Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Robot Parade Leader]

With all the shit you've put up with and all the shit you could get away with how in the hell haven't you just beaten the fuck out of lots of people yet Truean?

Sometimes I just totally want to but can't.

[Truean]

Should I say conscience? Wisdom enough to know I'd lose even if I won?

Not entirely sure what you're asking for.

[wierd]

I think he is just a bit young, and hasn't had time to adjust. Wonders how people like us manage to not go postal.

Relaxing hobbies help. Things that shut off the brain, but produce something you can be proud of. I picked up crochet and knit for that very reason. All muscle memory, brain can turn off. Produces neat things afterward.

You need to find your own outlet though, robot. Every person is different.

[Robot Parade Leader]

Mostly yeah.

But also like, how the hell aren't you corrupt when everyone else is?
Half the shit I've read here about Truean says we're dealing with somebody who knows all the ins and outs of lots of shit.
Why is everyone else getting rich off fucking things up but not Truean?
How do you just suck all that shit up and not do something back?

[wierd]

Integrity.

[Robot Parade Leader]

Ok yeah. I was hoping T might give us some more detail on that though?

[Truean]

Please don't quote:

Why ask why? What would anyone gain.... (No question mark). To corrupt their world, I'd have to touch it. No.

People are bastards (Don't tell me it's an over-generalization). I can't / won't deal with them in real life without playing their delusions, so I escape into fantasy. Being corrupt would require dealing with their poisoned reality, and I don't want to..... I could outmaneuver all of them, play their games and "win," while losing what little of myself I have. No. Nothing to gain, not really.

Helped everyone; everyone disbelieved. Truth prevailed, but didn't save me. I found and condemned the actually guilty, to prison. Their disbelief, their delusion condemned me, all the same. I don't care anymore; I'm dead inside. It's the only way I survive. I was thrown out of society, because I was gay or whatever I am, and people wouldn't believe those in power were corrupt. They've proven unworthy of any part of me. I could save them or condemn them. I won't do either.

Oddly, many believe my carefully chosen words are missing something. So, they try to "explain" or "educate" me. No. It's more people manipulating me. I do what I have to and what I'm forced to. I'd be just fine in solitary confinement; to really punish me, put me in the general population. Hell is other people.

Logic, reason, and rationality, don't sway people. They want, wish, and whine, while wondering why worlds wither. Yes, keep saying "I'm just asking," while true but undesirable answers are presented.... Don't care. Then they get mad at me for not making their delusions real. Humanity is insane; thus I am a misanthrope.

Corrupt them? I don't care about them. Not anymore. Good side? Bad side? They're all bad. They preach the doomed impotence of logic, the failure of virtue, and the uselessness of rationality? Witness the full logical result of those sermonized theories.

Please don't quote:

[Tiruin]

I'd really like the tone of this thread to be progressive rather than cynical given the latest posts. While it's important to denote the context--that the people generally dealt with aren't the more developed, and why there's a lot of conflict in reasoning or communicating with them, it's not helpful to dwell on what they did onto you and then generalizing them as people. It's their traits and behaviors which caused that; not by nature of being people themselves.

Tru, please do not conflict the general populace with what you have been exposed to, nor let the idea justify your own beliefs because of what certain people have done, regardless of their position in power. While you believe those things, along with yourself being a 'misanthrope', that's a temporary state of mind reinforced over a period of time. In trying to give advice to others; work with them here, because cynicism does not define others' worth. A great many people are cynical; it's a learned response to what their general, consistent environment was, but the only one in full control within anyone's reach is themselves.

And I'd not like to see people generalizing others when in specifics they're focusing on a certain group which is difficult to isolate from the general populace. Focus on the behavior, the traits, the characteristics. But not people, because you'll end up conflicting your own perception and causing a cognitive pseudoloop of how you'll think about people, instead of the behavior or otherwise that made you feel that way towards them. Ideas sway people; culture sways people; familiarity does the same. Logic, reason, and rationality all fall under ideas; how they're presented--and these in a way may be presented subjectively, given the communication of one to another, as at times others' ideas may not be logical to us but reasonable to them because they've a way to make sense about it (even if this sense isn't strongly cultivated and more on what they've learned to believe).

