Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 09-10-2019, 09:20 PM
Sunny Daze's Avatar
Sunny Daze is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bay Area Urban Sprawl
Posts: 12,696
On the other hand, it's certainly possible love someone is a reprehensible or abusive person.
  #52  
Old 09-11-2019, 03:23 AM
Tibby's Avatar
Tibby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,693
You miss both the times and the person.

Unless you’re a sociopath.

If you feel empathy, you miss those you care about whether they are still in your life providing you happiness, or they are not.

My oldest daughter is now in college far away. Sure, it would make me happy to have her close by, but it makes me happier knowing she is happier where she’s at.

My parents and grandparents are long gone. Their antics provided me with many happy times. But, it makes me happiest knowing my antics provided them with more happy than sad times.

I’ve had many pets in my life. I often think back at the happy times I’ve had with them over the past 60 years. But, I also think about their lives. Did they enjoy their relatively short lives? To this day it would hurt me to think although they enriched my life, their lives were...meh. But, I don’t believe that’s the case. It makes me happy to believe I was a factor in making their lives happier. It would make me sad to think they would have been happier with someone else.

...well, there were two hamsters I had as a child that probably would have been happier with someone else. One got stepped on and killed by my mom when I left his cage door open (she didn’t squash him on purpose...I don’t think). Another got squeezed to death by my 2 year old nephew (I think he did it on purpose). I still feel bad for those little guys.

I’ve got much to be unhappy about in my current circumstances, but it makes me happy to think back at the both the happy times others provided to me, and the happy times I provided to them. On balance, I’m a happy guy.

If you explore your feelings I believe most of you will realize that you miss the times you’ve had with people as well as the people (and animals).
__________________
“Do you believe in such nonsense?” "No, but they say it works even if you don't believe in it.”—Niels Bohr
  #53  
Old 09-11-2019, 01:44 PM
Machinaforce is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,514
Well a Buddhist site said it so it must be the truth, especially since the reasoning seems sound. That you don't miss them, you just want more good times or other times in general. You are attached to the times you had not the person.
  #54  
Old 09-11-2019, 03:00 PM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 18,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
Well a Buddhist site said it so it must be the truth, especially since the reasoning seems sound. That you don't miss them, you just want more good times or other times in general. You are attached to the times you had not the person.
Either you're wrong in your understanding, or Buddhism site is wrong in it's explanation. At least one of you is wrong. That much is certain.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #55  
Old 09-11-2019, 04:13 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 13,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
Exactly which means you like care and kindness not the person. If you loved the person then it doesn't matter how they act. It's like loving the times you had with people and not the person themselves.
It's possible to love somebody conditionally, but that doesn't mean that it's impossible to love unconditionally.

In actual fact, there's pretty obviously a continuum here, as evinced by examples of people putting up with some bad behavior but not past a 'breaking point'. Your position is that the breaking point shows that people only care about the behavior, but the fact that people persist through some bad behavior flatly proves you wrong.
  #56  
Old 09-11-2019, 04:24 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 13,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
Well a Buddhist site said it so it must be the truth,
Holy crap, you actually wrote this.

Your homework assignment is naming the specific fallacy that has rooted itself in your thinking, and explaining why it's causing you to blindly accept "sound reasoning" that is handily disproven by casual observation of reality.
  #57  
Old 09-11-2019, 10:17 PM
Machinaforce is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,514
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
Holy crap, you actually wrote this.

Your homework assignment is naming the specific fallacy that has rooted itself in your thinking, and explaining why it's causing you to blindly accept "sound reasoning" that is handily disproven by casual observation of reality.
You have not disproven it, if anything you just reinforce it.

Sure that is one component but the argument is still strong in that you love the bits but not the person. If you loved the person then the bits and aspects they have wouldn't matter. The things about them are still just pieces, like me saying I miss my dog stamping her feet means I miss the act, not her. It's the same with people,you miss the pieces but these are not "them" because there is no "self" or core aspect that you are loving which endures moment to moment. You love the abstract things currently present: beauty, humor, these can be anyone (which would explain what he meant by fickle).

