How do you deal with toxic Green?? Leo? Help

[Vagos]

I have a huge problem with dealing with toxic people from the SD Green ideology complex. The fact that they don't understand when they pose an unfalsifiable argument or a self-canceling argument is very triggering to me. I fully understand the value of Green concepts, I was one of the organizers of an LGBT pride movement, I am very cautious with the products I use and the impact they have on the environment, even paying extra money for it, I cherish people that are vegan even though I am not, and politically I am also heavily leaning towards left.

But when people start having logical fallacies and epistemologic blunders I just lose it... 

Someone comes up to me with the argument of "Fascists should be killed" and I go out of my way to explain to them that fascism is (besides else) the act of forcefully imposing your opinion to another person and killing a fascist would be exactly nothing short of fascism itself, and they don't get it and they start attacking me and they start believing that I am a fascist myself for saying that, then I just lose it, I have this rage that builds inside me, my chest, my head, I just suppress my anger and move away, because if I don't I feel like I might end up causing someone harm.

Or when I explain something to someone and they blame me for mansplaining just because I am a man and I argue that mansplaining is the act of explaining something in a manner that uses my sex as a means of power and I'm doing nothing like that at the moment, and then they start telling me that I'm mansplaining what mansplaining means, even though I'm literally just reading to them from a definition dictionary, and the fact that they don't see that their argument is unfalsifiable, and that there is no argument such, that if I use it they become persuaded, I just can't handle it.

It seems like I have a very big emotional burst whenever I can't prove that I am right. I feel a huge injustice being done to me.

Due to having suppressed anger in the past for other reasons (also having to do with a feeling of not being able to prove my points and being ridiculed even though I was right and feeling that a huge injustice is taking place) I now have panic attacks that build up from the exact same bodily sensation and it so much resembles what I'm feeling in these anger-causing situations it's uncanny. It's just like this anger has to come out no matter what and finds other ways around.

Please give me some fruitful ideas about what can I do to solve this.

I have thought of just entering a state of existing in which I actively avoid any argument that might cause turmoil, I have thought about talking only with questions, I have thought about going completely silent for a while, sometimes when it builds up to a certain level and I am at the peak of this anger rollup I even think that I should move away from civilization altogether and go live somewhere else, in a monastery or something.

There might be more counterintuitive ways, like maybe it could be interesting to just start agreeing with them so much that it becomes creepy, like if I pretend I agree with that first person that wants to kill fascists and I start talking about decorating street lights with their intestines or something, like coming out on top with something so radically extreme that it will make even them question their ideas. I don't know folks. I need some help here.

Thanks sorry for the long read

Edited June 24, 2021 by Vagos

[integral]

First show them that you fully understand and empathize with their perspective, they need to feel that your on their side, then softly introduce the concept and make them empathize with your perspective. 

"i understand how you feel"

In general your just not a likable guy during these interactions, be likable. Tone of voice is basically everything when dealing with feelers, nothing else matters. 

I grew up in a feeler green family. This is the way.  

Edited June 24, 2021 by integral

[bejapuskas]

1 hour ago, Vagos said:

It seems like I have a very big emotional burst whenever I can't prove that I am right. I feel a huge injustice being done to me.

Welcome to everybody's world  This is what most people feel. If you understand that, it might help.

What do you mean by toxic Green, can you give us examples?

[Vagos]

9 minutes ago, bejapuskas said:

Welcome to everybody's world  This is what most people feel. If you understand that, it might help.

What do you mean by toxic Green, can you give us examples?

I did already yes, did you skip on reading the whole thing? I know it's big sorry

[MatteO22]

2 hours ago, Vagos said:

Please give me some fruitful ideas about what can I do to solve this.

Journal, and I don’t mean rationally.