Taken from experience and words from many folks in the field: Families, friends, and other social groups affect how people think, feel, and act, but individuals as people are all social in nature. These differences between individuals and between groups reflect differences in people’s levels of differentiation of self. A person’s 'self' is also developed parallel to their locus of control, or how much you feel in control of what you think at the moment--built up over time alongside the experiences one has; initially during development (eg when you're unfamiliar with the culture/environment or the surroundings are very consistent) the more impact others may have on your functioning and the more one may try to control, actively or passively, what goes around them. In the lack of these, there's less openness to communication because the mode of control feels broken with others. The basic building blocks of that self are inborn, but one’s relationships during early years of life (childhood, adolescence, and young adulthood) are environmental affectors of that development; the environment that one adapts to or tries to face. Young adulthood is generally where one establishes the sense of themselves/their 'self', and this level of “self” rarely changes unless a person makes a structured and long-term effort to change it. Which goes with experience, persistence, and cognitive willpower.

If you feel that beginning to generalize people is something that you can do, it'll affect your perception, and you work with your perception to react and adapt to your environment; if you feel this may be lacking or causing you more frustration or any negative feeling: Add more ideas to it, not necessarily ideas along the same theme that caused you to feel that way. Conflict occurs when there's a lot of lack, and this may spiral in a person's mind because they're generally either reacting to an environment that was understood as something that really doesn't work with them, or their sense of self is underdeveloped (lacking attitude, empathy, etc). These developments and understandings follow conceptualization. And underneath all that is the basis of a thread like this--asking for more information in dealing with people, who may be acting in a way to cause all that stress and upset feelings; all feelings of which are valid. You've to work with yourself all throughout and focus on that--to also remember that you who were built up before, who adhered to something good and better as a dream in the future, are not deprecated no matter what others do to you.
Everyone has this unique, common part of themselves that will remain no matter what others do to them. That's one reason why people feel conflicted in these situations and keep acknowledging their stance (eg feeling stressed or hurt) against what causes the conflict.

[Truean]

Please do not quote

I said, "Don't tell me it's an over-generalization," but it doesn't matter. Say it as many times as you want; I don't care. I could explain it, but I actually don't care anymore. People are terrible and nothing, nothing will ever convince me otherwise. I hate all of humanity; they deserve it. You wanna deal with the reality of those hoards of people in those videos? Are they all special as they needlessly literally trample people, sometimes to death, over material items. (No question mark).

People are very sick of being told what to do, or what they should do.

I offer practical, real advice that helps in the real world. Everyone is sick of everyone else. So I just try to function the best I can, around their dysfunction. I can either help OP cope, or not.

Please do not quote

[wierd]

I sometimes wonder if this is more an american thing than a human thing, but the innate nature to be assholes is indeed baked into everyone.

I have a kind of middle-path attitude on that.  Crowds reflect the worst humanity has to offer, with accuracy of that prediction increasing towards 1:1 as the crowd grows in size.  I never trust crowds.

Individual humans though may have redeeming qualities. I observe and then make an informed choice to intervene or not, on a person by person basis.


It has been my experience, and seemingly that of other people, even from very regressive regimes, that when there are few people, who have to work together to survive, the cost of being an asshole is just too high for an individual, and the society is overall happier, even though they have less, and suffer more total adversity.

It is in very wealthy and prosperous societies, where the costs of being an asshole are so small, compared to the gains, that I see the most of this nasty side of human nature.