I'm sorry but I just haven't seen anyone take his argument down and not reinforce it by accident. Calling it nonsense is a lazy way to turn away from something you don't want to hear. Granted it's not something I want to hear either because it shattered what I believed love to be.
  #58  
Old 09-11-2019, 10:20 PM
Machinaforce is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,514
From the paragraph:

Quote:
To sum it up - Love towards abstract things is ironically real…mainly because abstract things are a perception of one’s own mind…and hence your mind is totally attached to it.

Love towards “real” things is ironically an illusion…mainly because both of your minds are fickle
Quote:
This is the fickle mind that we are dealing with. It is just impossible to create a “real” bond between one such human mind and another….especially when one has choices in choosing another mind - that is, your love towards your mother can be true because , one can have only one mother…thus in fact your love is towards maternity than towards the mind of the mother itself…no one would love their mother if the mother wasn’t kind and loving….would you love your mother if she had harassed you verbally and physically as a kid? No…because, you love the concept of maternity..which is care…and not the human being, that is the mother itself.
Quote:
Love towards “real” things is ironically an illusion…mainly because both of your minds are fickle
  #59  
Old 09-11-2019, 10:22 PM
Sunny Daze's Avatar
Sunny Daze is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bay Area Urban Sprawl
Posts: 12,696
You have not answered begbert2's question.
  #60  
Old 09-12-2019, 05:20 AM
GreenWyvern's Avatar
GreenWyvern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 1,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
Well a Buddhist site said it so it must be the truth
Which school of Buddhism, as a matter of interest?

As I'm sure you know, there are many different schools of Buddhism, which have different beliefs, practices, and even different scriptures. Perhaps there is one school of Buddhist thought that believes that, but others would strongly dispute it. It's not enough to say 'Buddhism' as though it's one single belief set. It's similar to all the various divisions and sects of Christianity.

The main schools of Buddhism are Theravada, Mahayana, and Vajrayana, but there are many sub-schools with different beliefs.

You say 'a Buddhist site', but which particular brand of Buddhist site? Do all other schools of Buddhism agree with what is said there? Which particular Buddhist belief system do you take to be 'the truth'?
  #61  
Old 09-13-2019, 01:14 PM
Machinaforce is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,514
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenWyvern View Post
Which school of Buddhism, as a matter of interest?

As I'm sure you know, there are many different schools of Buddhism, which have different beliefs, practices, and even different scriptures. Perhaps there is one school of Buddhist thought that believes that, but others would strongly dispute it. It's not enough to say 'Buddhism' as though it's one single belief set. It's similar to all the various divisions and sects of Christianity.

The main schools of Buddhism are Theravada, Mahayana, and Vajrayana, but there are many sub-schools with different beliefs.

You say 'a Buddhist site', but which particular brand of Buddhist site? Do all other schools of Buddhism agree with what is said there? Which particular Buddhist belief system do you take to be 'the truth'?
It's just more monolithic, because for some reason I got it into my head the Buddhism is special in some way or that the effects the teachings have on the people is proof. But results don't prove truth when it comes to teachings though.

Quote:
I think we miss someone because the lack of them being there is greater than the presence of others. We miss the times we had with the person and the way they made us feel. If you share a lot of happy experiences with someone wouldn’t you begin to associate that person with happiness? Almost as if that person is a direct link to your own private source of happiness. Those are just some of my thoughts though.
  #62  
Old 09-13-2019, 01:30 PM
GreenWyvern's Avatar
GreenWyvern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 1,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
It's just more monolithic, because for some reason I got it into my head the Buddhism is special in some way or that the effects the teachings have on the people is proof. But results don't prove truth when it comes to teachings though.


That doesn't even begin to make sense. I give up.
  #63  
Old 09-15-2019, 12:24 AM
Machinaforce is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,514
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenWyvern View Post


That doesn't even begin to make sense. I give up.
What I mean is that the teachings elicit a state of mind but that state of mind might not be the truth of reality as they claim it is. Kind of like how preaching of an afterlife might make people less uneasy about dying but that doesn't mean there is one.

