Re: The fear of "Too Late"

[Werel]

I'm a stuffy old "judgment" stickler, but I am sincerely sorry for my American orthographic imperialism if y'all up there do have the more sensible "judgement" as standard. I will never again trust a cursory Googling to tell me about Canada.

Like, this thing from reboot, a lot of these sound like someone was trying to insult her but it was backwards day and a bunch of really nice compliments came out instead.

But see, that's the thing: you judge all the stuff she's describing positively. Not everybody does. Some people think extended schooling is pointless or elitist. Some people think not having children is selfish or even immoral. Some people think that not earning as much money as you possibly can is laughable. Some people think non-manual work is weak and pathetic. It's a case study in "different standards = can't ever evade everybody's judgment, so just do the stuff you think is right for you."

Also, doesn't that mean that your judgements do have some weight to other people?

Yeah; if you're going on the offensive, you must believe on some level that your judgments can hurt others, which means they matter to some degree. So you get that your negative judgments can matter; how about your positive judgments? Can you believe that your good opinion is valuable to some people, i.e. they would be pleased if you judged them positively?

The poor-rich person judgment hypothetical, or the UFC champ, don't click for me. I am richer than most people in the world but the judgments of much poorer people who I like or respect have stung deeply, because money is irrelevant to character or truth or taste. The UFC champ can kick anyone's ass, but would be equally as heartbroken as a physical weakling if the object of their undying affections called them a worthless asshole. I see what you're getting at, I think, which is that someone who has qualities they themselves value (being strong if you value strength, being rich if you value wealth) is less vulnerable to teardowns because their lives align with their values. The stuff they think is cool and good is stuff they do/are. So: what kind of people do YOU, personally, find admirable or cool or valuable? What actions speak well of people, in your eyes? And how can you be/do those things yourself?

If your problem is that you don't find ANY traits good or valuable in others, then you're off the hook because nobody's judgment matters cause everyone sucks so who cares.

"Why are they saying this thing, their judgment-makers must be broken or something bad is about to happen "

Everything Enail said about comparing it to other examples of their judgment is spot on. Plus, it's kind of insulting to assume somebody is an idiot just because they express some positive opinion of you.

[nearly_takuan]

And here I was just going to tease you a bit for being prescriptive.

---

Um, I had a lot of reading to do to catch up with this thread... but one of the "themes" that stands out to me is that you don't feel like you really belong/fit in anywhere. Would you say that's accurate? If there were some hypothetical place where you could and did feel like you fit in, would that please you or make you think more positively about yourself? Not yet saying that there is, and I think considering too deeply what specifically that would look like would only get in the way at this point, but supposing there were some vaguely-defined area within the sphere of humans interacting with each other that was like that... is that something you value?

Because if not, that's a major thing to not worry about anymore. And if yes... well, that's where you'd want to talk/think more about specific details and try to figure out how to find or create that kind of place. If you had an answer either way, it'd probably help at least a little with identifying other things that are (or aren't) important to you.

[bomaye]

Well, I'm okay with thinking good things about myself, so that's not really something I have to "do".  

But for judgements, some people's opinions matter more to me than others. Something coming from someone I like or respect is more important than something from someone I don't think much of. If I think they generally have good judgement, their opinion is worth more. If they know a lot about the thing they're saying about me, it's going to matter more than if they're just some random person who doesn't know anything about it. That kind of thing?  It doesn't make criticism or insults from people whose opinions don't matter much not hurt, but it makes them hurt a lot less.  And vice-versa with compliments.

For you, maybe a way to approach it would be "if they were saying this thing about someone else, how much weight would I give that?" If they said "So-and-so? Oh, they're really cool" or "ugh, they're kind of a dumbass," how much would that affect your starting opinion of So-and-so (assuming they're a stranger to you or someone you don't know well)

Um, I'd take whatever they said into account because I don't know the other person?

But if someone goes ahead and drops the other shoe right from the start, that doesn't register as threatening?

No, because I'm free to think as lowly of them as I want, without fear of being tricked

  But what triggers that reaction, what do you think about them that makes you feel it's worth defending them on that judgement?

Because my my judgements are better than some randoms, and usually the randoms making the judgements have flaws that they're pretending aren't there or they don't realize they're there.

ETA: Also, doesn't that mean that your judgements do have some weight to other people? Doesn't that suggest that if you had a good opinion of yourself, it would deserve to be given some weight against other people's?

Nah, I don't see why anyone would take anything I have to say seriously because of my lack of everything

The "judgement-makers must be broken" part, you can check against other information you have about their judgement. And couldn't you bring up those same defences against negative things? Why are they saying it, could they have an ulterior motive, like making you feel bad or lowering you in relation to them so they feel better? And how would they know, are they even someone whose judgement is trustworthy?

Not as much against negative things because most negative judgments are weighed against normal things or really good things. It's like you're found wanting versus that kind of stuff.

But see, that's the thing: you judge all the stuff she's describing positively. Not everybody does. Some people think extended schooling is pointless or elitist. Some people think not having children is selfish or even immoral. Some people think that not earning as much money as you possibly can is laughable. Some people think non-manual work is weak and pathetic.

Some people are lucky if they have an accidental thought in their entire lives

Yeah; if you're going on the offensive, you must believe on some level that your judgments can hurt others, which means they matter to some degree. So you get that your negative judgments can matter; how about your positive judgments? Can you believe that your good opinion is valuable to some people, i.e. they would be pleased if you judged them positively?

Nah, most of them can just go find other positive judgments if they need to, they don't need mine

The poor-rich person judgment hypothetical, or the UFC champ, don't click for me. I am richer than most people in the world but the judgments of much poorer people who I like or respect have stung deeply, because money is irrelevant to character or truth or taste. The UFC champ can kick anyone's ass, but would be equally as heartbroken as a physical weakling if the object of their undying affections called them a worthless asshole. I see what you're getting at, I think, which is that someone who has qualities they themselves value (being strong if you value strength, being rich if you value wealth) is less vulnerable to teardowns because their lives align with their values. The stuff they think is cool and good is stuff they do/are. So: what kind of people do YOU, personally, find admirable or cool or valuable? What actions speak well of people, in your eyes? And how can you be/do those things yourself?

