Tim Cook wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> You can only be humiliated by yourself, not others.
> 
> Pardon my French, but that's rather BS. 

I suppose if you haven't learned not to be humiliated.

> Our emotions are affected by external stimuli.  In 
> fact, pretty much entirely.  Even if it's an internalised reaction to 
> something, the origin is external. 

Humiliation, as an emotion, is internal. The external stimulus does not 
necessarily make it occur.

It's no harder to avoid being humiliated by clowns making fun of you than it 
is to not be frightened by horror movies.  You merely need to recognise and 
internalize that the opinions of strangers who you don't know and will never 
see again are irrelevant to you.

Similarly, you can be embarrassed you made a mistake, or you can accept that 
you sometimes make mistakes and say "Oops, I made a mistake" and move on 
with your life.

> Variances in brain chemistry only 
> serve to augment things (even if vastly), not spontaneously generate 
> from whole cloth.

I haven't any idea what that has to do with the topic.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Understanding the structure of the universe
    via religion is like understanding the
     structure of computers via Tron.

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 30 Aug 2009 07:57:55 +0100, St. wrote:

> "Jim Henderson" <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote in message
> news:4a99576e$1@news.povray.org...
> 
>> Really?  Wow, I'd not observed that myself, but I've only got about a
>> month's experience in the country. :-)
> 
>      When were you here? It's really only over the last 5 years that
>      I've
> noticed how much more aggressive people have become. Of course that
> aggression has always been there, but now there are crowds and crowds of
> it instead of just a drunken punch up between two bully boys.
> 
>       And of course, I can't say that for every town as I haven't been
>       to
> every town, I'm sure some are ok... I think.

First time was in 2002.  The more recent trip would've been probably 4-5 
years ago.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Tim Cook wrote:
>> Darren New wrote:
>>> You can only be humiliated by yourself, not others.
>>
>> Pardon my French, but that's rather BS. 
> 
> I suppose if you haven't learned not to be humiliated.
> 
>> Our emotions are affected by external stimuli.  In fact, pretty much 
>> entirely.  Even if it's an internalised reaction to something, the 
>> origin is external. 
> 
> Humiliation, as an emotion, is internal. The external stimulus does not 
> necessarily make it occur.

But the external stimulus is necessary for it to occur.  (Semantics, what?)

> It's no harder to avoid being humiliated by clowns making fun of you 
> than it is to not be frightened by horror movies.  You merely need to 
> recognise and internalize that the opinions of strangers who you don't 
> know and will never see again are irrelevant to you.
> 
> Similarly, you can be embarrassed you made a mistake, or you can accept 
> that you sometimes make mistakes and say "Oops, I made a mistake" and 
> move on with your life.

This is nihilism, to some degree.  While it is perfectly understandable 
on an intellectual level, even if they're suppressed, ignored, or 
rationalised away, emotions do rear their ugly heads from time to time.

>> Variances in brain chemistry only serve to augment things (even if 
>> vastly), not spontaneously generate from whole cloth.
> I haven't any idea what that has to do with the topic.

The popular supposition goes that people with depression, psychoses, et 
cetera, are that way *because* of having different brain chemistry, 
hence Prozac, other antidepressants, and antipsychotics.  In a way, 'the 
chemicals *are* the emotions', or at least to the extent that they can 
be altered with other chemicals.  To which I disagree--the chemicals 
facilitate augmentation of emotions, but are not in themselves the cause 
thereof.  Re: the topic, this is to say that even the stimulus of brain 
chemistry is an 'external' factor.

--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net

Post a reply to this message

Tim Cook wrote:
> But the external stimulus is necessary for it to occur.  (Semantics, what?)

Does it? One can feel guilty without external stimulus, I'm sure. Certainly 
one can be trained to feel guilty without specific per-occurrence 
corroboration.

> This is nihilism, to some degree.  While it is perfectly understandable 
> on an intellectual level, even if they're suppressed, ignored, or 
> rationalised away, emotions do rear their ugly heads from time to time.

Occasionally, sure. But certainly you can eliminate the emotions the 
criticisms are intended to elicit well enough that your reaction is not "I 
got embarrassed once, so I'll never try again."  Especially if you're 
expecting rejection and just hoping for the best.

>>> Variances in brain chemistry only serve to augment things (even if 
>>> vastly), not spontaneously generate from whole cloth.
>> I haven't any idea what that has to do with the topic.
> 
> The popular supposition goes that people with depression, psychoses, et 
> cetera, are that way *because* of having different brain chemistry, 

Sure.

> hence Prozac, other antidepressants, and antipsychotics.  In a way, 'the 
> chemicals *are* the emotions', or at least to the extent that they can 
> be altered with other chemicals.  To which I disagree--the chemicals 
> facilitate augmentation of emotions, but are not in themselves the cause 
> thereof.  

I'm sure there's both chemicals that facilitate augmentation of emotions and 
chemicals that cause the emotions themselves. And I'm sure many of the 
prescribed drugs are completely unnecessary. :-)  I.e., I'm sure there are 
many people whose depression has a chemical cause, and many people who are 
prescribed anti-depressants merely because they're having a crappy life.

> Re: the topic, this is to say that even the stimulus of brain 
> chemistry is an 'external' factor.

Oh, alright.  I'm not sure I'd count the levels of neurotransmitters in my 
brain as "external" to my state of mind, but OK.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Understanding the structure of the universe
    via religion is like understanding the
     structure of computers via Tron.

Post a reply to this message

> At any rate, my point is that I live in a large urban area. It's not 
> exactly "too small a town".

Are you taking advantage of it?

My advice, since this has worked fairly well for myself: Try to make friends 
with some other single men your age who will push you to go places you 
wouldn't normally go. If you already have friends like that (say, at work), 
express interest in going out with them. Of course, you have to be willing 
to do so if they invite you. If you're not willing (too shy), then you have 
to remind yourself that it's a necessary step to improving the part of your 
life that makes you unhappy.

 - Slime
 [ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Does it? One can feel guilty without external stimulus, I'm sure. 
> Certainly one can be trained to feel guilty without specific 
> per-occurrence corroboration.

I imagine that must be terribly confusing when you have that and stop to 
actually think about it.  Enough to incite a person to take an action to 
justify the guilty feeling.

>> Re: the topic, this is to say that even the stimulus of brain 
>> chemistry is an 'external' factor.
> Oh, alright.  I'm not sure I'd count the levels of neurotransmitters in 
> my brain as "external" to my state of mind, but OK.

That's why I put it in quotes.  ;)

--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>>> Offer them drinks.
>>>
>>> I still don't get the part where I'm talking to a complete stranger
>>> and NOT getting the crap kicked out of me...
>>
>> You see a couple of cute girls in a bar, you walk up to the group and
>> say, "Hey, how's it going?  Can I buy you and your friends a drink?"
> 
> For some reason, last time I tried this, the girls kept looking sideways
> at each other and laughing at me...
> 

On this side of the pond, two women walking into a bar together are not
always looking for a guy to chat one of them up. I can offer two
reasons, neither of which have anything to do with the guy:

They go to a bar to drink without a GUY picking them up.
They go to a bar to drink and dance without picking up anyone.

In either case, in their own minds it was obvious that they didn't want
a guy to talk to and so it was giggle-worthy. Conceited of them, probably.

If you want to chat with someone at a bar that is frequented by women
(as in more than one), find the one who is driving the rest home after
everyone else gets wasted. If a group wanders in, pick out the
designated driver and just talk. Try a joke at a drunken friend of your
owns expense, just so you don't accidentally insult her best friend.

Post a reply to this message

>     When were you here? It's really only over the last 5 years that I've 
> noticed how much more aggressive people have become. Of course that 
> aggression has always been there, but now there are crowds and crowds of 
> it instead of just a drunken punch up between two bully boys.

It seemed pretty bad when I lived in Oxford from about 2003-2006.  I was 
walking along with my gf and there was another couple standing at a bus stop 
having an argument.  As we walked past the guy started shouting abuse at us 
and telling us to mind our own business etc while his gf was trying to calm 
him down.  It's scary, I don't know what half of these people are on.  Also 
it was pretty much accepted that if you were walking around between 11 and 
midnight you'd see at least one group having a fight or acting agressively.

>      And of course, I can't say that for every town as I haven't been to 
> every town, I'm sure some are ok... I think.

My home town of Southampton is the same in the centre.  When I'm there I 
just stick to local pubs and avoid the really central areas (after all, why 
would you want to go there?).

It's such a shame there are so many idiots who ruin it for the majority, I 
wish the police were tougher on them.

Post a reply to this message

> It just seems everywhere I go, everybody else falls into a completely 
> different age group to me.

Rule #1 : Never refuse friendship with someone because they are not a young 
single hot girl.  Single hot girls usually have more than one friend, you 
are more likely to meet hot girls by being friends with non-(hot girls). 
Plus it's less-weird and easier to be introduced to one than walking up to 
girls randomly.

Rule #2 : Act with your friends in a way that would make you attractive to 
girls.  Girls are not going to like you if your friends say to them "he's 
really boring, he just moans about work and his life the whole time".  If 
you are more positive then they will say "oh you should meet Andrew, he's a 
really good guy". Maybe :-)

You might try joining some activity group to make new friends, some of mine 
use this place in the UK:

http://www.spiceuk.com/home

Whilst none have found a hot girl as a girlfriend (AFAIK), they are always 
going out with people they met there, and they do things that they enjoy the 
whole time.  Seems like a perfect recipe for enjoying yourself and providing 
a good chance of meeting someone.

Forget about the specific task of finding a girlfriend, go about getting out 
more and meeting some people, then the girl will one day appear.

Post a reply to this message

Tim Cook wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> Does it? One can feel guilty without external stimulus, I'm sure. 
>> Certainly one can be trained to feel guilty without specific 
>> per-occurrence corroboration.
> 
> I imagine that must be terribly confusing when you have that and stop to 
> actually think about it.

Perhaps I wasn't clear.  You can be taught to feel guilty for (say) eating 
the wrong kinds of food together, or for looking at a pretty girl, or 
something like that. The teacher doesn't have to be around to make you feel 
guilty every time you look at a pretty girl. It's not confusing to you; you 
just know it's wrong to look at pretty girls.

> Enough to incite a person to take an action to 
> justify the guilty feeling.

Yeah, like teaching the next generation the same crap.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Understanding the structure of the universe
    via religion is like understanding the
     structure of computers via Tron.

Post a reply to this message