|
Home > Archive > Attention deficit support > October 2005 > The problem with ASAD
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
The problem with ASAD
|
|
| Ra♥ïⁿg L♂♀♫iε 2005-10-24, 2:00 am |
| There is a problem with Alt.Support.Attn-Deficit ...
There are millions of people in N. America, alone who have an ADD
style, temperament. This NewsGroup, as with many NG's is limited to the
involvement of a few individuals. Myself ..., Twittering One ..., ???
....
It's easy enough to whine that myself or T1 dominate ASAD.
O.K. Assume that such is so, for the moment ...
... There are ALWAYS going to be a few who will dominate any NG;
particularly so if those frequent few end up being the only ones who
participate.
If the Usenet community wants a vibrant and effective ng, it's members
have to work at it. It's members need to be tolerant of others. It's
members need to make-the-effort.
It's never easy with many people participating at the same time in a
ng. Nevertheless, the broad interaction can be a vibrant and
stimulating place.
It requires an effort.
... make the effort. Don't be put-off.
RL
| |
| Sumbuny 2005-10-24, 2:00 am |
|
"Ra??g L???i?" <raving.loonie@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130005764.875229.200540@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> There is a problem with Alt.Support.Attn-Deficit ...
>
> There are millions of people in N. America, alone who have an ADD
> style, temperament. This NewsGroup, as with many NG's is limited to the
> involvement of a few individuals. Myself ..., Twittering One ..., ???
> ...
>
> It's easy enough to whine that myself or T1 dominate ASAD.
> O.K. Assume that such is so, for the moment ...
>
> ... There are ALWAYS going to be a few who will dominate any NG;
> particularly so if those frequent few end up being the only ones who
> participate.
>
> If the Usenet community wants a vibrant and effective ng, it's members
> have to work at it. It's members need to be tolerant of others. It's
> members need to make-the-effort.
>
> It's never easy with many people participating at the same time in a
> ng. Nevertheless, the broad interaction can be a vibrant and
> stimulating place.
>
> It requires an effort.
>
> ... make the effort. Don't be put-off.
>
> RL
>
This group, like every other, goes through cycles...right now, I am in one
of my "busy" ones...I lurk more than I post because my "real life" tends to
be a tad busy at the moment (my older son started college, younger son is
heavily involved in h.s. band and Scouting)...add to that the fact that my
family just got slammed with Katrina and Rita...well, you will
understand....many others have similar issues, when "life gets in the
way"...
Over the years, you will see that groups come and go as this happens, and
the "roller coaster effect" happens...people come in, go out...some regulars
hang around with varying degrees of participation as their schedules allow,
and as their needs demand....right now my participatory needs are in some
other groups (see above reasons), but I do pop in here at least a few
times...
Other things that I have noticed is that my news server occasionally gets
"hiccups" where I get no postings for a few days...and then several
hundred--that affects "apparent" participation as well...
--
Buny
" Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal."
~ Albert Camus
| |
| Jack Straw 2005-10-24, 2:00 am |
| Being an ADD guy, I subscribe to 6 different newsgroups and flit back and
forth between them. Active here - for now.
Jack Straw
"Ra?i?g L???i?" <raving.loonie@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130005764.875229.200540@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> There is a problem with Alt.Support.Attn-Deficit ...
>
> There are millions of people in N. America, alone who have an ADD
> style, temperament. This NewsGroup, as with many NG's is limited to the
> involvement of a few individuals. Myself ..., Twittering One ..., ???
> ...
>
> It's easy enough to whine that myself or T1 dominate ASAD.
> O.K. Assume that such is so, for the moment ...
>
> ... There are ALWAYS going to be a few who will dominate any NG;
> particularly so if those frequent few end up being the only ones who
> participate.
>
> If the Usenet community wants a vibrant and effective ng, it's members
> have to work at it. It's members need to be tolerant of others. It's
> members need to make-the-effort.
>
> It's never easy with many people participating at the same time in a
> ng. Nevertheless, the broad interaction can be a vibrant and
> stimulating place.
>
> It requires an effort.
>
> ... make the effort. Don't be put-off.
