Post-hypnotism

moonlightress wrote:Richard, know this: you’re not welcome in this thread.

This ought to be interesting, I'm thinking to myself.

moonlightress wrote: It drains me to have to deal with your level of negativity and hostility and it does not belong here.

I can understand how you feel. Other people's words can have a strong effect upon our own thinking, if we let them.

Perhaps, as a sort of remedy, you can take up a daily practice of meditation. Do an hour per session; work up to it if you have to. Preferably, it may be done in the morning before other activities make it difficult to fit this exercise in the schedule. I've been influenced by Kyle Cease (do a search) in this matter.

It is my perception that if you could do this, you would be greatly rewarded.

quietvoice wrote:Perhaps, as a sort of remedy, you can take up a daily practice of meditation.

It is my perception that if you could do this, you would be greatly rewarded.

Hi quietvoice

Does an hour a day of self-hypnosis count? Because I do that. Complete and utter relaxation, focus of attention, the way you would have on the breath and non-attachment to thoughts. I have done mindfulness meditation in the past (Rob Nairn was my inspiration; I went on a retreat he led, and joined a group) and not had anywhere near as much success as with self-hypnosis. That hour a day is my oasis and I have no trouble fitting it in; it's top priority, ahead of any studying or anything else I have to do, apart from going to classes.

quietvoice wrote:

moonlightress wrote:Richard, know this: you’re not welcome in this thread.

This ought to be interesting, I'm thinking to myself.

I would try to make it interesting quietvoice, but obviously this thread is dead before it even starts. And you have heard some version of this story by me more than once.

==========

A nice clear day, Sally walks up the stairs in front of the town square. Like any other day, there are any number of townspeople going about their business, and as always when a person begins to speak from the top of the stairs a dozen or so people turn to listen.

“Attention everyone,” Sally begins, “I want to discuss the fascinating benefits of astrology and how it can give you strength to deal with all types of adversity, but first I want everyone to know that Bob is not welcome to speak. I can’t stop him from climbing these stairs and offering his opinion, but Bob is (insert various compliments). So if Bob does speak, then that will show disrespect and prove my point.

People listening start turning to each other, “Who is Bob? What does he have to say that is so upsetting to Sally? Why does Sally want to silence Bob? If astrology gives such benefits, shouldn’t Sally be strong enough to handle Bob’s opinions? Does Sally really think that trying to use social guilt and manipulate people is a sign that she is strong? That is what astrology offers? Where is this Bob guy? I want to hear him speak and decide for myself what is so awful about him.”

Inadvertently, Sally has just made the topic all about Bob. Sally has derailed her own topic before it has even begun. Astrology is now an afterthought as the townspeople want to know what makes Bob such a horrible person. Even more people begin to gather around, waiting to see if Bob will show.

==========

A common tactic in discourse is the metaphorical “Scarlett Letter” where a person tries to shame or guilt a person into silence. I understand why people use it, because it works. It can be a very effective tool, especially in cultures or communities where the use of public shaming is widespread. Ironically, it works very well in social justice communities that are intolerant of intolerance. It works on individuals that buy into the concept of shaming. It works on individuals that fear being publicly criticized.

Hint: I’m not one of those people.

And I encourage anyone interested in public discourse to never allow another person to use this tactic against you. Never allow another person’s weakness to guilt you into silence in the town square.

Where is Bob?

I haven't counted, but the OP appears to contain more words addressed to Bob than to Jimmyh.

I would have been disappointed if 'Bob' hadn't shown up.

Candid wrote:I haven't counted, but the OP appears to contain more words addressed to Bob than to Jimmyh.

I would have been disappointed if 'Bob' hadn't shown up.

You're quite right Candid.

Richard, once again, you’re right. The thread is dead and you killed it extremely effectively with a hail of bullets. I’ll even concede I fired the first shot. Stupid of me. I tried to appeal to a sense of decency I hoped you had, keep hoping you have, but I was once again wrong to think so. The point I proved wasn’t one I wanted to prove, it was one I’d hoped you’d be capable of disproving. I don’t consider it any kind of victory, let alone a hollow one; it was a failure. I’m a really, really slow learner at conducting myself in your world, sentimental idealist that I am, but I’m starting to see that if it means learning from you, it isn’t a skill I want to acquire.