 

Take a piece of paper, or a word document and write out your absolute uncensored and brutal preferably foul-mouthed anger. Let it pour through you like your life depended on it - only via keyboard/pen where no-one is being harmed in the process, and you’re being liberated. Rage via writing. It works extremely well when repressed anger comes up. Because via writing nothing needs to be held back. 
 

ps, I wouldn’t use the self actualisation journals here, it’s best to delete it usually. 

[Leo Gura]

This issue is not just about Green. This is the much larger issue of how do you deal with ignorance?

As you become more conscious you are likely to develop contempt for the massive unconsciousness of the average person. That's one of the many burdens of seriously developing yourself. You start to feel like a genius among apes. And then you gotta find ways to cope with that.

Best way I find is to stop trying to convince or change people and focus most of your attention on your creative work. Do not get too entangled with ignorant people and their BS. It's a huge distraction. Let them be ignorant. Focus on your work. And don't hinge your work on ignorant people.

[RendHeaven]

I wonder what kind of things you were saying/doing (subtly or otherwise) that would get someone to accuse you of mansplaining?

I appear strongly opinionated around my peers, but I am never accused of mansplaining. 

[Tim R]

@Vagos 

How about not engaging in debates with such people? Oh right, that won't do (I'll explain later).

Debates are an utter and complete waste of time. Ignorant people will not be convinced and no amount of reasoning will change anything about that. You need to be wise enough to understand that or you're just as foolish as them. 

It's a lovely relief to stop giving a f*ck about other peoples opinions and world views. My life is way too short to convince fools of what I think to be right, true or good. Is that really how you choose to spend your precious time?

You'll soon be dead, remind yourself of that next time you're about to engage in some stupid debate. 

 

You seek approval. You want to convince other people because actually, you want to convince yourself. You want to know that you're right. You want to feel it. And when you're denied that feeling of approval and righteousness (*cough* self esteem *cough* ) and instead are confronted with this impenetrable wall of ignorance, you feel rage. You're attached to your opinions. See, if I truly know something to be true, I don't need to convince anybody of it. 

Stop taking yourself so goddamn seriously. Nobody cares.

Learn to do the same thing. 

[Vagos]

@Leo Gura

Yeah but then I feel that stage 2 should care about stage 1 like an adult cares for teenagers. I should understand them, empathize with them, give them a break because they are at a lower school class sort of speak... But then I don't and I feel guilty that I don't. And like you (that's why I asked you personally too) I also feel that my life purpose is to teach this stuff. So I can not just ignore them and mind my life purpose because my life purpose IS literally them and their transformation to higher degrees of consciousness and reality understanding.

@RendHeaven

I do admittedly come out as strongly opinionated and I can't help that, because my opinion has very solid roots in fundamental concept analysis, epistemology and logic (logic as logics, as the science of doing logic and creating true statements, not as we usually use this word airy fairy like the opposite of feelings or whatever) and has a sound core structure that is not based on some stage green group thinking deeply ideological propaganda that has its roots in the internal need of belonging somewhere and has zero conceptual understanding because it usually has zero contemplation work done.

 

Edited June 24, 2021 by Vagos

[Leo Gura]

13 minutes ago, Vagos said:

@Leo Gura

Yeah but then I feel that stage 2 should care about stage 1 like an adult cares for teenagers. I should understand them, empathize with them, give them a break because they are at a lower school class sort of speak... But then I don't and I feel guilty that I don't. And like you (that's why I asked you personally too) I also feel that my life purpose is to teach this stuff. So I can not just ignore them and mind my life purpose because my life purpose IS literally them and their transformation to higher degrees of consciousness and reality understanding.

Here's the solution:

1) A Tier 2 person needs to channel her care and love in constructive creative ways. Your LP is not debating fools. This is a waste of your consciousness and love. Rather you must help mankind ON YOUR TERMS. So rather than debating ignorant people, go create a course or a school or something else that can truly help people. Debating people is one of the least constructive uses of your intelligence. If your LP is to teach, then fucking TEACH! Do it seriously, not arguing with fools. Make yourself a serious teacher. A seriosmus teacher doesn't argue, she is too busy teaching.

Be careful to not let people distract you from your true LP with petty human bullshit and games. Stop playing games with them.

You're angry because you're not actually doing your LP.

2) After years of experiencing it, you will learn to cope with ignorance and not let it faze you.

As you become ridiculously conscious, you will become able to not let ignorance affect you. You are not conscious enough for that yet.

[Vagos]

@Leo Gura Alright yeah that helps to some extent. Although I'm still very sad and also angry at myself for not being able to help people with really strong minds that can take it a step further. It's a pity really. I so much believe that these people can make it to the next level. Then again maybe they can't... I don't know, the jump from green to tier 2 is sure gigantic and highly underestimated. Anyway thanks, I highly value your opinion. 

[Vagos]

@Leo Gura It feels lonely where you are... doesn't it...? :-/ 

[Hello from Russia]

@Leo Gura What if your students argue with you about your teaching's content?

"But Leo ..." sort of style

Edited June 24, 2021 by Hello from Russia

[Vagos]

@Hello from Russia So you're saying I should recontextualize it in my perception ?

[Nahm]

The average Joe see’s through this hypocrisy with little to no effort because they are not suppressing their emotions to “be right”… to “be the knower”. 

Do you see the people you talk with having huge problems with a conversation, judging others as below them and toxic, being trigged by a conversation, blaming others for getting triggered and ignoring & suppressing rage & anger, and even needing to refrain from causing harm to others?

How is this so entirely missed? Seems preposterous. 

[Vagos]

2 minutes ago, Nahm said:

The average Joe see’s through this hypocrisy with little to no effort because they are not suppressing their emotions to “be right”… to “be the knower”. 

Do you see the people you talk with having huge problems with a conversation, judging others as below them and toxic, being trigged by a conversation, blaming others for getting triggered and ignoring & suppressing rage & anger, and even needing to refrain from causing harm to others?

How is this so entirely missed? Seems preposterous. 

But I do identify this as the problem. I do not think that this is what should be. I think that this should change and that's why I posted my OP in the first place. That doesn't make said opinions less valid if that's what you're saying though.

[Etherial Cat]

Such a valuable thread! I'd better print some of these fab answers and make posters out of them.

 

[RendHeaven]

5 hours ago, Vagos said:

because my opinion has very solid roots in fundamental concept analysis, epistemology and logic (logic as logics, as the science of doing logic and creating true statements, not as we usually use this word airy fairy like the opposite of feelings or whatever) and has a sound core structure that is not based on some stage green group thinking deeply ideological propaganda that has its roots in the internal need of belonging somewhere and has zero conceptual understanding because it usually has zero contemplation work done.

There's a strong fragmentation in this statement - you are mentally splitting reality into two halves, identifying with & upholding one half (the "solid," the "structural," etc.) while dis-identifying with & shitting on the other half.

Do you agree or disagree with my observation? If you admit that I might have a point, are you further willing to admit that maybe you haven't fully explored reality in an unbiased way, or will you insist that your contemplation work is a completed project?

If you are truly a student of epistemology, you ought to be familiar with two central realizations: not-knowing, and relativity.

I suggest you double down on your inquiries with not-knowing and relativity on the forefront of your mind.

I suggest this precisely because I sense in all of your posts that you actually believe that you know [a thing], and you actually believe that your position on [the thing] is non-relative.

Huge pitfall.