People who I don't match up with :p

If your problem is that you don't find ANY traits good or valuable in others, then you're off the hook because nobody's judgment matters cause everyone sucks so who cares.

We kind of don't exist in vacuum emotionally unfortunately, so you kind of need other people to get ahead or even just stay still

Everything Enail said about comparing it to other examples of their judgment is spot on. Plus, it's kind of insulting to assume somebody is an idiot just because they express some positive opinion of you.

"They don't have the full story."

Um, I had a lot of reading to do to catch up with this thread... but one of the "themes" that stands out to me is that you don't feel like you really belong/fit in anywhere. Would you say that's accurate?

Yes.

If there were some hypothetical place where you could and did feel like you fit in, would that please you or make you think more positively about yourself? Not yet saying that there is, and I think considering too deeply what specifically that would look like would only get in the way at this point, but supposing there were some vaguely-defined area within the sphere of humans interacting with each other that was like that... is that something you value?

I don't think I'd trust it. I'd be waiting for something bad to happen, because that kind of thing is too good to be true

Because if not, that's a major thing to not worry about anymore. And if yes... well, that's where you'd want to talk/think more about specific details and try to figure out how to find or create that kind of place. If you had an answer either way, it'd probably help at least a little with identifying other things that are (or aren't) important to you.

Eh, just focusing on "things that matter to me" would just leave me alone and/or lonely like usual, like it's kind of always done. That's part of where the outsider-ish thing comes from, "these people care about very different things than I do, and I don't care about things the same way they do."

[bomaye]

You're probably not down with hippie shit, but sometimes all it takes to open the floodgates is clearing the debris out of the way, rather than sticking an emotional finger down the throat. Mindfulness meditation of the sort where you sit still and quiet, you don't think, and you just keep checking in minute-to-minute on what you're feeling and accepting that experience, can dredge up a lot of stuff for airing out. I use the phrase "sit with it" sarcastically like 99% of the time, but in this case, just seriously try sitting with it. If nothing comes, nothing comes. If it does, let it, and try not to be too scared to let it wash over you till it's done. Forcing emotion is tough, but just opening the door to it semi-regularly is not.

Something to do later tonight when I can't sleep, I guess

Oh, and, I did end up trying this thing, but it was like... "Oh, there's a feeling" and then it would kind of quickly flit away and be gone

[Enail]

For you, maybe a way to approach it would be "if they were saying this thing about someone else, how much weight would I give that?" If they said "So-and-so? Oh, they're really cool" or "ugh, they're kind of a dumbass," how much would that affect your starting opinion of So-and-so (assuming they're a stranger to you or someone you don't know well)

Um, I'd take whatever they said into account because I don't know the other person?

Even if they were someone who has really different taste in people or whose judgement you think is poor? If someone you find boring thinks Person X is interesting, is that going to make you more likely to want to get to know X?

Or else, how about for a Person X you know a little bit, enough to have some opinions of your own? What would make you decide to give a lot of weight to someone else's opinion about them, and what would make you be disinclined to give it much weight?

But if someone goes ahead and drops the other shoe right from the start, that doesn't register as threatening?

No, because I'm free to think as lowly of them as I want, without fear of being tricked

So it's back to the belief that the only way someone would say something positive about you is if they were tricking you or they were themselves tricked?

  But what triggers that reaction, what do you think about them that makes you feel it's worth defending them on that judgement?

Because my my judgements are better than some randoms, and usually the randoms making the judgements have flaws that they're pretending aren't there or they don't realize they're there.

Okay, now we're getting somewhere! Your judgements carry weight for your opinions of people you care about, enough so that you'll overrule other peoples' opinions of them or even go on the attack to defend it! So the question is what gives you so much confidence in your judgements of other people (and how can you apply that to yourself)?

ETA: Also, doesn't that mean that your judgements do have some weight to other people? Doesn't that suggest that if you had a good opinion of yourself, it would deserve to be given some weight against other people's?

Nah, I don't see why anyone would take anything I have to say seriously because of my lack of everything  

If that were true, you wouldn't bother trying to tear someone down for insulting someone you cared about, because it would be totally ineffectual. If you can hurt someone by going at their flaws, that means your opinions have power, and you know it (some of the time, at least).

The "judgement-makers must be broken" part, you can check against other information you have about their judgement. And couldn't you bring up those same defences against negative things? Why are they saying it, could they have an ulterior motive, like making you feel bad or lowering you in relation to them so they feel better? And how would they know, are they even someone whose judgement is trustworthy?

Not as much against negative things because most negative judgments are weighed against normal things or really good things. It's like you're found wanting versus that kind of stuff.

I'm not sure I'm understanding you here. It sounds like you're saying that it doesn't matter whether someone's got an ulterior motive for saying something bad or if their judgement isn't trustworthy because you don't believe you have normal or really good things to compare the negative judgements to? Like, if they were saying those things about a friend, you would only ask "are they only saying it to make themselves feel better in comparison" or "how much do I trust this person's judgement anyway" if you first weighed the bad things they were saying about your friend against that friend's neutral or good qualities to see if you considered them worth that amount of consideration?  

---

But see, that's the thing: you judge all the stuff she's describing positively. Not everybody does. Some people think extended schooling is pointless or elitist. Some people think not having children is selfish or even immoral. Some people think that not earning as much money as you possibly can is laughable. Some people think non-manual work is weak and pathetic.

Some people are lucky if they have an accidental thought in their entire lives

And yet you'd consider those peoples' opinions worth listening to if they were saying something bad about you?

Everything Enail said about comparing it to other examples of their judgment is spot on. Plus, it's kind of insulting to assume somebody is an idiot just because they express some positive opinion of you.

