Just bought a webcam so I can chat with the family but I haven't hooked up to Skype yet as I am getting used to some radical changes to my laptop...patience...patience! Not eager to slap a photo on the internet as I was warned long ago that I could be pixilated into a porn site!// I can adapt to this mode of interaction- maybe because I was an only child- but am unraveling my recent cocoon and am thinking about getting involved again with a university group that has an active academic, social and travel program- just for seniors and former professors and professionals- it certainly beats lady lunches/ gossip!//Yes- the human face and body language have their own vocabulary, don't they? Also the tone of voice. I tend to be serene or animated- how about you? :-)
On Sep 2, 12:00 am, BB47 <[email protected]> wrote: > On Aug 29, 4:53 pm, retiredjim34 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Because these facets are a > > puzzle to me. > > Absolutely. It completely depends on the "face to face" interaction. > We adapt, but hopefully "we" are always a "facet" of ourselves. We > usually are in real life. But in here? There is no "face to face." > It is little black figures that have to be interpreted. Very hard. > Even in the same language. With no facial expressions, no body > language, no tone of voice, no vocal melody, nothing. So very hard to > convey the message in its sent condition. > > But as to your question? It seems to me to be perfectly OK to > "adapt" to different people. We sense when they just want to talk, we > sense what is proper to "bring up" , or what is not a good idea to > bring up, we sense all kinds of things, but that does not mean we are > not "ourselves." In here however is a COMPLETELY different world. > The little black figures can be so elusive as to what we are "saying" > and are confined to stricter rules. As far as face to face? We > adapt. In here? Adapting optional, as observed. > It is like talking through an interpreter, very dangerous. > > > > > > > On Aug 29, 10:24 am, BB47 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > While you display much decorum, it is not like do not offer your own > > > "cutting" opinions, at least from my view. > > > Do I mean "cutting" as in "malicious?" No, not necessarily, and > > > certainly not for the most part. Many things we say in here may be > > > preceived as such, but "cutting" is also just an attempt to "cut > > > through" to the "perceived truth" one might think or feel at this > > > point in their lives. Most of what is said in these groups is an > > > attempt to cut through, I really believe that, and not to cut others. > > > Controlling how each message is received is very difficult! And yet > > > just how they are perceived (as evident by the respose) "also" says > > > something about each of us. It is all very complicated. > > > > While the bad kind of "cutting" happens too, it is often just dressed > > > up in really nice decorum. I don't see that as any benefit, if it is > > > really in there, in fact it makes the problem worse. But I am > > > "trying" to view these posts as NOT having a malicious intent to them, > > > after all, "we are all one...we are the mirror...how you treat others > > > is how you treat yourself"...ect. ect. Well if you really believe > > > those things then we need to look closer at just what we are saying, > > > myself included. We might simply be trying to help by offering what > > > we see as "not seen" or even the wacky idea of "the truth" even > > > though we know we don't have it. It is so difficult to figure all > > > this out, yet we keep trying. Put a gold star up there for "effort" > > > on us human's report card for in trying to figure things out! > > > > Maybe my point is that some "need" to say some things, this is > > > apparent, and the motive behind that need, while questionable, should > > > not be judged too quickly. Some are more "direct" and "hold back > > > less" but that does not necessarily mean they have "bad intent." I > > > am not very good at holding back. This is obviously a danger and > > > something that will no doubt "stir up" but honestly, I do not see > > > that as a bad thing! > > > does a painter try and "stir up" emotions? "Stir up" is also "a re- > > > examination" isn't it? I realize there is a balance, and it may be > > > easy for you, but not so easy for me. Expression is what we are here > > > for. Does holding back expression do any good? Can we truly > > > "protect" the receiver? Can we "insure" the "intent" of each post? > > > We are obviously all different, and all take different approaches. If > > > we assume bad intent, then there is going to be trouble. If we ignore > > > what we see as bad intent there will be trouble too. I don't know the > > > solution, but dressing up bad intent in a nice classy disguise does > > > not seem to be the answer either. Not that you would do that! I > > > believe you are a very nice person with genuine goals of seeking, > > > feeling, learning, and you believe in harmony and peace. Those are > > > wonderful qualities! > > > > As to Jim's OP, I do some adapting to other people, this is > > > natural, but I am always myself. Are there different facets? Of > > > course. Should we always "adapt?" I am not sure. If it violates > > > something important in you I don't think so. Some core philosophy? No, > > > but then that can be discussed. Everything needs to be discussed! > > > That is my core philosophy! Hey, I discovered a new one! thanks for > > > listening, if you bothered. > > > > On Aug 29, 6:05 am, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I had to give this one some thought, Jim, and examine the way that I > > > > interact in a group. I'm not sure what you are going for here, but > > > > for me, relationship and group dynamic always has time coming in and > > > > going out aspects. I cannot say that I behave the same everywhere I > > > > go, because I find myself sizing up the environment to establish a > > > > comfort zone for the exchange - what others are comfortable with, what > > > > I am comfortable offering. Issues of trust and trustworthiness are > > > > present in every relationship and group, and they can take awhile to > > > > establish. But even if the group is only together for an evening, > > > > there will be a getting to know you period, a bonding period, a > > > > deconstructive period, and a coming together before separating > > > > period. Happens every time. > > > > > I also choose the topic for discussion based on the receiver's > > > > receptivity. I don't try to discuss Esoteric philosophy unless I > > > > first see interest and foundational knowledge. I have found that > > > > allowing people their comfort zone can bring the best out in them. > > > > However, there is also an edge where they will begin to feel > > > > threatened and challenged if they are taken beyond it. I have noticed > > > > that some people prey on this, and like to disturb and stir things > > > > up. I take the other route, as my mother taught me that ladies and > > > > gentlemen do what they can to make everyone around them comfortable, > > > > and it is a good way to live. I think there is something to be said > > > > for this kind of virtuous nobility. > > > > > All of this is to say that, while I am always me, I respect those > > > > around me in each exchange, which gives particular flavor to each > > > > exchange and may bring up different aspects, as you say, in me. > > > > > On Aug 28, 2:19 pm, retiredjim34 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I thought for a long time that I was the same “me” wherever I > > > > > was and whoever I was with. But then, in recent decades, I began to > > > > > notice differences in the “me” that was present, first with a few > > > > > people, then more and more with more and more. For example, I might be > > > > > witty with fast comebacks with one person, and yet with another I was > > > > > more dull and boring. Even when I tried to lighten up with the second > > > > > person, I did not seem able to – I couldn’t call forth the facet of me > > > > > that was present with the first person. Hmmm. > > > > > Have any of you noticed this? Probably everyone has, and just > > > > > as probably many have written about it. Do any of you know if this is > > > > > the case? And has anyone tried to explain the different facets of > > > > > one’s personality that seem to naturally shine with different people? > > > > > Or am I just nuts? Jim- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