It is one of the reasons I greatly dislike the "progressive" mantra of moving people into dense city environments, or extensive social welfare. (Protip, it has very little to do with costs in a monetary or tangible form, and much more to do with costs in terms of societal and behavioral capacities) These things reduce the costs of being an asshole, and maximize the gains, which in turn, encourages asshole behavior. (again, all humans are capable of being assholes, and have to learn to not be one. Much like the mantra "every man as his price", every person has their point of comfort after which they feel comfortable being an asshole. The more removed from consequences a society becomes, the more prone to sliding down the spectrum into the kind of shitfest presented in Truean's video link the society becomes. The vast majority of the people who engaged in those acts of madness had no lasting ill consequences, and perversely, the most egregious of the offenders likely were the ones who grabbed the most holiday swag-- again, maximization of profit and minimalization of consequence == increased assholeness)

Individual people, removed from the "cover" of a big group or mob, are less likely to engage in asshole behaviors. This is why I focus on individuals instead of groups, despite the inefficiency.  Group-centered interventions (such as big social welfare systems) offer a 'crowd' that hides and thus minimizes the consequences of abuse or being an asshole, greatly increasing the incidence rate.  I dont donate to charities. I instead help individual people on individual bases, and only after an observation period.  I get accused of being a miser or an asshole for this, but I feel that this is not an accurate assessment of my behavior. I am a hardass, BECAUSE I still care. Not in spite of.

Personally, I am of the opinion that human kind is not evolutionarily adapted enough for "massive society" like we have now. Our brains are not that different than they were 6000 years ago, when people had just discovered how to make bronze tools, and the size of a "city" was no greater than 2000 people. This is why the "asshole problem" exists. People just cannot keep track of all the offenders, and instead just accept the degenerate consequences of such action en-mass, because the offenders cannot be kept in the light and socially accountable for their misbehavior. (No, I dont mean prison, or things like that. I mean the natural consequences that come from being an asshole that arise in small-scale human group interactions. Word gets around, and being an asshole means loss of access to resources, assistance, and social interactions. In small-scale human interaction this greatly applies pressure to NOT be an asshole, which just is not there when the society grows so large that people are anonymized by a crowd.  Throw into that, that despite what many pundits say, the "green revolution" in agriculture (eg, the use of fossil fuel derived nitrogen fertilizers to increase crop yields) is also NOT sustainable, the implication that the asshole problem has in relation to the spread of dangerous pathogens when coupled with antibiotic resistance-- and the handwriting is pretty damned clear that the planet just has too many people in it, and we are not advanced enough as a species to properly handle the realities of having a population this size.  Collapse is inevitable, and will be the more horrible the longer it is postponed, because the population continues to grow, (and with it, the incidence rate of the asshole problem, and the overcapacity issues associated with such population density)

The sooner the contraction happens, the better, in terms of overall human survival.

I too am a major misanthrope, because I approach this with eyes that are open and a thinking mind, rather than an open heart and and an empty mind. I agree with Truean that in gestalt, the human race is too degenerate to be sensible to approach, and want to distance myself from it. Hell really is other people. It truly is.

Perhaps after a few tens of thousands of years, humans will have developed cogitative abilities that extend beyond a limited circle of 300 people, and can effectively combat the asshole problem when there is large population buildup---  But that future is NOT today.

Today, humans are assholes when they are in large groups, because they can get away with literal murder with no real consequences. We destroy our own planet for stupid reasons because we cannot properly conceive of the consequences of our actions, and we seek to deny these realities in favor of imagined realities that are not real.

Individual people, dealing with individual people, are well within the scope of what we are currently capable of dealing with, and dealing with correctly. That is why I take this tactic.  I dont trust groups, and never will. I am willing to TRY to trust individual humans, on an individual basis.

[Tiruin]

I said, "Don't tell me it's an over-generalization," but it doesn't matter. Say it as many times as you want; I don't care. I could explain it, but I actually don't care anymore. People are terrible and nothing, nothing will ever convince me otherwise. I hate all of humanity; they deserve it. You wanna deal with the reality of those hoards of people in those videos? Are they all special as they needlessly literally trample people, sometimes to death, over material items. (No question mark).

Why I made my post like that, is because in the time between then and now--you (as in, the wording) display very similar indicators that fall parallel to being jaded; nothing is needed to justify a generalization about the existence of a species and the characteristics towards them other than what one chooses to believe, and if a small sample set--a certain occurrence does such, it puts one into a position to either treat the concept as specific as it is towards one area, or to work with it as they please. These beliefs are all correct at a certain point in time, but when they become conclusions, that's another important point. It affects further ideas. All that in the link is on-point; it's a terrible happening, and it will affect anyone viewing or seeing it by adding more ideas in mind. And personally, this is a point which is handled by everyone in the field geared towards mental health and dealing with people everyday. It's a very stressful area, but it's also an area with the most potential to get to know people; the only limitation is the part for the self. That's what I was nudging when I was poking your post--it lacks specificity, and puts bias and prejudice from experience onto people undeserving of that kind of characterization. It is an over-generalization because it's as if what dysfunctional behavior one has seen, is expected to be seen from other people in similar or otherwise situations. That's the importance of culture and seeing into culture to bridge that gap.

The general idea of 'people' begins to be constructed by whom you're generally with. That's a similarity with many people who hold cynical beliefs about humanity as a general point; their thoughts, not necessarily their lived experiences as a whole, follow a mindset of thinking that focuses in mind upon these characteristics. And a certain attitude--western or otherwise--does not represent the whole existence of humanity nor their current capabilities and innate nature.

And that's me from a psychology course, alongside further studies into the whole science. That is why I am prodding at that generalization; because your posts were towards giving advice...but recently have been more and more biased because of what's being focused on It's a general notice for anyone working with dysfunction to not let one's OWN burden affect them--to deal with one's own personal 'mental burdens' else their capabilites in aiding others or giving rational, realistic advice may be hindered by these. That signifies the " " I see in the tone of the recent posts. They use very spurious terms, filled with slang and shallow characterization, call upon assholes and other degenerate terms, but lack the follow-up needed to actually clarify the situation to forward understanding. Yes, the people are showing pretty ass-y behaviors; what could be done about it for the person you're advicing for their understanding and well-being? It should not end at misanthropy or towards just acknolwedging how bad the environment is.

And it's a disparate position when you see 'people' being defined very vaguely when the 'people' being mentioned using context clues are from one's lived experiences instead, hence the need of specificity since nobody is going against each other here--but for the purpose of advice to the OP.

@True: Do not let the people who you've experienced jade you into making them your representative benchmark for humanity. It's a very distinct line within the study of behavior how maladaptive behavior is noted. Do not use maladaptive behavior as your baseline towards seeing humanity, because that will inevitably skew your own perception while leaving other impressions stable (like one's own view of what they did; there may not be a connection at all between those, but the feelings towards them may stay).
And that's why I go against those generalizations, because they do not necessarily apply. They are right in a way, but come off more as a very cynical way to cope with what experiences you've went through. It's visible in the tone, and affects more than what's being said concisely.

I sometimes wonder if this is more an american thing than a human thing, but the innate nature to be assholes is indeed baked into everyone.

Big correction
People are not assholes by generalization; it's the behaviors rather. There's my gripe with the recent posts by which there's a lot of surface generalization without checking the specifics of what meaning is being presented, or what's going to be discussed from these--there's a lot between noting an 'innate nature' that creates this delicate conception, because it'll affect how people will see others given the meanings being presented. It's misinformation to mention such--that people can innately be assholes, but rather the idea would be that it's in the process of behavior given that how one would understand someone being 'an asshole' (totally western term :v) is localized in culture.

That said, it's rooted into maladaptive behavior. It's a lot more complex than saying 'this is innate and this isn't innate', because there are many factors which support the existence of certain behaviors over others. The 'asshole' behavior is directly tied into how the culture of the people, localized within areas where social norms, work (stretching from the workplace to the home to other areas applicable) are perpetuated. Like for example, a difference from my viewpoint given me being from another country. I'm all reading many posts here being so generalizing towards humanity when another viewpoint is completely different--I can note that the examples being given in the recent posts are localized, rather than actually generalized (because using my own examples from my city, country, province, etc, alongside connections to studies and cross-referencing from other people give a different viewpoint). We've noticed how American culture (not the holistic one but the one being perpetuated in common media) is pretty individualistic; there seems to be a lot more on words with less to what is being thought about, a lot more on turns of phrases and on saying what's on one's mind rather than thinking about the idea with others, but that's only to one tiny bit of such culture, and not even describing the majority of what's going on.

But that's the gentle poke towards misanthropy--it comes from those dealing with these directly, and in itself is a jaded view of reality disconnected from how it's being seen. Hell is other people, is the common quote supporting it, but it's not other people, it's the attitudes being reinforced and perpetuated, the thoughts commonly being thought about others and the limits of knowledge being present in individuals which are better overcome when people are together.

There's a lot of generalization being thrown out that derails from the OP, and more towards 'I've become a misanthrope because of what I've seen', and yet there are many people who have seen more and had a convincing outlook of faith in humanity which could specify a lot more than what was noted, rather than ignorance and not paying enough attention to what's happening. While there may be many problems within the world that are too many to specify and discuss--the most control anyone has, is with themselves and their thoughts and perception.That's why I ask a bit more thought into those posts. Misanthropy is not connected to one of open mind or open heart, or to how much one's mind is filled with information, but how that information is processed, alongside the lived experiences one has gone through.
...And seeing the content of that misanthropy, it seems more like a really reinforced dislike or otherwise towards certain characteristics being shown: Only that it's connected to the idea of 'person' rather than characterized by itself. ...So it's incomplete or misleading by itself to see it as misanthropy. Would be just like saying 'what they have done that I didn't like, anyone else can do--even those I didn't even meet yet'.

[Truean]

Please do not quote:

Not sure I know or am concerned with where all that came from, where it's going or why....

Let's try something Tiruin, a little exercise called "so what?" Let's pretend that you're both a.) 110% correct, and b.) I believe you are correct. You aren't, and I don't, but let's pretend. Let's give you the benefit of the doubt and then some. Let's say everything you put up there is not only true, but 110% true. Let's pretend you're not only correct but you're even more correct than you realize you are.

So what?

What's your point?

What would you like anyone, particularly OP, to do with that? How does that help at all?

It doesn't.

Here, we'll pretend you're right and, "all people aren't terrible," is a true statement. It isn't, but we'll pretend. The people around OP are terrible. He is having difficulty dealing with them. The idea that there are other people who aren't terrible doesn't help him deal with the terrible people in front of him. What practical steps would you like OP to take that come from your idea of "all people aren't terrible?" Do you believe "not overgeneralizing" will somehow help OP deal with a disgruntled customer screaming in his face for something he didn't cause and can't cure, while he is just trying to do his job? Saying, "not all metal is sharp and jagged," doesn't help at all when there IS sharp and jagged metal cutting you.... Your point, no matter how true or false, isn't applicable, is it?

Compare and contrast my advice:

Here, we'll pretend I'm wrong and , "all people are terrible," isn't a true statement. It is, but we'll pretend. The people around OP are terrible. He is having a difficult time dealing with them. The idea that those people are terrible and he should escape into his headspace while safely functioning, not harming anybody, and not considering them worthy of stressing him out does help him. I have provided several pages of practical steps, which I have successfully used for years. I believe following the practical steps I've provided in this thread can, have, and will help OP deal with a disgruntled customer screaming in his face for something he didn't cause and can't cure, while he is just trying to do his job. Saying, "all metal is sharp and jagged and here's how I deal with it, does help when there IS sharp and jagged metal cutting you.... It's getting advice from somebody whose dealt with it before; it is applicable, and works.

See what I just did there? It's an argument to practicality. It also argues the point from what the Null Hypothesis is, that you're wrong until proven right and that your critics are correct until proven wrong. Even assuming you're right and I'm wrong, so what? My way is more practical, and it delivers results at no cost, with no risk.