>
> RL
>
| |
| Ra♥ïⁿg L♂♀♫iε 2005-10-24, 2:00 am |
| Ra=E2=99=A5=C3=AF=E2=81=BFg L=E2=99=82=E2=99=80=E2=99=ABi=CE=B5 wrote:
> There is a problem with Alt.Support.Attn-Deficit ...
>
> There are millions of people in N. America, alone who have an ADD
> style, temperament. This NewsGroup, as with many NG's is limited to the
> involvement of a few individuals. Myself ..., Twittering One ..., ???
> ...
>
> It's easy enough to whine that myself or T1 dominate ASAD.
> O.K. Assume that such is so, for the moment ...
>
> ... There are ALWAYS going to be a few who will dominate any NG;
> particularly so if those frequent few end up being the only ones who
> participate.
>
> If the Usenet community wants a vibrant and effective ng, it's members
> have to work at it. It's members need to be tolerant of others. It's
> members need to make-the-effort.
>
> It's never easy with many people participating at the same time in a
> ng. Nevertheless, the broad interaction can be a vibrant and
> stimulating place.
>
> It requires an effort.
>
> ... make the effort. Don't be put-off.
>
> RL
What I am trying to express is that ...
... A vibrant NG doesn't occur by magic. It needs a hard, deliberate
effort on the part of it's members. And then when it's full of
activity, it requires some patience and tolerance by it's participants.
Perhaps, we take NG's a bit for granted ...
Perhaps, we are too unreasonable when a NG is full of energy and
activity.
Maybe ASAD as a noisier place might be a nice change ? ... My 2
cents worth.
That is all I am suggesting, herein. This is Usenet. Others will have
their own comments and ideas. It's a public party. ...
RL
| |
|
| "Ra??g L???i?" <raving.loonie@gmail.com> expounded:
>It's members need to be tolerant of others.
Says one of the most intolerant ones here....
>It's members need to make-the-effort.
Many of us do make the effort, but can't be bothered continuing
exactly the way *you* want us to. You want more participation? Try to
keep in mind it isn't your group, it isn't all about the way you see
life - let people be the way they are. We've all come here from
different directions and will all get through life one way or another.
--
Ann
e-mail address is not checked
| |
| Ra♥ïⁿg L♂♀♫iε 2005-10-27, 6:41 pm |
|
Ann wrote:
> "Ra?=C3=AF?g L???i?" <raving.loonie@gmail.com> expounded:
>
>
> Says one of the most intolerant ones here....
>
>
> Many of us do make the effort, but can't be bothered continuing
> exactly the way *you* want us to. You want more participation? Try to
> keep in mind it isn't your group, it isn't all about the way you see
> life - let people be the way they are. We've all come here from
> different directions and will all get through life one way or another.
> --
> Ann
> e-mail address is not checked
Ann,
I have to love your postings.
Thus, I point out ...
1) You do care. You do read what I write, You care enough to respond.
Thank you. It speaks for itself and says a lot. I imagine that I am
appropriately seeing it for what it is ...
I sincerely appreciate it.
2) I can never figure it out .... ... are you referring to me or
yourself, herein and elsewhere ?
You will probably take what I have written in this posting as an insult
(assuming that it is still within me to insult/shock you). You
shouldn't do so.
As I see it, you are quite similar to me. I respect you for it. I
understand what you are saying. I agree.
I have no idea as to what you went through in life. ... Albeit, I have
a crude idea.
I know that you appear to be self-interested. To me, you clearly aren't
so ...
You will undoubtably think that I am out of my mind when I claim ...
My failure is my inability to EFFECTIVELY set and assert my own
self-interest.
..=2E It seems to fly-in-the-face of everything that I have written.
THE TRUTH IS THAT IT SPEAKS VOLUMES ABOUT MY FAILURE TO ACHIEVE SUCH
..=2E.
RL
| |
|
| "Ra??g L???i?" <raving.loonie@gmail.com> expounded:
>
>Ann wrote:
>
>Ann,
>
>I have to love your postings.
>
>Thus, I point out ...
>
>1) You do care. You do read what I write, You care enough to respond.