AS for the main topic no matter how I spin it I just come back to the same conclusion that we don't miss people just the times we had with them, as much as it pains me.
  #64  
Old 09-15-2019, 12:26 AM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 52,857
Dude, just get help.
  #65  
Old 09-17-2019, 09:35 PM
Machinaforce is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,514
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinastasia View Post
Dude, just get help.
A therapist can't help me against the arguments being made and no one has proven them false besides just sweeping them away with casual dismissal.

There is no treatment for the harsh truth.
  #66  
Old 09-17-2019, 10:33 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 16,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
A therapist can't help me against the arguments being made and no one has proven them false besides just sweeping them away with casual dismissal.
You wrote: “Well a Buddhist site said it so it must be the truth,” and folks — swept it away with casual dismissal, because, honestly, that’s more than it deserves.

You, right there, are ‘sweeping away with casual dismissal’ the idea that a Buddhist site could state stuff but be incorrect: that a claim posted there couldn’t possibly be a crafty lie or an honest mistake or whatever, because, oh, gosh: a Buddhist site said it, so it must be true, right? Er, no; that’s not actually a thing.

Your “so it must be the truth” isn’t some ironclad proof of truth; but the fact that you’d type out so shabby a phrase is evidence that you’re doing it wrong.
  #67  
Old Yesterday, 12:53 AM
nelliebly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Washington
Posts: 1,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
A therapist can't help me against the arguments being made and no one has proven them false besides just sweeping them away with casual dismissal.

There is no treatment for the harsh truth.
And yet you keep posting the same woe-is-me stuff. What do you really expect to get out of the responses here? I've read your threads--or should I say "thread," singular, because they're all basically the same thing, to wit: Oh, I'm miserable because some quasi-Buddhist site I visited said such-and-such." Why do you keep posting the same queries? Seriously, why?

You dismiss the replies on every thread you've posted. You've dismissed the religious/spiritual experiences of others. So why post this stuff? Why post here? Does it give you a sense of superiority because you think you've out-foxed all the smart people who've responded? Is it a power trip because no matter what you post, people respond?

I'm not expecting an answer. You generally ignore posts like this. But maybe those tempted to respond will take note.
  #68  
Old Yesterday, 01:28 AM
Beckdawrek's Avatar
Beckdawrek is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: So.Ark ?
Posts: 17,008
Dude, can't you move past this bag of crappola? Why do you keep studying this junk you found on some web site?
Now, I don't really know buddism but I know crap when I read it. This is smelling like a bunch of crap.
You're stinkin' up your brain with it. Stop.

(please tell me you don't donate any cash to these folks, if they ask for cash tell them cash is not 'real')

Last edited by Beckdawrek; Yesterday at 01:30 AM.
  #69  
Old Yesterday, 01:40 AM
GreenWyvern's Avatar
GreenWyvern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 1,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post

... and no one has proven them false ...
This is a basic and fundamental misunderstanding.

It's NOT up to other people to prove that it's false, it's up to you to prove that it's true.


Meanwhile... perhaps you can help me with this problem:


I read on a Zoroastrian site that Ahuramazda said the world is going to end the Friday after next. I am plunged into despair! It must be true because I read it on a Zoroastrian site.

I want someone to prove to me that the world won't end the Friday after next. I have a feeling they are right. Nobody seems able to prove logically to me that the Zoroastrians are wrong, everybody is just dismissive - that shows that the Zoroastrians must be right.

Oh, I am so terribly unhappy!
  #70  
Old Yesterday, 02:05 AM
GreenWyvern's Avatar
GreenWyvern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 1,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenWyvern View Post
Meanwhile... perhaps you can help me with this problem:


I read on a Zoroastrian site that Ahuramazda said the world is going to end the Friday after next. I am plunged into despair! It must be true because I read it on a Zoroastrian site.

I want someone to prove to me that the world won't end the Friday after next. I have a feeling they are right. Nobody seems able to prove logically to me that the Zoroastrians are wrong, everybody is just dismissive - that shows that the Zoroastrians must be right.

Oh, I am so terribly unhappy!
I should add that the Zoroastrians have 8 closely-written pages of elaborate numerological calculations to prove that world will end the Friday after next.

I want someone to go through those those 8 pages of calculations and show me that they have made a mistake somewhere. If you are not prepared to that, I have to assume they are right. Oh, woe, woe is me!
  #71  
Old Yesterday, 02:16 AM
Beckdawrek's Avatar
Beckdawrek is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: So.Ark ?
Posts: 17,008
So, Machinaforce watch how I make GreenWyvern see the truth.
"Green, my friend, delete that website from your brain and your laptop. Lets go outside for awhile. Look at the sky. Feel the ground under your feet. Does it look like the world is going to end? No it doesn't. Do you still believe that crap you read online? Didn't think so. Don't you feel happier? I knew you would."

Machina, that's how easy it is. You decided to believe. Decide not to believe. You'll be happier, I promise.

(GreenWyvern, I know you don't really believe that junk)
  #72  
Old Yesterday, 02:44 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,522
Just to answer the title: No. We miss the people. It isn't just missing the time we spent with them, but also future contact with them. For instance, I miss being able to tell my grandpa and get his response about a current problem I'm having.

Now do we miss only our contact with these people? Sure. But that's kinda inherent--we don't have any experience of other people as people other than our contact with them.

As for you main topic in so many threads: Buddhism tries to make yourself feel happier by detaching from material desires and accepting things as they are. If it isn't making you happier, give it up and try something else.

Buddhism's purpose is not to make your depressed or to justify depression.
  #73  
Old Yesterday, 09:34 AM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 18,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
A therapist can't help me against the arguments being made and no one has proven them false besides just sweeping them away with casual dismissal.

There is no treatment for the harsh truth.
Your therapist is not your rhetorical sparring partner. That's not his/her job. His/her job is to treat you for your pathological obsessive disorder and whatever other mental disorder you may be suffering from.

Furthermore, Buddhism isn't science. It's another belief system that can't be proven wrong to anyone who really believes it. Like any other religion past or present.

Finally, you don't really believe Buddhism anyway. If you did, you would not need constant testing and validation from strangers on a message board. You'd just accept things as they are presented to you and get on happily with your life. But you don't accept them. You stew in misery and doubt, wanting only to argue, obsess and whine about how you're unhappy because you can't find "Truth". No shit, Sherlock. Continue your therapy and consider that Buddhism is not for you. No philosophy truly can be because you lack the capacity to judge for yourself what's useful and what isn't.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #74  
Old Yesterday, 03:46 PM
Machinaforce is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,514
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Your therapist is not your rhetorical sparring partner. That's not his/her job. His/her job is to treat you for your pathological obsessive disorder and whatever other mental disorder you may be suffering from.

Furthermore, Buddhism isn't science. It's another belief system that can't be proven wrong to anyone who really believes it. Like any other religion past or present.

Finally, you don't really believe Buddhism anyway. If you did, you would not need constant testing and validation from strangers on a message board. You'd just accept things as they are presented to you and get on happily with your life. But you don't accept them. You stew in misery and doubt, wanting only to argue, obsess and whine about how you're unhappy because you can't find "Truth". No shit, Sherlock. Continue your therapy and consider that Buddhism is not for you. No philosophy truly can be because you lack the capacity to judge for yourself what's useful and what isn't.
Except it isn't just a philosophy because there is actual psychological studies that support some of it's claims.
  #75  
Old Yesterday, 03:49 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 13,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
Except it isn't just a philosophy because there is actual psychological studies that support some of it's claims.
Not any of its claims that matter. Not any of its claims that you stress over.