This is one of many reasons why academic social science is failing right now and being consciously rejected. It isn't providing average, everyday people with practical solutions, troubleshooting methods, and / or is telling them to ignore what's right in front of them in favor of some academic model theories. It does a terrible job persuading people, because people follow practical results. That's not even touching the massive methodological flaws.

What I'm saying is very simple. Assume people yelling at you are bastards, not worth your emotional investment, not worth stressing out over, and are just looking for somebody to yell at. They're crazy and you're unlucky. It isn't your fault. Here's a coping mechanism that isn't booze, drugs, or something else addictive, expensive, illegal, or fatteningly unhealthy for you.

This is called being a rationalist as opposed to an empiricist, because experiments and peer reviewed journals can't and aren't going to answer this question well. That's a very short version of it.

______
Note: As stated before repeatedly, I am not a mental health professional. There are licensed practicing mental health professionals, such as psychologists, who can help far more than I ever could. If you are experiencing a mental health issue, please seek out the proper care from a professional (NOT ME).
_______

Please do not quote:

[Tiruin]

Yeah that was my point >.< I don't get where all the 'so what' exercises are connected to since what I was writing those, were towards the misanthropy you were posting about which didn't seem to belong in how you wrote them. "I hate humanity and all of them deserve it." And I look up to you as you're a credible person; seeing you say that has me in a twist because it brings about 'what could've turned her perception into such a knot.' So that was what I was pointing towards--the offset of handling dysfunction; it affects people and depends on the concepts passing in one's mind. And while you could've said that under moods or something (which seems the case), it's... So it may be more of me being emotional and otherwise with the words and meaning given, because it's all coming off as convincing beliefs to you, and that worries me because that's a way in dealing with very stressful events which persist over time; it affects the mental concept along with how to deal with them. Though the 'so what' exercise is something I learned that helps work when situations become very tense, as if that deals with people--they can be particular with the meaning they get, and communication is powerful in its variance and presentation.
Differentiating someone's behavior and noting it's something of them, while not attaching yourself or otherwise to that behavior helps a lot, because it faster enables a person to structure their thoughts so that stress and otherwise occur less and less the more this is practiced--this is the theme mentioned by everyone in-between all the posts since page 1, and is extremely important for everyone. It's the underlying idea under 'don't care about that person if they're a jerk' which doesn't necessarily even include the person--it isolates the behavior, and directs you towards the behavior instead of the person, so that also avoids collateral cognitive dissonance of people, since the concepts of people are whom anyone will meet daily and in a multitude of scenarios; when one is able to differentiate and isolate behavior, it both exercises their own control over the situation entirely, and is a personal exercise that really alleviates stress on the mind because by then you'll know where to orient your feelings--to the behavior, to what's causing it, and under situations of duress you'll be able to handle yourself more because you'll have an understanding of the situation even if you have no idea what that person is capable of, because you addressed something that a person works with. If anyone doesn't see the importance of differentiation in that manner, please mention why, because this seems pretty confrontational given the tone (or that's just me getting the idea that my posts are coming more from experiments and studies). I've never said that certain attitudes which are considered terrible shouldn't be (or...that's how I read that), I'm talking about how unspecific saying 'people are terrible' is, when there was no direction to what was being said after saying that; that was tone of some recent posts instead of all other posts which gave advice in handling situations where these happen. To prepare for these situations because they can happen, to dissociate the self from the attitude being seen and t, ano not react to even press it further, and given other 'non-terrible' people as an area to look at too in how they handle the situation as the idea of how other people and what other people have been through can really affect someone. And one's thoughts can dwell on many things in between the time of incidence and the time you're in right now afterwards, especially when these things equal concepts of the people they're familiar in working with or will work with; the following thoughts may also add to stress and being upset or detract from them, these happen after the event has happened and build up over time if what one is dealing with is relatively, similarly consistent or may not have a concrete idea of dealing with what's going on. So all the advice back there is towards techniques or how to handle these.

[Truean]

.

[TheBiggerFish]

I think this discussion needs a thread.