>
>Thank you. It speaks for itself and says a lot. I imagine that I am
>appropriately seeing it for what it is ...
>
> I sincerely appreciate it.
>
>2) I can never figure it out .... ... are you referring to me or
>yourself, herein and elsewhere ?
The pronoun 'you' when directed at a single poster (that would be
*you*) makes it fairly clear who I'm referring to. What I see as a
problem is you (Raving Loonie or however you're referring to yourself
these days) don't read what is posted as meaning what was posted, you
constantly try to read beneath and around what was written.
>
>You will probably take what I have written in this posting as an insult
>(assuming that it is still within me to insult/shock you). You
>shouldn't do so.
>
>As I see it, you are quite similar to me. I respect you for it. I
>understand what you are saying. I agree.
Thank you for respecting me as me, but I see nothing similar between
you and me. I take what was posted as what was meant, I don't try to
dig beneath to find a hidden meaning. I have no time or patience for
it. I am very WYSIWYG, I don't 'operate', I just 'am'. Don't look
for underlying subterfuge, there isn't any. I've given up trying to
figure out what you're trying to 'figure out'.
>
>I have no idea as to what you went through in life. ... Albeit, I have
>a crude idea.
No, you have no idea at all. Unless you read back through eleven
years of ASAD. I don't post about my life much anymore, I figure the
people here who know me have heard it before. It's boring to go on
and on about yourself.
>
>I know that you appear to be self-interested. To me, you clearly aren't
>so ...
>You will undoubtably think that I am out of my mind when I claim ...
>
>My failure is my inability to EFFECTIVELY set and assert my own
>self-interest.
>
>.. It seems to fly-in-the-face of everything that I have written.
>
>THE TRUTH IS THAT IT SPEAKS VOLUMES ABOUT MY FAILURE TO ACHIEVE SUCH
>...
>
>RL
Self-interested - that means what? Interested in one's self?
Self-focused? What? I have far too much in my life to be so focused
on myself, I'm a wife, a mother, a daughter, a sister - lots of other
people for me to think/worry about than just myself.
--
Ann
e-mail address is not checked
| |
| Ra♥ïⁿg L♂♀♫iε 2005-10-29, 11:36 am |
| Ann wrote:
> "Ra?=C3=AF?g L???i?" <raving.loonie@gmail.com> expounded:
>
[ excerpt ]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thank you for respecting me as me, but I see nothing similar between
> you and me. ...
Oh ?
The similarity between us is quite apparent to me.
I accept that you are unaware of a tangible similarity to myself.
Asymmetries of sensitization seem to be common. I do not yet understand
why <<such a thing>> ought to be so.
For example, a while back, it was Patti who said that she saw much of
her(past)self in me. I accept her observation. Presently, I, myself, am
oblivious to those features that Patti recognizes as us both holding in
common.
<puzzlement>
To whatever end ~~~~~
( .... My motive is to make you aware.
Of 'that' which you key into ... Of what you infer from
<such>
.... are considerations which I set aside.
)
> The pronoun 'you' when directed at a single poster (that would be
> *you*) makes it fairly clear who I'm referring to. ...
Curiously, I am very much in the habit of talking in the second person.
You this ...
You that ...
Do you know ?
Do you know what I mean ?
You think that ...
[ Eg. I am 'claiming' that I know how read "you's" mind. I am
telling "you" what 'you' is thinking ... as duh ... sure like I know
what you are thinking, eh ... etc ]
I am very much into speaking in the 2nd person and using "you" all the
time. It's my natural mode.
..=2E. Curiously, this doesn't seem to be preferred route.
Most people seem to talk naturally in the 1st person. ... It's all
"me" .. It's all what 'I' think. ... It's all about what "I" am aware
in regard ... about what I care about. PREDOMINENTLY the "I" or "me"
isn't even mentioned. it is simply implied.
When I talk unselfconsciously, I heavily emphasize the "you"'s.
I am talking AT YOU RIGHT NOW !!! ... It's pure second person,
personal (?).
*** Notice the usage of the "I" at the beginning ***
I am quite aware that you talk at people. ... just as I am doing with
yourself right now. ... this is "me". I converse this way all of the
time. ... It is not normal.