"They don't have the full story."

Why doesn't "they don't have the full story" apply if it's a negative opinion they're expressing of you?

[bomaye]

Even if they were someone who has really different taste in people or whose judgement you think is poor? If someone you find boring thinks Person X is interesting, is that going to make you more likely to want to get to know X?

I'd definitely take into account their own ability to see things, but they also have more experience with the person so I'd still have to take that in account, I think

Or else, how about for a Person X you know a little bit, enough to have some opinions of your own? What would make you decide to give a lot of weight to someone else's opinion about them, and what would make you be disinclined to give it much weight?

It depends on what the other person is to Person X. There'd be situations where I trusted what someone else had to say as a starting point (say, an ex, or someone who's been friends with them for a long time etc)

So it's back to the belief that the only way someone would say something positive about you is if they were tricking you or they were themselves tricked?

I mean, caveats: if they just want to talk to me about hockey or some other thing, that's whatever. Casually liking someone for something is whatever. Anything more than that, yes.

Okay, now we're getting somewhere! Your judgements carry weight for your opinions of people you care about, enough so that you'll overrule other peoples' opinions of them or even go on the attack to defend it! So the question is what gives you so much confidence in your judgements of other people (and how can you apply that to yourself)?

Because I've noticed over the years that a lot of people have poor ability to truthfully judge someone else objectively, or don't notice their own biases or blind spots, or just think a lot of higher of themselves than their abilities warrant.

However, they're also the majority. So not passing their muster means you're left out.

If that were true, you wouldn't bother trying to tear someone down for insulting someone you cared about, because it would be totally ineffectual. If you can hurt someone by going at their flaws, that means your opinions have power, and you know it (some of the time, at least).

It's more the hope that I can tear them to shreds with my words than the belief that it's working. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't

I'm not sure I'm understanding you here. It sounds like you're saying that it doesn't matter whether someone's got an ulterior motive for saying something bad or if their judgement isn't trustworthy because you don't believe you have normal or really good things to compare the negative judgements to? Like, if they were saying those things about a friend, you would only ask "are they only saying it to make themselves feel better in comparison" or "how much do I trust this person's judgement anyway" if you first weighed the bad things they were saying about your friend against that friend's neutral or good qualities to see if you considered them worth that amount of consideration?

No it's like, a negative judgement happens because it's weighed against a positive ideal. Most people can't be an ideal, but being close to one or at least on the surface acknowledging the importance of that ideal is important to normal people because it reflects back at them that they are right to have those ideals and right to think poorly of people who don't. If they said something to friend, that's easy, that's at least a little back-up and it's evidence that they're dumb because they don't think the same way I do.

And yet you'd consider those peoples' opinions worth listening to if they were saying something bad about you?

Those people are kind of charge of everything, including whether you get excluded or not

Why doesn't "they don't have the full story" apply if it's a negative opinion they're expressing of you?

I've had it happen to me before where someone seemed to like me but then they learned something and "NOPE"d out. And that's about traits that I think are worrisome. If those traits worsen with age, that means the greater the chances of getting NOPE'd like that with each new person.

[Enail]

Even if they were someone who has really different taste in people or whose judgement you think is poor? If someone you find boring thinks Person X is interesting, is that going to make you more likely to want to get to know X?

I'd definitely take into account their own ability to see things, but they also have more experience with the person so I'd still have to take that in account, I think

Or else, how about for a Person X you know a little bit, enough to have some opinions of your own? What would make you decide to give a lot of weight to someone else's opinion about them, and what would make you be disinclined to give it much weight?

It depends on what the other person is to Person X. There'd be situations where I trusted what someone else had to say as a starting point (say, an ex, or someone who's been friends with them for a long time etc)

Okay, is there any reason you couldn't take these things into account when the person X is you? Give less weight to potential negative opinions from people who you don't think are great at seeing things or don't have much reason to think they know?

So it's back to the belief that the only way someone would say something positive about you is if they were tricking you or they were themselves tricked?

I mean, caveats: if they just want to talk to me about hockey or some other thing, that's whatever. Casually liking someone for something is whatever. Anything more than that, yes.

So, something I don't get. If you're so convinced about your negative beliefs about yourself that you flat-out rule out any positive opinion from outside (beyond the superficial), why is it so terrible to have people judge you negatively? As far as you're concerned, anything else wouldn't count anyway, right? Why worry about something that's just agreeing with something you're already convinced is true?

Okay, now we're getting somewhere! Your judgements carry weight for your opinions of people you care about, enough so that you'll overrule other peoples' opinions of them or even go on the attack to defend it! So the question is what gives you so much confidence in your judgements of other people (and how can you apply that to yourself)?

Because I've noticed over the years that a lot of people have poor ability to truthfully judge someone else objectively, or don't notice their own biases or blind spots, or just think a lot of higher of themselves than their abilities warrant.

However, they're also the majority. So not passing their muster means you're left out.

But a person's judgement is different from their acceptance. Just because you're worried about being left out (leaving aside the fact that different groups judge and accept different things), that doesn't mean you need to believe everything negative someone says about you.

Is it possible for a person to have things of value about them in your judgement while still being excluded by the people around them? Or vice versa, is it possible for someone to be accepted by some people without having any qualities that you'd consider valuable?

If that were true, you wouldn't bother trying to tear someone down for insulting someone you cared about, because it would be totally ineffectual. If you can hurt someone by going at their flaws, that means your opinions have power, and you know it (some of the time, at least).

It's more the hope that I can tear them to shreds with my words than the belief that it's working. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't

So that's hope that your opinions have power, and evidence that they sometimes do. So, what if your opinions do have weight?  Doesn't that mean that if you did feel good about some aspect of yourself, that might be worth holding onto even if some people disagreed?

I'm not sure I'm understanding you here. It sounds like you're saying that it doesn't matter whether someone's got an ulterior motive for saying something bad or if their judgement isn't trustworthy because you don't believe you have normal or really good things to compare the negative judgements to? Like, if they were saying those things about a friend, you would only ask "are they only saying it to make themselves feel better in comparison" or "how much do I trust this person's judgement anyway" if you first weighed the bad things they were saying about your friend against that friend's neutral or good qualities to see if you considered them worth that amount of consideration?

No it's like, a negative judgement happens because it's weighed against a positive ideal. Most people can't be an ideal, but being close to one or at least on the surface acknowledging the importance of that ideal is important to normal people because it reflects back at them that they are right to have those ideals and right to think poorly of people who don't. If they said something to friend, that's easy, that's at least a little back-up and it's evidence that they're dumb because they don't think the same way I do.

But then aren't you saying that you do sometimes hold onto your ideals and your values over other people's, when it's a friend you're thinking about? You discount the other person's judgement because there's something you think is valuable about your friend whether or not this other person sees or values it. Isn't that you having your own system of values and judgements that doesn't depend on what other people think??

And yet you'd consider those peoples' opinions worth listening to if they were saying something bad about you?

Those people are kind of charge of everything, including whether you get excluded or not

Again, this seems like conflating value and the benefits you'd hope to get from value. You were saying before that you'd want to have value to yourself, but value to yourself isn't going to give you those kinds of concrete benefits like not being excluded, right? That says that there's something other than "will the people in charge of stuff allow me to have what I want or need" that "value" means to you. What is it?

Why doesn't "they don't have the full story" apply if it's a negative opinion they're expressing of you?

I've had it happen to me before where someone seemed to like me but then they learned something and "NOPE"d out. And that's about traits that I think are worrisome. If those traits worsen with age, that means the greater the chances of getting NOPE'd like that with each new person.

Aside from the value vs. acceptance thing above, there's not going to be just one opinion a person has. If they think one good thing about you and then learn something new about you that they don't think is good, that doesn't mean the good thing isn't true. People pretty much always have at least a few negative judgements even of someone they overall think really positively about, and often vice versa as well. Why does the possibility that someone might judge some things negatively mean that you can't count any positive judgements?

[bomaye]

Okay, is there any reason you couldn't take these things into account when the person X is you? Give less weight to potential negative opinions from people who you don't think are great at seeing things or don't have much reason to think they know?

No back-up, and fighting against the opinion of a large group of people is generally difficult

So, something I don't get. If you're so convinced about your negative beliefs about yourself that you flat-out rule out any positive opinion from outside (beyond the superficial), why is it so terrible to have people judge you negatively? As far as you're concerned, anything else wouldn't count anyway, right? Why worry about something that's just agreeing with something you're already convinced is true?

It's because those negative opinions can exclude you from pretty much anything nice if they decide you are whatever that thing is.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

But a person's judgement is different from their acceptance. Just because you're worried about being left out (leaving aside the fact that different groups judge and accept different things), that doesn't mean you need to believe everything negative someone says about you.

Is it possible for a person to have things of value about them in your judgement while still being excluded by the people around them? Or vice versa, is it possible for someone to be accepted by some people without having any qualities that you'd consider valuable?

Yes and yes

So that's hope that your opinions have power, and evidence that they sometimes do. So, what if your opinions do have weight?  Doesn't that mean that if you did feel good about some aspect of yourself, that might be worth holding onto even if some people disagreed?

I guess, but there's a reason I don't feel good about myself in the first place?

But then aren't you saying that you do sometimes hold onto your ideals and your values over other people's, when it's a friend you're thinking about? You discount the other person's judgement because there's something you think is valuable about your friend whether or not this other person sees or values it. Isn't that you having your own system of values and judgements that doesn't depend on what other people think??

Yeah.

It's sure gotten me far :p

Again, this seems like conflating value and the benefits you'd hope to get from value. You were saying before that you'd want to have value to yourself, but value to yourself isn't going to give you those kinds of concrete benefits like not being excluded, right? That says that there's something other than "will the people in charge of stuff allow me to have what I want or need" that "value" means to you. What is it?

Freedom from negative opinions and to be allowed to do the things I want to do, but without having to discount or defend myself from normal people and to not have it be used as a reason to be NOPE'd.

Aside from the value vs. acceptance thing above, there's not going to be just one opinion a person has. If they think one good thing about you and then learn something new about you that they don't think is good, that doesn't mean the good thing isn't true. People pretty much always have at least a few negative judgements even of someone they overall think really positively about, and often vice versa as well. Why does the possibility that someone might judge some things negatively mean that you can't count any positive judgements?

Because if the negative ones are strong enough to overpower the positive ones, then those are the primary and important ones.

[Enail]

Okay, is there any reason you couldn't take these things into account when the person X is you? Give less weight to potential negative opinions from people who you don't think are great at seeing things or don't have much reason to think they know?

No back-up, and fighting against the opinion of a large group of people is generally difficult

Sure, but if you can do it when the opinion is about a friend instead of you, why not for yourself?

And the "large group of people" part is your assumption, it's that enemy you're burning down the fields for preemptively because you think they will come. Negative opinions you encounter are probably going to be from individuals, right? It's pretty rare for people to have the power to speak for large groups. Assuming they speak for a large group is giving them more power than they need to have.

So, something I don't get. If you're so convinced about your negative beliefs about yourself that you flat-out rule out any positive opinion from outside (beyond the superficial), why is it so terrible to have people judge you negatively? As far as you're concerned, anything else wouldn't count anyway, right? Why worry about something that's just agreeing with something you're already convinced is true?

It's because those negative opinions can exclude you from pretty much anything nice if they decide you are whatever that thing is.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

But if you're excluding yourself from those preemptively anyway to save yourself the risk of negative opinions, what difference does it make? The opinions mean something more than just the concrete effects of what you're excluded from or accepted in.

But a person's judgement is different from their acceptance. Just because you're worried about being left out (leaving aside the fact that different groups judge and accept different things), that doesn't mean you need to believe everything negative someone says about you.

Is it possible for a person to have things of value about them in your judgement while still being excluded by the people around them? Or vice versa, is it possible for someone to be accepted by some people without having any qualities that you'd consider valuable?

Yes and yes

Okay, so that means that you can consider someone to have value whether or not anyone else thinks they do and whether or not other people accept them. Is it possible for you to apply to yourself, in theory at least?

So that's hope that your opinions have power, and evidence that they sometimes do. So, what if your opinions do have weight?  Doesn't that mean that if you did feel good about some aspect of yourself, that might be worth holding onto even if some people disagreed?

I guess, but there's a reason I don't feel good about myself in the first place?

But that reason isn't necessarily because there's nothing about you that's worth feeling good about. Like we were discussing earlier, one reason is that you poke holes in any potential good self-opinion to preempt other people from doing it, right? And part of that is because you don't feel like your opinions have any power so they can't hold up against a negative judgement from someone else, right?

So if your judgements do have some power, maybe that means it could be possible for them to protect a good opinion of yourself from outside judgement. Doesn't that logically mean that that preemptive hole-poking is something you don't have to do for your own protection? Of course, that doesn't magically make those good feelings about yourself spring up, but if you can recognize that you don't have to cut down any little shoots, that might make it easier to help some grow over time.

But then aren't you saying that you do sometimes hold onto your ideals and your values over other people's, when it's a friend you're thinking about? You discount the other person's judgement because there's something you think is valuable about your friend whether or not this other person sees or values it. Isn't that you having your own system of values and judgements that doesn't depend on what other people think??

Yeah.

It's sure gotten me far :p

I'm not sure that a value system is for getting people anywhere. I mean, it's something pretty heavily internal. But it's a foundation you could maybe use to support some self-value over time?

Again, this seems like conflating value and the benefits you'd hope to get from value. You were saying before that you'd want to have value to yourself, but value to yourself isn't going to give you those kinds of concrete benefits like not being excluded, right? That says that there's something other than "will the people in charge of stuff allow me to have what I want or need" that "value" means to you. What is it?

Freedom from negative opinions and to be allowed to do the things I want to do, but without having to discount or defend myself from normal people and to not have it be used as a reason to be NOPE'd.

That doesn't sound like the same thing as you were talking about before that started this branch of this discussion, when you were saying that you wanted to increase your value as a person to yourself. I mean, I guess having value to yourself could maybe make you feel more free from negative opinions and less obligated to defend yourself from them, so in that sense it works, sort of. But I don't see how value to yourself would really prevent you from being rejected or make you more allowed to do things you want to do (unless you mean that you allow yourself to do them)?

Aside from the value vs. acceptance thing above, there's not going to be just one opinion a person has. If they think one good thing about you and then learn something new about you that they don't think is good, that doesn't mean the good thing isn't true. People pretty much always have at least a few negative judgements even of someone they overall think really positively about, and often vice versa as well. Why does the possibility that someone might judge some things negatively mean that you can't count any positive judgements?

Because if the negative ones are strong enough to overpower the positive ones, then those are the primary and important ones.

But in the reverse situation, if someone makes a hurtful negative judgement but they don't completely "NOPE" out of knowing you (which means that the positive judgements are strong enough to overpower the negative ones), you would still count the negative one, wouldn't you?

[bomaye]

Sure, but if you can do it when the opinion is about a friend instead of you, why not for yourself?

Because the most you can hope for is making people feel fucking stupid, and I don't have enough normal-people high-value markers to make them feel stupid for doing it, they could always just counter with manchild permavirgin stuff or whatever

And the "large group of people" part is your assumption, it's that enemy you're burning down the fields for preemptively because you think they will come. Negative opinions you encounter are probably going to be from individuals, right? It's pretty rare for people to have the power to speak for large groups. Assuming they speak for a large group is giving them more power than they need to have.

Individuals working within a pretty orthodox framework.

But if you're excluding yourself from those preemptively anyway to save yourself the risk of negative opinions, what difference does it make? The opinions mean something more than just the concrete effects of what you're excluded from or accepted in.

Because the options would be nice and the only way to "improve" is through them.

Okay, so that means that you can consider someone to have value whether or not anyone else thinks they do and whether or not other people accept them. Is it possible for you to apply to yourself, in theory at least?

"What's the catch?"

But that reason isn't necessarily because there's nothing about you that's worth feeling good about. Like we were discussing earlier, one reason is that you poke holes in any potential good self-opinion to preempt other people from doing it, right? And part of that is because you don't feel like your opinions have any power so they can't hold up against a negative judgement from someone else, right?

So if your judgements do have some power, maybe that means it could be possible for them to protect a good opinion of yourself from outside judgement. Doesn't that logically mean that that preemptive hole-poking is something you don't have to do for your own protection? Of course, that doesn't magically make those good feelings about yourself spring up, but if you can recognize that you don't have to cut down any little shoots, that might make it easier to help some grow over time.

They only have power if I have the means to be able to ignore their judgments without losing anything in the process.

People who have a lot of friends can afford to not care about others judgments, because they already have the friend-system in place. That goes for most other things too.

I'm not sure that a value system is for getting people anywhere. I mean, it's something pretty heavily internal. But it's a foundation you could maybe use to support some self-value over time?

I think you need the external things as proof that the internal thing is right first.

That doesn't sound like the same thing as you were talking about before that started this branch of this discussion, when you were saying that you wanted to increase your value as a person to yourself. I mean, I guess having value to yourself could maybe make you feel more free from negative opinions and less obligated to defend yourself from them, so in that sense it works, sort of. But I don't see how value to yourself would really prevent you from being rejected or make you more allowed to do things you want to do (unless you mean that you allow yourself to do them)?

It's because I'd have things that I would then be able to say "Who cares what you say, I already have [things] anyways, and if you push it, I'll rub those things in your face."

The most obvious example, I'm tall. I'll never have a short guy's problems or insecurities because it's a thing I have. There's no sane point of attack, there's no hole to be poked into it. That doesn't mean there aren't things that don't suck about being tall, but those are just adjustable things.

But in the reverse situation, if someone makes a hurtful negative judgement but they don't completely "NOPE" out of knowing you (which means that the positive judgements are strong enough to overpower the negative ones), you would still count the negative one, wouldn't you?

"What's the catch? They're getting something else out of this."

[Enail]

But if you're excluding yourself from those preemptively anyway to save yourself the risk of negative opinions, what difference does it make? The opinions mean something more than just the concrete effects of what you're excluded from or accepted in.

Because the options would be nice and the only way to "improve" is through them.

I'm lost. What options?

Okay, so that means that you can consider someone to have value whether or not anyone else thinks they do and whether or not other people accept them. Is it possible for you to apply to yourself, in theory at least?

"What's the catch?"

How would having value have a catch?

So if your judgements do have some power, maybe that means it could be possible for them to protect a good opinion of yourself from outside judgement. Doesn't that logically mean that that preemptive hole-poking is something you don't have to do for your own protection? Of course, that doesn't magically make those good feelings about yourself spring up, but if you can recognize that you don't have to cut down any little shoots, that might make it easier to help some grow over time.

They only have power if I have the means to be able to ignore their judgments without losing anything in the process.

People who have a lot of friends can afford to not care about others judgments, because they already have the friend-system in place. That goes for most other things too.

But even people who have a lot of friends do still care about others' judgements quite often. External things can help, but I don't think they really have as much protective power against judgements as you think :\

I'm not sure that a value system is for getting people anywhere. I mean, it's something pretty heavily internal. But it's a foundation you could maybe use to support some self-value over time?

I think you need the external things as proof that the internal thing is right first.

But wasn't the whole point of this that you didn't think it was worth trying to get any of the external things unless you felt like the internal had enough value to make it worth putting them effort in for it first?

That doesn't sound like the same thing as you were talking about before that started this branch of this discussion, when you were saying that you wanted to increase your value as a person to yourself. I mean, I guess having value to yourself could maybe make you feel more free from negative opinions and less obligated to defend yourself from them, so in that sense it works, sort of. But I don't see how value to yourself would really prevent you from being rejected or make you more allowed to do things you want to do (unless you mean that you allow yourself to do them)?

It's because I'd have things that I would then be able to say "Who cares what you say, I already have [things] anyways, and if you push it, I'll rub those things in your face."

The most obvious example, I'm tall. I'll never have a short guy's problems or insecurities because it's a thing I have. There's no sane point of attack, there's no hole to be poked into it. That doesn't mean there aren't things that don't suck about being tall, but those are just adjustable things.

Now we're all the way back to the question of what kinds of things would count for "who cares what you say, I have [things]!"  Which I think is what got onto the whole question of value! Any thoughts?

But in the reverse situation, if someone makes a hurtful negative judgement but they don't completely "NOPE" out of knowing you (which means that the positive judgements are strong enough to overpower the negative ones), you would still count the negative one, wouldn't you?

"What's the catch? They're getting something else out of this."

Again, why do the negatives get accepted but you question the positives?

[Werel]

Dag it's hard to keep up with this thread on a phone keyboard

Some people are lucky if they have an accidental thought in their entire lives

And some people's standards for judgment are based unthinkingly on defaults. I'm not sure it's worth giving opinions that have never been carefully thought through & are just held cause they're the default (e.g. "You must be this normal to ride") as much weight as judgments based on standards that individuals have thought about and decided on.

Because I've noticed over the years that a lot of people have poor ability to truthfully judge themselves objectively, or don't notice their own biases or blind spots against themselves, or just think a lot of lower of themselves than their abilities warrant.

Fixed

Negative opinions you encounter are probably going to be from individuals, right? It's pretty rare for people to have the power to speak for large groups. Assuming they speak for a large group is giving them more power than they need to have.

YEP

Seems almost like you'd prefer to take a negative judgment as coming from all members of a given group just to spare yourself the danger of having to find out the opinions of each individual in the group, but maybe I'm wrong.

No it's like, a negative judgement happens because it's weighed against a positive ideal. Most people can't be an ideal, but being close to one or at least on the surface acknowledging the importance of that ideal is important to normal people because it reflects back at them that they are right to have those ideals and right to think poorly of people who don't.

The bit about people liking to have their values acknowledged/shared as a form of validation is fairly wise. But there are some folks out there who value having their ideals challenged, or enjoy the company of people with different ideals, or just don't require that their friends share all the same values. Shit, there are even people out there who share a lot of YOUR values.

The flip side of ideal-conforming is that positive judgments can arise from being weighted against negative ideals; people can expect the worst from a person with X characteristics and be pleased when they find something better.

Nah, most of them can just go find other positive judgments if they need to, they don't need mine

If it worked that way and all positive judgments from all people were worth exactly the same thing, you could just go get accolades from wizardchan and be totally fine not needing anyone else's positive judgments.

What's the catch? They're getting something else out of this."

I think that's called friendship

When you know somebody has bad parts and you like them and want to interact with them anyway

You know, that thing. That's what they're getting.

Also worth being careful not to mix up "liking" and "not judging negatively." If asked to describe my best friend I'd probably include things like "pedantic" and "emotionally clueless" and "directionless and wallowing." But this is a person who I also love and like more than nearly anyone on earth. You can see lots of flaws in someone while still liking them a great deal. Seeing flaws doesn't have to kill affection.

But even people who have a lot of friends do still care about others' judgements quite often. External things can help, but I don't think they really have as much protective power against judgements as you think :\

Yeah; in my experience, internal stuff helps a lot more and has more protective power.

So the question of what the internal defense would be is, like Enail says, pretty important.

Oh, and, I did end up trying this thing, but it was like... "Oh, there's a feeling" and then it would kind of quickly flit away and be gone

Now I'm just picturing David Attenborough all "Ah...there she is, the elusive bomaye emotion... and in an instant, gone before the observer can marvel at her delicate plumage."

Can go better after a few tries, especially for the very emotionally closed-off, if it seems like it might get you somewhere useful.

[bomaye]

I'm lost. What options?

A lot of normal people things kind of operate on the idea that you know what you're doing or have done this before. Dating, sex, jobs, friends, liking popular things, if you are without some of these things or don't have a lot of experience with these things it is a sign of something wrong and a more likely sign of "better exclude to be safe."

How would having value have a catch?

Because if I can't see it, there's possible something else going on

But even people who have a lot of friends do still care about others' judgements quite often. External things can help, but I don't think they really have as much protective power against judgements as you think :\

I bet it works a lot better than defiantly holding out by yourself.

But wasn't the whole point of this that you didn't think it was worth trying to get any of the external things unless you felt like the internal had enough value to make it worth putting them effort in for it first?

Getting those things requires effort and some discipline and sacrifice and being uncomfortable, but if it's not going to pay off in the end, then it's a waste.

If you can do everything right and still have nothing to show for it, why do it?

Now we're all the way back to the question of what kinds of things would count for "who cares what you say, I have [things]!"  Which I think is what got onto the whole question of value! Any thoughts?

Lots of money (unlikely and not something I ever figured was realistic anyways), lots of sexual or relationship experience (unlikely now), being able to show something for your efforts or have some kind of status for your troubles (have none), lots of friends or even the illusion of lots of friends (I don't think I've ever had the temperament for that), some kind of sign of manliness that is recognized by other men (also was unlikely to be realistic, though I apparently walk like a gunslinger who has had combat training if Putin's walk was any indication )

Again, why do the negatives get accepted but you question the positives?

The negatives are usually things I'm already aware of. The positives are things that are like, maybe it's a positive, but it's not the kind of positive that overwrites a negative? Like I can understand "we're stuck in the same place or keep showing up to the same place, so familiarity is nice", and other things of that nature, and maybe if I can hang intellectually with another smart person I'll accept "you're smart/not dumb" but there is otherwise nothing that I can offer that can't easily be found somewhere else in a better package.

[bomaye]

Dag it's hard to keep up with this thread on a phone keyboard

Sorrrrrryyyyyy

(Pronounced "sore-ey")

And some people's standards for judgment are based unthinkingly on defaults. I'm not sure it's worth giving opinions that have never been carefully thought through & are just held cause they're the default (e.g. "You must be this normal to ride") as much weight as judgments based on standards that individuals have thought about and decided on.

Non-thinkers run the place

Because I've noticed over the years that a lot of people have poor ability to truthfully judge themselves objectively, or don't notice their own biases or blind spots against themselves, or just think a lot of lower of themselves than their abilities warrant.

Fixed

Are you trying to tell me something? :p

YEP

Seems almost like you'd prefer to take a negative judgment as coming from all members of a given group just to spare yourself the danger of having to find out the opinions of each individual in the group, but maybe I'm wrong.

I'd have to poll each individual in a group to find out their individual opinions, so if they don't indicate or otherwise say anything, it's assumed they have it :p

Shit, there are even people out there who share a lot of YOUR values.

I know, I see examples of it here and there on r9k (in between the white supremacy propaganda and the Elliot stuff)

The flip side of ideal-conforming is that positive judgments can arise from being weighted against negative ideals; people can expect the worst from a person with X characteristics and be pleased when they find something better.

I think that's more just giving someone the benefit of the doubt, which isn't always a great thing to do either

If it worked that way and all positive judgments from all people were worth exactly the same thing, you could just go get accolades from wizardchan and be totally fine not needing anyone else's positive judgments.

Indeed, judgremounts are probably more valuable coming from above :p

I think that's called friendship

When you know somebody has bad parts and you like them and want to interact with them anyway

You know, that thing. That's what they're getting.

"We are stuck in this same place regularly for some reason so we might as well make it fun. And then when personal conditions change, it will go away."

Also worth being careful not to mix up "liking" and "not judging negatively." If asked to describe my best friend I'd probably include things like "pedantic" and "emotionally clueless" and "directionless and wallowing." But this is a person who I also love and like more than nearly anyone on earth. You can see lots of flaws in someone while still liking them a great deal. Seeing flaws doesn't have to kill affection.

Oh I agree, flaws usually make for more interesting people, but there's flaws and like red flag flaws.

Yeah; in my experience, internal stuff helps a lot more and has more protective power.

So the question of what the internal defense would be is, like Enail says, pretty important.

Internal has never protected me unless I'm going like 100% with it, which is pretty much what I'm doing now.

Now I'm just picturing David Attenborough all "Ah...there she is, the elusive bomaye emotion... and in an instant, gone before the observer can marvel at her delicate plumage."

Can go better after a few tries, especially for the very emotionally closed-off, if it seems like it might get you somewhere useful.

Every time I've been recognizing something, I've been like "Okay, time to sit with it and feel it" and then next to nothing happens and I'm like "Welp"

Edit: I guess on this last bit, I think I was holding my breath before so I decided to try breathing this time and things are kind of flowing. It's kind of a pit of sad and despair and mourning though

[bomaye]

Addendum: I just had an independent source tell me I argue against myself rather than for myself and allow a lot of bad feels in to myself through the internet :/

[reboot]

Addendum: I just had an independent source tell me I argue against myself rather than for myself and allow a lot of bad feels in to myself through the internet :/

You kind of do. You remind me of a cousin of mine who argues just to argue. Sometimes it is really fun and we can go for hours, but sometimes (like you) he lets some pretty dark things out. Then it gets frustrating, aggravating, and has the potential of causing a real fight.

