am-as-state-of-being.”

One of the simpler, but intellectually incomprehensible language takes towards an expression is “I am that I am.”  The key word seems to be “that,” as opposed to a an easier “what.”  Changes the whole frame of reference and throws it into meta-metaphysics.  I don’t think this can be understood on a rational level, but agree with you again that it can be experienced.

Every time we have a shift in perception, a moment of epiphany, transformation, or experience an experience, however one wants to couch it , we are open,  to a realm of “am-ness.”  It has nothing to do with what we think about it, and probably even less to do with what can be said about, those these might be the same thing.

In “I am that I am,” someone was presumably quoting the Judeo-Christian God.  I posit that the person quoting had had a key experience, a flash of insight that was uber-rational.  Most Biblical concordances offer grand glosses on the “meaning” of this statement.  The problem is a gloss or explication has to be couched in words, which, as we seem to agree, doesn’t cut it.  

The transformative experience as gateway to, or absolute state of “am” is always available, and happens all the time,  perhaps particularly when “time” is not a factor, in another poor, wordy expression.  It doesn’t need to be forced, and I don’t think it can be.

Two difficulties come up:  Most people don’t simply experience their experiences.  We tend to get too busy thinking about it.  Second, “experience” or being in the “experiential state” is transitory.  Downright fleeting, in fact.  It seems to be too intense to sustain, though not impossible to remember.

If we were able to sustain such a state, would we be enlightened beings?  Or are the fleeting experiences, moments of enlightenment, about the best we can hope for?  I don’t know.

Which brings me to a recent Bob post:

Hi Bob:  Re:
“Intellectually I can see what the Buddhists can call the "hell realm" they live in, but my compassion is horribly limited for them. They can feel this in me, very often, and they try to play with me a bit on those occasions when I've had occasions to talk with them, since the notion of guilt is something they like to use to toy with people who have any particular sense of right and wrong.”

The problem here is the characterization of Buddhists or Buddhism as some kind of monolithic entity, when in fact, they and it are almost as diverse in thought and practice a the Hindu, of which they were a subset to begin with.  It is impossible to  reconcile your view with a basic Buddhist tenet of compassion for all living things  (even within this life of hell as some strains view it.)

There are Buddhist line of thought embracing a vast demonic hierarchy, levels of hellishness, which, to them, is not speculative, but as “real” as anything in Revelations. These strains have long been a part of Tibetan and Bhutanese culture at least.  But Buddhism did not begin there, just a Christianity didn’t start in Rome.  The Buddha, of course, was born in India.  He wrote nothing down, and everything attributed to his thought was/is subject to different interpretations.

Zen, or Chan Buddhism, which started in China and migrated to Japan, has much, I think, in common with the thought of the lineage of Milarepa, its possible source, and does not reflect conservative Buddhist thought.  Maybe they can be thought of as similar to the Universalist/Unitarians of their time.

One of the tenets of Zen is to be attuned to experience the now.  This sect is non-judgmental, but from a position of compassion.

Do “Buddhist’s” like to mess with “non-Buddhist” minds?  Well, some of the American converts I’ve met seem to, but then, there are smart alecks everywhere.

Best, Jimbeaux  

[This message has been edited by oceanvu2 (09-28-2008 07:30 PM).]

rwood
Member Elite
since 02-29-2000
Posts 3797
Tennessee


141 posted 09-29-2008 07:54 AM       View Profile for rwood   Email rwood   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for rwood

I don't know why, but Earl's "Batman Begins" quote reminded me of another quote from a romance film, "Maid in Manhattan."

"What we do does not define who we are. What defines us is how well we rise after falling."

personally, it's amazing how many of us base our principals on some really good sounding lines, scripted by someone faceless for that of another, more attractive for an audience. lol.

  

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


142 posted 09-30-2008 09:13 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



I agree, rwood.  A pleasure to hear somebody who's suspicious of a fast answer in a mouth with really really white teeth.

Sincerely, Bob Kaven
rwood
Member Elite
since 02-29-2000
Posts 3797
Tennessee


143 posted 10-02-2008 06:26 AM       View Profile for rwood   Email rwood   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for rwood

I was in a hurry, and made the common mistake of a word. But I left it because it also applies, in *principle.*

I think you captured the thought, Bob.

Thanks.
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> Philosophy 101 >> Can Anyone Other Than A Recluse   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors