--- akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> --- In [email protected], Peter
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sorry, but I'm not going to continue this
> discussion.
> > I've got to go have sex with a goat.
> 
> Thats a nice pattern. Drive by, skim a post, miss
> major points, argue
> loudly against points not made, then claim being to
> busy to even read
> a fairly careful crafted response clarifying the
> issues and pointing
> out where your quick skim has lead your assessments
> astray. 
> 
> Well, yes I have made a judegement about you
> (pertaining to decisions
> future action) -- not to be confused with
> judgemental views.
> 
> All hail the monkey mind!

Thank you Akasha...too sweet of you. I'm so glad you
have no expectations and hence no judgements. I just
can't get worked-up about "tacky" decor and how it
proves  I am inadequate for you in some way. Talk
about expectations, Jeez! You responded to me, I
responded to you and you find my response to be
inadequate. Who has the expectations here? Next time
just call me fuck-face and things will be clearer for
all of us. 


 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > --- akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> > > --- In [email protected], Peter
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > > > I am jut a bit intrigued by the
> "expectations"
> > > > > theme. See other posts
> > > > > on this. (this one summarizes some of the
> > > issues.)
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/64595
> > > 
> > > > > You appear, in my view, to be smearing
> > > judgemental
> > > > > critics and  expectations with personal
> > > preferences. To say,
> > > > > "that decor is not for me" -- and then
> dropping
> > > it, is a statment
> > > of personal taste. To go  further and say "thats
> > > tacky" is judgemental. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > And there is a semantical razor's edge here.
> By
> > > > > "judgemental views" I mean making assessemnt
> of
> > > others or things
> > > that are not required for
> > > > > ones own decisions and actions. Its not
> decrying
> > > > > using "judgement" aka  IMO intellectual
> > > discrimination, which when
> > > applied  to things one must make a decision
> about,
> > > and actions one is
> > > > > considering, is a good thing. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > A theme I am exploring is "are judgemental
> views
> > > > > rooted in
> > > > > expectations"? It seem to be a correct, and
> > > useful,
> > > > > hypothesis, but I
> > > > > am still looking for exceptions to disprove
> the
> > > it.
> > > > 
> > > > I don't think that all judgements are rooted
> in
> > > > expectations. Some obviously are, but many are
> > > not.
> > > > For instance I eat something that doesn't
> taste
> > > good
> > > > and I say, "Yuk, that tastes awful" and I spit
> it
> > > out.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > And of course, I just made a large distinction,
> > > above, between
> > > "judgments" and "judgmental actions" --- and
> posited
> > > that expectations
> > > are linked to the latter, not the former. Its
> funny,
> > > becasue the
> > > springboard for your example is on the former,
> on
> > > jusgements,
> > > something I did NOT link to expectations.  Of
> course
> > > you are free to
> > > develop your own models, but your example has
> > > nothing to do with
> > > countering my point.  You appear to be arguing
> > > against my point by
> > > suggesting I said the opposite of what I said.
> Not a
> > > problem, but its
> > > kind of hard to carry on much of a convo that
> way.
> > > Either you didnt
> > > read what I wrote, or my words were incredibly
> > > obtuse. 
> > > 
> > > Carrrying on with your example, I would say your
> > > judgement that
> > > something doesn't taste good, and your decicion
> not
> > > to eat more, is
> > > what I consider appropriate use of judgement.
> You
> > > found your personal
> > > preferences were not consistent with the meal
> and
> > > you made a decision
> > > based on that. Bravo. Thats a good thing. 
> > > 
> > > What I am suggesting is that if you went on to
> say
> > > something like,
> > > "and poeple who like this are stupid, unevolved
> and
> > > ugly!" then I
> > > would hold that you are holding a  "judgemental
> > > view" -- per my
> > > definition above, and this is not useful, and is
> > > part of the monkey
> > > mind chatter of irrelevance, frustration and
> cyclic
> > > behavior. This
> > > latter" judgemental view" had nothing to do with
> > > personal decision and
> > > action. Its just a vehicle for more crap to
> > > circulate through the
> > > mind, distort ones vision and make one a bit of
> an
> > > ass.
> > > 
> > > > You seem to be saying that
> > > > expectations are bad or wrong. 
> > > 
> > > Again you appear not to have read my posts on
> this
> > > and are jumping in
> > > mid stream. Not a problem, but it makes your
> points
> > > quite off target.
> > > Unc and Irmeli were arguing that expectations
> were
> > > bad. I went through
> > > a number of counter arguments and examples that
> > > expectations are the
> > > foundation of science and technolgy -- in the
> realm
> > > of things, we do
> > > an action and expect a repeateable result. When
> we
> > > turn the light on,
> > > we expect it to go on. And that is fine, no
> foul.
> > > 
> > > I did find some common ground to agree with
> them,
> > > that, IMO, not
> > > having expecations about outcomes over which we
> have
> > > little control is
> > > a good thing. In other words, expectation over
> > > things which we have
> > > little control is indeed bad. Examples: don't
> expect
> > > a person to be or
> > > act a certain way, don't expect the day to
> unfold in
> > > a certain way.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > I really don't see a problem with
> > > > saying it was tacky. I just didn't like it. If
> > > someone
> > > > else liked it I certainly wasn't going to
> argue
> > > with
> > > > them! I'd say, "Oh" and leave it at that. 
> > > 
> > > I was using the "tacky" statement just a 
> 
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to