Nice thing with the internet, unlike our face-to-face, vodka fueled marathon debates, you can go back and reference what you said previously. If you catch yourself arguing against yourself, try and sort out what you really feel vs need to win the argument vs changed/evolved opinion. Also see if you can notice in your writing when the bad feels are leaking and try to remember both your physical and mental state and what happened on those days. This might help you identify what leads to bad feels leaks and how to avoid them.

[Enail]

Yep. I'm pretty sure there was a complete circle in this last bit where you argued your way around to the opposite of what you'd said at the start Reboot's suggestion is spot-on.

[bomaye]

Every time I've been recognizing something, I've been like "Okay, time to sit with it and feel it" and then next to nothing happens and I'm like "Welp"

Edit: I guess on this last bit, I think I was holding my breath before so I decided to try breathing this time and things are kind of flowing. It's kind of a pit of sad and despair and mourning though

Some more leaked out last night and I had a horrific nightmare after I went to sleep. Who am I doing this for again?

You kind of do. You remind me of a cousin of mine who argues just to argue. Sometimes it is really fun and we can go for hours, but sometimes (like you) he lets some pretty dark things out. Then it gets frustrating, aggravating, and has the potential of causing a real fight.

Nice thing with the internet, unlike our face-to-face, vodka fueled marathon debates, you can go back and reference what you said previously. If you catch yourself arguing against yourself, try and sort out what you really feel vs need to win the argument vs changed/evolved opinion. Also see if you can notice in your writing when the bad feels are leaking and try to remember both your physical and mental state and what happened on those days. This might help you identify what leads to bad feels leaks and how to avoid them.

Yep. I'm pretty sure there was a complete circle in this last bit where you argued your way around to the opposite of what you'd said at the start Reboot's suggestion is spot-on.

[Enail]

Some more leaked out last night and I had a horrific nightmare after I went to sleep. Who am I doing this for again?

I'd think if letting it out more on the day-to-day might lead to fewer big explosions, it might mean fewer unpleasant nightmares overall too? But   to the horrific nightmare!

You kind of do. You remind me of a cousin of mine who argues just to argue. Sometimes it is really fun and we can go for hours, but sometimes (like you) he lets some pretty dark things out. Then it gets frustrating, aggravating, and has the potential of causing a real fight.

Nice thing with the internet, unlike our face-to-face, vodka fueled marathon debates, you can go back and reference what you said previously. If you catch yourself arguing against yourself, try and sort out what you really feel vs need to win the argument vs changed/evolved opinion. Also see if you can notice in your writing when the bad feels are leaking and try to remember both your physical and mental state and what happened on those days. This might help you identify what leads to bad feels leaks and how to avoid them.

Yep. I'm pretty sure there was a complete circle in this last bit where you argued your way around to the opposite of what you'd said at the start  Reboot's suggestion is spot-on.

The plus side is that if you can argue things so intently, that sounds like a skill that could transfer into being more bulletproof, if you can focus on what you want to be protecting vs. what you want to be arguing against.

[bomaye]

I'd think if letting it out more on the day-to-day might lead to fewer big explosions, it might mean fewer unpleasant nightmares overall too? But   to the horrific nightmare!

Yeah, we'll see what happens tonight

The plus side is that if you can argue things so intently, that sounds like a skill that could transfer into being more bulletproof, if you can focus on what you want to be protecting vs. what you want to be arguing against.

It... doesn't work. I remember doing similar things here and eventually getting banned for it. And also, since I'm not like... mainstream normal about things, it's just trying to fight against a mass that doesn't care about you and won't listen to you even if you're right.

[Enail]

I didn't mean you should do it here!  But when I think about 'inner bulletproofness,' it's kind of about being able to feel like the things you value have worth even when the people around you don't value them, having some kind of other framework you can judge things by instead (or more realistically, as well as, because bulletproof is rarely a 100% thing, it's just one tool for defence). That's how it's worked for me, at least.

[bomaye]

I didn't mean you should do it here!  But when I think about 'inner bulletproofness,' it's kind of about being able to feel like the things you value have worth even when the people around you don't value them, having some kind of other framework you can judge things by instead (or more realistically, as well as, because bulletproof is rarely a 100% thing, it's just one tool for defence). That's how it's worked for me, at least.

I dunno, that always seemed like a trade-off to me. The more low status or uncool or whatever a guy you are, the less anything you say or do matters, until you hit a point where you're just kind of an extra existing human being. I have yet to find a level of bulletproof that overrides that (that isn't something you're born with like autism), because you can't be nobly defiant when someone can just turn to the a few hundred other people and "Get a load of this fuck-up"

[Enail]

Like I said, I don't think it's possible to be totally sanguine in the face of insults from hundreds of people, or at least not for most people it isn't. But since it seems like it's something that affects you very strongly, even a small increase in bulletproofity could maybe reduce the amount of stress around it, which might in turn make it easier to pursue things that could raise your status or to feel better about a choice to not do that kind of thing?

And then the other side is that lack of status/coolness/etc. might reduce the impact you can have on other people or the number of people you can impact, but I think you're underestimating the power you do have. I'd bet a good amount that there's someone out there who still remembers and feels good about something nice you said or did years ago, and someone who still remembers and feels bad about something insulting or rejecting you did years ago. Whether you believe it or not, you're a person, and what you say and do can affect other people.

[bomaye]

even a small increase in bulletproofity could maybe reduce the amount of stress around it, which might in turn make it easier to pursue things that could raise your status or to feel better about a choice to not do that kind of thing?

This would be the magic bullet

[reboot]

Every time I've been recognizing something, I've been like "Okay, time to sit with it and feel it" and then next to nothing happens and I'm like "Welp"

Edit: I guess on this last bit, I think I was holding my breath before so I decided to try breathing this time and things are kind of flowing. It's kind of a pit of sad and despair and mourning though

Some more leaked out last night and I had a horrific nightmare after I went to sleep. Who am I doing this for again?

That bolded bit is a very good question. Who ARE you doing this for?

In my opinion, if you are not doing it for yourself (or at least primarily for yourself), then do not do it.

[Sponsored content]