Natasha Tori Maru

Do we have one? Rolling. Post that shit. Shorts, reels, tick-tock turds. Do your worst short format. Boomer cringe. I love the spittle on the guys mouth 🤮🤢 https://vt.tiktok.com/ZS45V1Enf/

Nothing wrong with anger. Lots wrong with suppression! I find most people who suffer from depression (the non-clinical chemical type) often have deeply repressed anger. Anger is a healthy forward moving energy. Expression through healthy processing is very good for the body. Unprocessed anger looks like someone acting out the emotion with no ability to stop it; they are overtaken by it and have an irresistible compulsion to act. Healthy, processed anger is recognised and felt fully, but we aren't overcome so much that we need to act on it. Although, expression can help! Having our emotions AT others is not self regulated. Emotional repression has consequences. Glad you are doing better 🙏🏻

@LordFall definitely jump into Ralston's work - it will assist with the distinction between pain and suffering

@Sincerity 99% of the office is cringe! That show exists to INVOKE cringe

@Yimpa

Brendan is super nice to speak to as well! Thanks for the share. I hear Peter is really getting on in age 🙏🏻

My GOD. This is worthy of the cringe Megathread. Toppled from the only dominance hierarchy he knew 🥹

... its gotten worse. The censorship is fucked. You guys here crying about bUt My MaSCulInE VoICe, ThIS FoRuM iSn't AbOut TruTH, CAn't spEaK my tRuTh, toO muCh TrUth foR tHiS pLAcE!!! Exhibit A:

It prohibited me from posting that! Either the word or sentence triggered some filter I have never encountered before.

@LordFall have you studied Peter Ralston's work?

@something_else @Ulax I think you guys both have relevant experience that might apply here (if I recall posts correctly!)

Thank you, good sir

In the words of Ralston "You are doing it! Stop doing it!" >.<

@LordFall You are misunderstanding again. But it seems wilfully so?

This really comes across like a bad faith, uncharitable position to take regarding arguments.

Anyway what I am seeing is you consistently misunderstanding what others mean - either through others failure to express properly or your own interpretation. Doesn't matter. But that is what is happening here. And everywhere in almost all of your misunderstandings on the forum. If you want to still address things in the way you do - so be it. Your assumptions are really shooting you in the foot.

You honestly think it is a burden to ask clarifying questions so you can properly address someone's meaning? How people express themselves through the limitations of language and their context is always the biggest challenge to face - this is why really trying to clarify what is meant prior to assuming and then engaging is needed. It saves a lot of wasted energy and avoids confusion. Weird

My analogy does not require this. Higher perspective may change what the phenomenon means, what caused it, and whether the conceptual question you're asking about it remains coherent.

You consistently do not ask any questions around meaning - but you assume you understand. Why?

I have really tried to work on Se. Chaos is my undoing. I trust I can deal with whatever happens now. I know I can deal with chaos. I can deal with crazy shit falling on my lap. Working in construction really helped with mastering this domain. I had an ENTJ mentor who had some great advice "Just trust you will be able to deal with whatever comes your way, even if unplanned". I also practice vipassana meditation - body scanning. Yoga. Lots of body connection stuff. Endurance cycling or 60-70kms on the weekend. What sort of Se issues do you have?

Imagine say, a two dimensional being living on a perfectly flat surface and a sphere passes through their world. From their perspective they see a point appearing, then becoming a circle. The circle grows larger, then gets to a maximum size, shrinks down then becomes a point again and dissappearing. Your question (or premise) could be "what is causing this strange circle to change size?" or "it is a circle expanding and contracting". The question and the explanation do not address what is actually happening. The problem isn't that we are missing 2D information - the entire third dimension is missing. From 3 dimensions, the whole sequence is trivial: a sphere is moving through their plane. But if you tried to explain the sphere entirely in 2D terms, you'd be forced into increasingly strange explanations. The explanation requires a conceptual move that the existing framework cannot represent. Best analogy I can think of.

Some questions aren't difficult because the answer is complicated. They can simply be difficult because the question is being asked from within a conceptual frame that makes the answer impossible to see.

No worries I always like to go hard on both sides of a topic.

It shifts ones perspective - which can be hard to explicate.

It does if the arguement wouldn't even exist with wholeistic understanding.