For whatever, crazy XXXXed up reason people infer that I am talking
about myself ... that I am narrow minded, opinionated, conceited and
self-adsorbed.
"TELLING another person" is not warmly received ...
You talk this way. You tell others what they mean. You tell others what
they are trying to do.
Example:
Simply read what you have written below.
> ... What I see as a
> problem is you (Raving Loonie or however you're referring to yourself
> these days) don't read what is posted as meaning what was posted, you
> constantly try to read beneath and around what was written.
=2E.. So, I "constantly try to read beneath and around what was
written", eh?
How peculiarly perceptive of you, Ann!
A remarkably astute observation and precise, effective description.
YES, I do that sort of thing, very much so ...
So do you. It's what you were doing when you described what you
observed about "me", eh?
I take what I percieve as a "given". ... I just 'accept'. Full stop.
What twigs my fancy is scanning across and around such granted and
accepted experiences. ... exploring context. ... discovering
enveloping perimeters.
>
> Thank you for respecting me as me, but I see nothing similar between
> you and me. I take what was posted as what was meant, I don't try to
> dig beneath to find a hidden meaning. ...
Actually, I become slightly confused and disoriented, here....
..=2E.. I sense that there is a very clear and distinct difference
between us, NOTWITHSTANDING the similarity. ... ... the distinction
<somehow> involves what you are emphasizing round about *now* ...
... the " I am very WYSIWYG, I don't 'operate', I just 'am'. ..."
portion
This is very disorienting for me. I recognize it as being very similar
to my own sensibility YET markedly different. I keenly sense it ...
feel it
As yet dumb insofar as being unable to paint and express this strong
cognizance with explicit words.
We have an overlapping strength concerning PERCEPTION. .. The
overlapping similarity is involved with what we are EMPHASIZING ..
and/or ... what catches the glint of our mind's eye ... Ergo, what
draws our attention. This, I can feel, sense, know strongly and
confidently *somehow* ( as to how ????? XXXX if I know ... )
When I go back I read what I have written, I am using "me's" and "I"s.
..=2E I know from experience that when I talk out loud, its always YOU's
I know that when I am writing "me" and "I", I am mainly in a purely
receptive mode. Looking, listening, searching. ...
I am simply describing what I am perceiving. The "me/I" implicitly
defines the activity of PERCEIVING and DESCRIBING that of which I am
currently aware.
Nothing is INFERRED.
Rather, the only thing that is being implictily inferred by me is the
activity of OBSERVE & DESCRIBE. [Full stop].
=2E.. I have no time or patience for
> it. I am very WYSIWYG, I don't 'operate', I just 'am'. ...
Your descrptition of yourself being very WYSIWYG is beautiful.
I am drawn in to shout out ... THAT'S ME TOO !!!
As I am strongly drawn in ... as I draw closer ... I feel myself being
flung away with ... "that is NOT me".
This feeling of being drawn in as similar and thence flung away as
disimilar is a strong and persistent feature of your descrption, here
< curiously ... puzzlement, mumble ... >
>I am very WYSIWYG, I don't 'operate', I just 'am'. ...
>I am very WYSIWYG, I don't 'operate', I just 'am'. ...
>I am very WYSIWYG, I don't 'operate', I just 'am'. ...
>I am very WYSIWYG, I don't 'operate', I just 'am'. ...
I am very WYSIWYG, I don't 'operate', I just 'am', ANNE
You don't care what others think.
You aren't being self-conscious
You are being very 2nd person YET you are unabashadly 1st person,
singular about it.
My description here & now is very fundemental to you. It is so [close
range], dense, personal, high-frequency that it is likely to be free of
emotion or 'psychological bull shit'. ( Ergo ... At this scaling, it
is too fundamental, simple & dense to be distorted by memories or
life's experience. They are unlikely to pertain. )
Fundamentally and effortlessly, I accept as granted whatever I
percieve. There is nothing to think about.
WYSIWYG!
Bravo!
=2E.. I can't imagine that it could ever be any other way for me.
I accept ...
I accept ...
I accept ...
I accept ...
I accept ...
I accept ...
I accept ...