I’m going to try again. Having learned something valuable, and building on a different skill I also need to practice for my new business, I’ll do better next time. I won’t send you an invitation, since it’s a public thread and no invitations are needed, but I do want to invite you to be yourself; true to who you are, as I strive to be.

Looking over your reply again, I can see that I should have realized it would elicit another version of the story you've been compelled to tell more than once. I should have known others have done this before. I do take some comfort from not being the only one; occasionally there *is* strength in numbers.

Where is this Bob guy? I want to hear him speak and decide for myself what is so awful about him.”

Inadvertently, Sally has just made the topic all about Bob. Sally has derailed her own topic before it has even begun. Astrology is now an afterthought as the townspeople want to know what makes Bob such a horrible person. Even more people begin to gather around, waiting to see if Bob will show.

Where is Bob?

He’s right here and I’m sure he can stand by and is proud of, every word.

moonlightress wrote:(Richard, know this: you’re not welcome in this thread. I want to make that explicitly clear at the outset, so you can’t misinterpret it...It drains me to have to deal with your level of negativity and hostility and it does not belong here. I know I cannot stop you from participating, but if you do, it will be public knowledge that you do so with blatant and obtuse disrespect and disregard for the expressed wish of the thread starter. I nurture a little hope you won’t stoop to that level of boorishness.)

The “first shot.”

moonlightress wrote:I’ll even concede I fired the first shot. Stupid of me. I tried to appeal to a sense of decency I hoped you had

Just my opinion, but your first shot doesn’t seem very decent. It seems to me to be a great example of hypocrisy, the very opposite of decency appealing for a sense of decency.

moonlightress wrote:Does an hour a day of self-hypnosis count? Because I do that. Complete and utter relaxation, focus of attention, the way you would have on the breath and non-attachment to thoughts. That hour a day is my oasis and I have no trouble fitting it in; it's top priority..

Maybe try increasing it to two hours a day? This thread, like the previous thread, is clear evidence of the ineffectiveness of self-hypnosis. It is clear evidence that an hour a day isn’t helping you to live up to your stated values.

moonlightress wrote:Richard, once again, you’re right. The thread is dead and you killed it extremely effectively...

No, moonlightress, you did.

You really can't shut people out, here or in your life. As this thread proves, the more you try to avoid people/things/events, the more they keep coming at you. What we resist, persists.

You really can't shut people out, here or in your life. As this thread proves, the more you try to avoid people/things/events, the more they keep coming at you. What we resist, persists.

This is mostly true.

No, moonlightress, you did.

This doesn't follow.

The Arbiter of Truth hath spake.

I’m glad you get it.

It’s unfortunate how many people these days get sucked into the comforting idea that “all opinions are created equal” and use that to justify completely discarding all reasoning when it might challenge their sense of self worth to have nothing to say. It takes humility to recognize when one’s words might not have value and address errors of reasoning as they’re called out. It takes a hell of a lot more than that to make sure one’s beliefs and statements actually track the truth in the first place, let alone to be able to make definitive statements which never turn out to be wrong. Precious few can recognize a Transcendent Arbiter of Truth when they see one, and I’m glad you’re able to recognize all of the hard work I’ve put in to earn the title.

Moonlightress sabotaged her own thread when she made a big deal of who couldn't post here. The red-flag-to-a-bull approach nearly always ends in tears.

Moonlightress, for future reference, start any thread you like and stay on topic yourself. If someone with opinions you don't like chimes in, simply ignore. Don't engage. Respond only to posts that confirm what you already believe, from people who flatter you.

Somewhere in the control panel you can block members whose contribution offends you. If you do that, Richard's posts won't appear for you and you therefore will have no trouble resisting the urge to argue.