And just because *some* of their claims may be substantiated or even accurate, that in no way indicates that all the rest of them are. Particularly not the demonstrably false ones. I mean, christianity claims that murder is bad. Does that mean the earth is only 6000 years old?
  #76  
Old Yesterday, 03:58 PM
Machinaforce is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,514
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beckdawrek View Post
So, Machinaforce watch how I make GreenWyvern see the truth.
"Green, my friend, delete that website from your brain and your laptop. Lets go outside for awhile. Look at the sky. Feel the ground under your feet. Does it look like the world is going to end? No it doesn't. Do you still believe that crap you read online? Didn't think so. Don't you feel happier? I knew you would."

Machina, that's how easy it is. You decided to believe. Decide not to believe. You'll be happier, I promise.

(GreenWyvern, I know you don't really believe that junk)
You don't decide to believe something.
  #77  
Old Yesterday, 04:00 PM
Machinaforce is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,514
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenWyvern View Post
This is a basic and fundamental misunderstanding.

It's NOT up to other people to prove that it's false, it's up to you to prove that it's true.


Meanwhile... perhaps you can help me with this problem:


I read on a Zoroastrian site that Ahuramazda said the world is going to end the Friday after next. I am plunged into despair! It must be true because I read it on a Zoroastrian site.

I want someone to prove to me that the world won't end the Friday after next. I have a feeling they are right. Nobody seems able to prove logically to me that the Zoroastrians are wrong, everybody is just dismissive - that shows that the Zoroastrians must be right.

Oh, I am so terribly unhappy!
Again, Buddhism isn't like those religions and I have proven the claim to be true but others haven't shown it to not be so. They have not shown that we miss the people and not only the times we had with them nor have they disprove the claim that we are only attracted to the abstract concepts (like care) and not the human as the paragraph I quoted said.
  #78  
Old Yesterday, 04:04 PM
Machinaforce is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,514
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
Just to answer the title: No. We miss the people. It isn't just missing the time we spent with them, but also future contact with them. For instance, I miss being able to tell my grandpa and get his response about a current problem I'm having.

Now do we miss only our contact with these people? Sure. But that's kinda inherent--we don't have any experience of other people as people other than our contact with them.

As for you main topic in so many threads: Buddhism tries to make yourself feel happier by detaching from material desires and accepting things as they are. If it isn't making you happier, give it up and try something else.

Buddhism's purpose is not to make your depressed or to justify depression.
Accepting things as they are doesn't always lead to happiness, in fact Buddhism itself says that we can't live in Absolute Reality since it is nothing like the constructed reality of humans. It would require giving up the lies: desire, values, compassion, etc and one can't live like that.

Reality as it is isn't like the reality that human live in and that is what bothers me the most that much of what I have taken to be true isn't and that the world as it is isn't the way society makes it out. Buddhism isn't about being happier, it's about ceasing suffering, the two are not the same.

It's not about being happy it's about seeing the truth, even if it hurts, and all it does is hurt me. I can't just go back an unsee everything even though I wish I could.
  #79  
Old Yesterday, 04:17 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 13,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
Again, Buddhism isn't like those religions and I have proven the claim to be true but others haven't shown it to not be so. They have not shown that we miss the people and not only the times we had with them nor have they disprove the claim that we are only attracted to the abstract concepts (like care) and not the human as the paragraph I quoted said.
Just to be clear, when you say we haven't shown that we miss people and not experiences, you mean that you're blatantly ignoring everything we've said on the subject.

And I haven't seen this proof of Buddhism's distinction from other religions. Maybe I missed it. Because I've seen exactly nothing to suggest that these folks are any more accurate than, say, Pastafarianism.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
Accepting things as they are doesn't always lead to happiness, in fact Buddhism itself says that we can't live in Absolute Reality since it is nothing like the constructed reality of humans. It would require giving up the lies: desire, values, compassion, etc and one can't live like that.

Reality as it is isn't like the reality that human live in and that is what bothers me the most that much of what I have taken to be true isn't and that the world as it is isn't the way society makes it out. Buddhism isn't about being happier, it's about ceasing suffering, the two are not the same.

It's not about being happy it's about seeing the truth, even if it hurts, and all it does is hurt me. I can't just go back an unsee everything even though I wish I could.
You're not seeing true. You're seeing woo. Its entirely filling your vision.