I accept ...
I accept ...
This is never an issue with me.
... NEVER a problem
... Effortless
... seemingly w/o cost !!!
Thoughtless ...
I ACCEPT, ... O.K. ?
Life begins ...
The clock starts ticking ...
WHEN ...
... I ask myself ....
So what am I supposed to infer from WhatISeeIsWhatIACCEPT ?????
The Raving Loonie is very, very, very heavily into 'inference'.
ANN ~~~~~~~~> WYSIWYG ' Eat your heart out, fellow! '
RL ~~~~~~~~> WYSIWYG. No problem. Accepted.
So, what is it supposed to mean, any way ?
ANN ~~~~~~~> The answer to life, the universe and everything is ' 42 '
RL ~~~~~~> I'll buy that ... What was the question.
ANN emphasizes ... It IS
..=2E. it IS
..=2E. it IS
..=2E. it "IS"
An exuberant celebration of WYSIWYG.
You don't need to convince the Raving Loonie of THAT ... I am
pre-sold.
Now where is all of that underlying subterfuge that you previously
mentioned ?
I like ...
I like ...
.... It paints context onto the WYSIWYG egg.
You don't seem to be into doodling on WYSIWYG eggs.
O=2EK. ... That's cool.
... We make contact at the surface of the shell.
In truth, there ain't a heck of a lot of difference between us.
No surprise, really.
As always, I remain baffled about the asymmetries that seem apparent in
individual sensitivities.
> .... Don't look
> for underlying subterfuge, there isn't any. I've given up trying to
> figure out what you're trying to 'figure out'.
>
> No, you have no idea at all. Unless you read back through eleven
> years of ASAD. I don't post about my life much anymore, I figure the
> people here who know me have heard it before. It's boring to go on
> and on about yourself.
Funny. I actually HATE talking or thinking about myself.
Furthermore, I am entertained by small talk. Regardless, it doesn't
satiate me much. To my loss, I tend to avoid it.
IMO, talking about one's self IS small-talk. Most people do it.
As with myself and atypically ... You tend NOT to talk about yourself.
..=2E.
To listen to you ... To read what you write ...
My first imptression is to infer that you only talk about what
intersts and concerns you.
Gee whizz! ... I rub people the same way, too.
Part II .... ( How can you/me appear to be so full of ourselves but it
really isn't so !!!!!! )
I am written out.
I am very much the opposite of how it is that I am perceived. ... I
can recognize this inversion in yourself.
Perhaps it may be a given that such <inversion> is to be found in
everyone ...
NEVERTHELESS, most people make exactly the opposite/inappropriate
inference most of the time w.r.t. myself ( and perhaps everyone's self
???? )
I am no different. I make the same mistake.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+*************************+
+*EUREKA, EUREKA, EUREKA *+
+*************************+
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
*ding*
*ding*
*ding*
=2E.. the Raving Loonie just hit the JACTPOT !!!!!!!!
eureka
eureka
eureka
wow, wow, wow
wow, wow, wow
wow, wow, wow
... I NOW, NOW, NOW UNDERSTAND WHY I MUST DRIVE YOU STARK RAVING NUTS
!!!!
Duh, ... duh, ...duh ... duh
=2E.. it's so totally, totally OBVIOUS and deeply INHERENT
I am CORRECT ... guaranteed.
**** ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN ABOUT IT !!!!! ***
I leave the posters and lurkers, one-and-all with this 'Brian Teaser'
Why does the Raving Loonie drive Ann ballistic ...
Or more precisely, ... forgetting about "me" ...
~~~~~> What makes Ann go ape shit gonzo, EXPLICITLY.
What is her hot button? Why does it do such a thing?
The answer is very simple, ...VERY EXPLICIT
VERY INHERENT. ...
I bet that Anne doesn't even know what it "is" in the
'explict'-sense-of-knowing
;)
Finally, how can I mention such outlandish crap and expect to survuve
w/o getting my head bitten off?
Minor answer - I respect Ann, the situation and the awareness that I
possess.
I have good reason to be confident that is appropriate, respectful and
productive to effectively express such knowledge.
Hence, the teaser!