If you truly understood not-knowing and relativity, you would actually smile and apologize when accused of 'mansplaining' instead of getting overheated and excessively expository, because you would realize that you don't even know what 'mansplaining' really is:

• Has it personally happened to you? How many times? Just once, or hundreds? Some women claim to experience it hundreds of times. Perhaps you have logic and dictionary definitions on your side, but even you must concede that women understand more than you on the level of personal experience.
• Do you know the string of complicated emotions that arise when you are the target of mansplaining? Many women do, intimately.
• What if the mansplainer doesn't actually realize that he is mansplaining, and this ignorance is a key feature of the phenomenon which women are trying to bring attention to? If this were the case, then your denial of mansplaining would actually be in favor of mansplaining. Are ya gonna deny that?
• What if it only seems unfalsifiable because you're looking at the phenomenon from within? e.g. - what if appeals to logic, argumentation, dictionary definitions, and narrative control (e.g. "being right," "being objective") are themselves components of mansplaining? Maybe to see mansplaining in full view, you need to literally stop arguing entirely, maybe you need to let go of the need to be right, and then the phenomenon reveals itself to you. I mean clearly many people see it happening, but you don't. So is everyone stupid and wrong, or are you just looking in the wrong places?

And this is just a taste of what it's like to admit your not-knowing.

Furthermore, notice that your standards of what a thing is are particular to YOU or your school of thought. Even if you appeal to what "the dictionary says," the contents of the dictionary must be interpreted, and your interpretation will be different than someone else's interpretation, and are you really arrogant enough to assert that your interpretation is the right one objectively? After all, by what criteria do you assert that you have "the right" interpretation? After honest reflection, you must admit that your criteria for right interpretation is particular/relative to YOUR frame of reference. This is a taste of relativity.

Let's go one more step. Beyond the level of semantics and word games, there is the realization that the feminine lived reality literally sees the world differently from your masculine lived reality, and you actually have no "solid grounds" upon which to insist that your lived reality ought to be prioritized and upheld as true over theirs'.

Take this example: maybe from your perspective, you nonchalantly say something condescending without realizing that you were hurtful, but to you it's really not a big deal. Meanwhile, to the person you were talking to, what you said was seriously hurtful.

To you, it seems like they should just be less sensitive, I mean fuck it's really not a big deal dude it's literally just words! Get over yourself! But to the other person, it really feels like wow this guy has no regards for my emotional world at all - they're completely blind to their impact on others, they have no self-awareness beyond their own skin, and now they're blaming me for something they did, how the hell is this fair??

So I ask you now, who is "right?" Who has the objectively correct worldview? Before you try to get out a measuring tape where you try to discern how "objectively" hurtful a statement is, lemme just spoil for you that there is no such thing. In fact, both interpretations that we found above are valid when we realize the role of relativity in the way that reality unfolds. The statement was simultaneously innocent and hurtful.

When you finally accept this paradox, you lose the will to "fight" over "being right," because no such thing exists anymore. And that's where your body-mind begins to taste freedom.

Edited June 25, 2021 by RendHeaven

[yetineti]

@Leo Gura

 

I love you because of me. Thank us.

[Vagos]

@Cykaaaa This is helpful, I will try this too. Thank you very much.

@RendHeaven  Thank you for your answer. I think that you have some things mixed up. The fact that there is no true(er) opinion from an absolute perspective does not mean that there is no true(er) opinion from a relative perspective. Don't think that just because ABSOLUTE Truth is infinite there aren't partial truths that are not. 

The pythagorean theorem say, is a definitive partial truth that is extremely solid FOR THE PARTIAL bubble in which it is existing. If you start questioning the ontological metaphysics of its essence (eg what is a line or a point or length and so on) then it of course collapses as a house of cards. That does not mean that it is not extremely solid in its relative domain.

You don't need do anything but imagine a team of ten people, one of them a bomb diffuser, with a bomb in the center of the room. Let's say one of them is you. Are you really going to contemplate if the bomb diffuser is the one who needs to diffuse the bomb? Are you really going to argue with him about it using your arguments about how what he has read in diffusing manuals is interpretable in many ways ?

Not all opinions are of the same value. Not inside the relative domain in which they are referring to. Outside that, and when being exposed to the absolute yes, all of them crumble to pieces. Language crumbles to pieces for that matter.