And reality is indeed like the reality people live in. Sure, there are other levels of reality that aren't like what we directly experience - the subatomic level, the atomic level, the molecular level, etc. But the fact that reality operates weirdly at those levels doesn't mean that reality doesn't operate in the normal way at the macro level. And just because the atomic level doesn't demonstrate the emergent properties found at the macro level doesn't mean they're not happening - that would be like saying that the fact a car doesn't work once disassembled that it doesn't work while assembled.

But you know all this and don't care.
  #80  
Old Yesterday, 04:46 PM
Beckdawrek's Avatar
Beckdawrek is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: So.Ark ?
Posts: 17,008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
You don't decide to believe something.
Sure you do. What? You think it's magic or something?
I decide to believe 1000s of things everyday.
And, son you can too. It's called 'adulting'.
  #81  
Old Yesterday, 05:02 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 13,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beckdawrek View Post
Sure you do. What? You think it's magic or something?
I decide to believe 1000s of things everyday.
And, son you can too. It's called 'adulting'.
Er, I also think you can't consciously decide to believe something. You can decide to act like you believe it, operating on trust and such, but whether or not you actually believe something is not in the realm of conscious decision making - it's more a subconscious thing.

If you want to change your beliefs, you have to change the factset your subconscious is working with. Seek out more information, analize the information you already have, work to recognize your biases and stress to yourself that they *are* biases and that buddhism isn't some magical truth-bastion that should be trusted without proof. Stuff like that. But you can't just decide to believe in the FSM and such.
  #82  
Old Yesterday, 05:20 PM
Beckdawrek's Avatar
Beckdawrek is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: So.Ark ?
Posts: 17,008
I can.
  #83  
Old Yesterday, 05:23 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 13,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beckdawrek View Post
I can.
I find that hard to picture - to the point that I think we must be misunderstanding each other.

Could you, right now, start fervently believing in the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Could you, right now, replace your belief that gravity is correlated with mass with a belief that gravity pulls like it does because magical elves just arbitrarily decide which directions to push things in?

Last edited by begbert2; Yesterday at 05:23 PM. Reason: typo
  #84  
Old Yesterday, 05:27 PM
pool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Inside
Posts: 4,521
I don't get why it has to be one or the other, you can miss the person and miss the times you had at the same time.

Sometimes people change for the worse, like let's say they become a bad drug addict, they undergo personality changes and they aren't the same person, they have changed but you can still miss the person that they used to be.

Also you can love or enjoy being with a person not just because of how you feel about them, but how they make you feel about yourself.
__________________
"You can do anything you set your mind to...But money helps"
  #85  
Old Yesterday, 05:32 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 13,111
Also I've seen people mourn people they've never done any activities with.

Ever seen somebody who's lost a just-born or not-quite-born baby?
  #86  
Old Yesterday, 05:55 PM
Sunny Daze's Avatar
Sunny Daze is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bay Area Urban Sprawl
Posts: 12,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
A therapist can't help me against the arguments being made and no one has proven them false besides just sweeping them away with casual dismissal.

There is no treatment for the harsh truth.
You said the following about your dog:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
I guess that exact moment wouldn't be the same without her to be truthful. Without her little stamping feet and such it would not be the same.
The fact that you are choosing to believe that your dog wasn't important because a website says so, means that this statement is false:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
You don't decide to believe something.
For the record, I also believe that you can decide to believe something. Sometimes you have evidence, sometimes you don't, sometimes you go with your gut, and sometimes you tell your gut what it believes.
  #87  
Old Yesterday, 06:00 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 13,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunny Daze View Post
For the record, I also believe that you can decide to believe something. Sometimes you have evidence, sometimes you don't, sometimes you go with your gut, and sometimes you tell your gut what it believes.
Every time I've told my gut we were going to believe something my gut responded with, "No chance bucko, but if you want to go along and pretend to buy it, acting like a looby all the while, I'll just hang back watching and quietly saying 'I told you so'."
  #88  
Old Yesterday, 06:24 PM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 52,857
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
A therapist can't help me against the arguments being made and no one has proven them false besides just sweeping them away with casual dismissal.

