Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site tove.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!tove!israel From: israel@tove.UUCP (Bruce Israel) Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: Hurting, "no"s and choice. Message-ID: <290@tove.UUCP> Date: Tue, 30-Jul-85 00:28:58 EDT Article-I.D.: tove.290 Posted: Tue Jul 30 00:28:58 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 31-Jul-85 23:20:18 EDT References: <382@azure.UUCP> <374@oliven.UUCP> <1334@uwmacc.UUCP> Reply-To: israel@tove.UUCP (Bruce israel) Organization: U of Maryland, Laboratory for Parallel Computation, C.P., MD Lines: 96 In article <1334@uwmacc.UUCP> oyster@uwmacc.UUCP (Vicious oyster) writes: >In article <374@oliven.UUCP> rap@oliven.UUCP (Robert A. Pease) writes: >>Try this one to see if you cannot MAKE yourself feel an emotion. >> ... >>Now, don't tell me you can't choose to feel an emotion! > > I think the point is that one cannot *NOT* feel certain emotions. I know >people who can choose not to be happy (or at least it seems that way), but I >would have to turn myself into an emotionless zombie before I could feel no >sadness at the death of a friend. Can you at least agree with *that*? Well I agree with that, but that doesn't mean that you CANNOT feel that emotion, only that you would have to "turn yourself into an emotionless zombie" to do so. If you agree that you could "NOT feel that emotion" by turning yourself into an emotionless zombie, then you must agree that you can choose your emotions, at least in this case! get this straight: Saying that you have power over your emotions IS NOT THE SAME AS saying that you should indiscriminately exercise it! There is a *BIG* difference between what you CAN do, and what you SHOULD do! Personally, I think anyone who would choice not to feel sad over the death of a friend has jello for brains. Now, since the issue of how to apply these concepts has not been discussed, let me give a little discussion on it, based soley on my point of view about it and my own experience. Take it for what it's worth. I'd also like to relate this to an interchange between Greg Woods and Pooh, to wit (totally paraphrased of course, I don't have the time to go dig out the originals. Blame me if I misrepresent anyone.) Greg: The more people that adopt this concept, the less pain there will be in the world. Pooh: You can't and shouldn't wipe out pain. It's have of human experience. Now, contrary to popular opinion, I am not advocating this philosophy for people to apply to avoid negative feelings. (In fact, knowing Greg, I don't believe that he is either, but I can't speak for him). Yes, you can this to avoid (notice the word I used very carefully, campers. I said "avoid", I didn't say "eliminate" or "eradicate".) negative feelings. In some cases it may be appropriate (I find anger to be one that it is more often appropriate to avoid than depression or hurt, but these are just my biases), but it is not always appropriate. I consider it extremely inappropriate for the above example (the death of a close friend), and usually appropriate for anger when I get cut off on the Beltway (a four lane parking lot that circles Washington, D.C.). Now, I hear someone asking, "But if you shouldn't use it most of the time, how is it useful?" Good question. To answer this I need one more belief of mine, that being that much (or most) of emotional pain is second-level pain, that which comes from not wanting and therefore not accepting the first level emotional pain. For example, I get rejected when I ask a women out on a date (the original discussion, remember?). This hurts. I say to myself "That hurts. I don't want it to hurt, so I won't let it." So instead of feeling very hurt for a couple of hours (at which point I would naturally get off of it), I feel only somewhat hurt. But that second-level pain ends becoming longer term, maybe lasting weeks, and maybe the next time I ask a women out, it compounds the hurt from that rejection so that they work together, the combination being greater than the sum of the two events. Now, given this extra belief of mine (and also another belief of mine that every emotion has a purpose and you can use any or all of these emotions to grow), the way I view the application of emotional control and responsibility is this: Know that you have control over the emotions that you have. Since you do have control, obviously what you are experiencing was your choice and has a purpose. Since it was your choice, accept it, and when you've experienced as much as you need to for your growth, it will go away and you will choose another feeling to do the same to. i.e. choose what you have. (a little Zennish, ain't it?) Now to relate it to Pooh and Greg's discussion: obviously you will not have eliminated all pain, just what I call second-level pain (which I consider to be totally unnecessary pain since you've created it yourself and it has no basis on external events). It also eliminates what I'll call third-level pain, which is where you are feeling second-level pain and then get mad at yourself and feeling guilty for feeling that pain and putting yourself through all that. Well, that's enough for now. I apologize for any confusion in the above; most of the above concepts are my own ideas and, as internalized concepts, are very difficult to actually put into words. -- Bruce Israel seismo!umcp-cs!israel (Usenet) israel@Maryland (Arpanet)