... Dons flame retardant clothing
Clue: Ann hates me mispelling her name as Anne. ... I often seem to
make this mistake. I don't know why I do so.
I do realize why Ann takes a mils dislike to having such an error
made in her regard.
So ...
why ?
How come ?
RL knows 'why' ...
Anyone else ???
Be very explicit. ... The answer is very explicit ....
exceedingly so.
>
> Self-interested - that means what? Interested in one's self?
> Self-focused? What? ...
>=2E.... I have far too much in my life to be so focused
> on myself, I'm a wife, a mother, a daughter, a sister - lots of other
> people for me to think/worry about than just myself.
Yes, you have been much more lucky and successful than me in life.
In recent years, I have become quite aware of my inability to simply
take life as it comes ... savour it ... gain self-fulfillment from it.
It's quite wonderful that you were able to succeed in growing up and
thence just 'living' life. ... I envy you.
I wish that I could achieve it, myself.
... I am still struggling to reach that level of contentment and
personal effectiveness BEFORE it is to late.
... before my children have fully grown and and/or life has passed me
by.
Having ADD doesn't make it easy ...
RL
> --
> Ann
> e-mail address is not checked
( P.S. .. I suspect that Guardenman can figure it out ... perhaps
others, too )
Many more people know Ann far better than I do.
I KNOW that I am correct.
Care to bet ?
(friendly ... virtual ... as in bragging rights ) 'bet'
P=2EP.S. ... the irony is that I would rather loose. I would prefer that
others might also perceive it.
| |
|
| "Ra??g L???i?" <raving.loonie@gmail.com> expounded:
(snip - of interesting ramblings that I don't have the attention to
respond to individually)
> Yes, you have been much more lucky and successful than me in life.
>
>In recent years, I have become quite aware of my inability to simply
>take life as it comes ... savour it ... gain self-fulfillment from it.
If I've been more successful in life I think it's because of one key
point - I *have* accepted life as it comes. It's too hard to fight
it. It's too hard to figure it out. I just keep looking forward and
go there. Move on. Forgive. Never forget, but don't hold on too
tight. Don't let the hurt hurt for long. Learn. Stumble. Pick
yourself up, and move on. Because life does, no matter what happens
to you. It moves on. You must, too. The Serenity Prayer has helped
me, (I am not a religious person, rather a philosophical one). Grant
me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to
change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference. As I
age, the wisdom comes. Hopefully. Slowly. Sorta :o)
--
Ann
e-mail address is not checked
| |
| Ra♥ïⁿg L♂♀♫iε 2005-10-29, 11:36 am |
| Ann wrote:
> "Ra?=C3=AF?g L???i?" <raving.loonie@gmail.com> expounded:
>
> (snip - of interesting ramblings that I don't have the attention to
> respond to individually)
>
>
> If I've been more successful in life I think it's because of one key
> point - I *have* accepted life as it comes. It's too hard to fight
> it. It's too hard to figure it out. I just keep looking forward and
> go there. Move on. Forgive. Never forget, but don't hold on too
> tight. Don't let the hurt hurt for long. Learn. Stumble. Pick
> yourself up, and move on. Because life does, no matter what happens
> to you. It moves on. You must, too. The Serenity Prayer has helped
> me, (I am not a religious person, rather a philosophical one). Grant
> me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to
> change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference. As I
> age, the wisdom comes. Hopefully. Slowly. Sorta :o)
> --
> Ann
> e-mail address is not checked
Amazing.
What you have written, here is sparse in DIRECTIONALITY. As in a lack
of:
=2E.. right versus left
=2E.. up versus down
=2E.. good versus bad
a=2Ek.a. WITHOUT needing to DECIDE
Veritably self-defines ACCEPTANCE and SELF-FULFILLMENT
( As in a tautological sense ... INHERENT, implict, automatic,
guaranteed )
Quite astonishing, really.
-----
Last night, I wrote out the feature that I saw in the 'Eureka' moment
and mailed it to myself. I shall post it, forthwith ...
> ... Never forget ...
A huge problem with exploring 'context' ...
with discovering 'implicits' ...