There is no treatment for the harsh truth.
No, a therapist can help you stop obsessing about all of this in the first place. It has nothing to do with "casual dismissals". You do sound honestly obsessed.

If you're so worried about that, you can find a therapist who's a Buddhist. But a therapist isn't there to debate with you, or just tell you what you want to hear.
  #89  
Old Yesterday, 07:24 PM
Machinaforce is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,514
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunny Daze View Post
You said the following about your dog:


The fact that you are choosing to believe that your dog wasn't important because a website says so, means that this statement is false:



For the record, I also believe that you can decide to believe something. Sometimes you have evidence, sometimes you don't, sometimes you go with your gut, and sometimes you tell your gut what it believes.
Essentially yes, it made me rethink what I actually missed and I was sad to realize that it wasn't her.

Then again it is the same religion that refers to loneliness as some kind of sickness:

Quote:
What you're experiencing is normal suffering due to loneliness. Psychologists will tell you it's normal as long as it does not interfere negatively on your physical or mental health. Most people do something to ease feelings of loneliness (make new friends, read, do sports, watch TV, ..). But that's not curing loneliness. It's like having a disease and alleviating its symptoms. This is no different than being depressive and drinking alcohol to ease the depression. Off course it's not dysfunctional as drinking alcohol, but the mechanism is the same: you suffer, and instead of resolving your main problems which are the cause of your suffering, you're postponing their resolution to a later date.
  #90  
Old Yesterday, 07:27 PM
Machinaforce is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,514
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinastasia View Post
No, a therapist can help you stop obsessing about all of this in the first place. It has nothing to do with "casual dismissals". You do sound honestly obsessed.

If you're so worried about that, you can find a therapist who's a Buddhist. But a therapist isn't there to debate with you, or just tell you what you want to hear.
That's why a therapist can't help because none of them can dispute the claims with a good argument.

I have read what people have written, but those still fall under the "missing the times you had and not the person" component of the argument. Same with the paragraph saying you like the abstract parts but not the person (care, humor, kindness).
  #91  
Old Yesterday, 09:09 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 16,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
That's why a therapist can't help because none of them can dispute the claims with a good argument.

I have read what people have written, but those still fall under the "missing the times you had and not the person" component of the argument. Same with the paragraph saying you like the abstract parts but not the person (care, humor, kindness).
All apologies, but you kinda tipped your hand with “Well a Buddhist site said it so it must be the truth”: we now know what you hold up as a good argument, and it’s the exact opposite of one. We now know what apparently impresses you, but mimicking that approach — even to win you over — would be shameful.

Take a long look at what you’re blithely insisting, there: you’re not claiming that Buddhist arguments are true because you think they’re true; you’re claiming that they’re true because you think they’re Buddhist.

That’s, uh, wrong, is the thing. Might be your fundamental error, right there.
  #92  
Old Today, 08:00 AM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 18,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
That's why a therapist can't help because none of them can dispute the claims with a good argument.
It is not their fucking job to be your rhetorical sparring partner. That you believe that you have the right harangue every person you meet with your incessant bullshit is some new level of entitlement. Get it through your head: Nobody cares about your struggle for the Truth because it's delusional and obsessive. That your therapist doesn't engage you in this wankery is a credit to him/her. They are there to treat you. But if you refuse to cooperate with your treatment, they will just take your money and see you next week.

Much like us. Though I feel like we should be getting paid at this point as well.

See you next week.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.

Last edited by QuickSilver; Today at 08:01 AM.
  #93  
Old Today, 01:54 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 13,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
I have read what people have written, but those still fall under the "missing the times you had and not the person" component of the argument. Same with the paragraph saying you like the abstract parts but not the person (care, humor, kindness).
There are people I've cared for despite not seeing them for long periods of time. According to your position I should be no more saddened by their death then I am by their departure. This is wrong, because your position is wrong.

If the only interest you have in a person/animal is what they can do for you and what you can get out of them, I think that's sociopathy.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:03 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017