=2E.. is that it is EXCEEDINGLY 'forgettable'. Unsurprising. Such things
are intended to be forgotten.
By Axiom, the focus of thought is proven/assumed INDEPENDENT of such
concerns.
... so like, "purge", already?
----
Eureka #2
I know why Ann has ADD!
... yadda, yadda, you were born with it, etc. , etc.
I don't mean it THAT way ...
I intend it in the <<sense of>> your THINKING STYLE ( ... read "this"
as attentional style. Ergo ... what happens to grab the fancy of your
mind's eye )
Verrrry interesting.
Now I shall hurry off and send a second posting to myself ...
---
The issue of a person using 1st, 2nd or third person in
converstation/writing
... and if it is being directed outward at ...
... or referring to one's self ...
..=2E. and how it is percieved by others ...
And what is strongly, extensively and consitently held as implicitly
assumed in background context WHILST DOING SO ...
... is confusing, interesting and important stuff:
1) It is very confusing
2) It is usually misconstrued, even if it is/was made explicitly
apparent at one time ,,,
3) It is a feature which is a long term habit and persistent ... ...
specific to the individual.
4) 1st, 2nd, 3rd person ... directing at ... referring to self ...
etc is ABSOLUTELY EXPLICIT and stable
5) ' What is strongly, extensively and consitently held as implicitly
assumed in background context WHILST DOING SO ...' is simple,
coherent, very reliably persistent, very stable ( Again, specific to
the individual )
THESE ARE QUALTIES which are favorable for creating CONCRETE
DESCRIPTION !!!
RL
| |
| Ra♥ïⁿg L♂♀♫iε 2005-10-29, 11:36 am |
| Ra=E2=99=A5=C3=AF=E2=81=BFg L=E2=99=82=E2=99=80=E2=99=ABi=CE=B5 wrote:
> Ann wrote:
[snip]
( written early this morning )
Ra=E2=99=A5=C3=AF=E2=81=BFg L=E2=99=82=E2=99=80=E2=99=ABi=CE=B5 wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Ann wrote:
[ snip ]
*** NOTICE BELOW ***
[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> I am very WYSIWYG, I don't 'operate', I just 'am', ANNE
>
>
[ snip ]
>
> To listen to you ... To read what you write ...
> My first imptression is to infer that you only talk about what
> intersts and concerns you.
>
> Gee whizz! ... I rub people the same way, too.
>
> Part II .... ( How can you/me appear to be so full of ourselves but it
> really isn't so !!!!!! )
>
> I am written out.
>
> I am very much the opposite of how it is that I am perceived. ... I
> can recognize this inversion in yourself.
>
> Perhaps it may be a given that such <inversion> is to be found in
> everyone ...
*** NOTICE *** NOTICE *** NOTICE ***
> NEVERTHELESS, most people make exactly the opposite/inappropriate
> inference most of the time w.r.t. myself ( and perhaps everyone's self
> ???? )
>
> I am no different. I make the same mistake.
Also consider ...
~~~ and ~~~
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> +*************************+
> +*EUREKA, EUREKA, EUREKA *+
> +*************************+
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> *ding*
>
> *ding*
>
> *ding*
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Analysis:
I am being accused of the crime of seeking inference. Considerable
emotion is employed. This is defensive. It is re-acting ...
also
[vbcol=seagreen]
Yet it is clear at at deeper, more fundamental and intensely abstract
level that I also appreciate WYSIWYG. I recognize the value in
emphasizing such a thing. I am vry cognizant of some of the
implications in doing so.
Ann and I are different. At this junctucture we diverge in the manner
what we each indidually do.
Ann emphasiszes the WYSIWYG and the abscence of 'drawing inference'.
What is the advantage of NOT INFERRING ????
INFERENCE is my main interest ...
SHUNNING INFERENCE is Ann's main interest.
I am working at a level that is sufficiiently fundamental and dense,
that concerns about acceptance, rejection ... right, wrong ....
a=2Ek.a. 'psychological bull shit' does NOT pertain. I am describing a
reality that is sub-real. ... It cannot converge into a concept of
reality because AT THIS LEVEL there is an insufficient universe of
consideration to produce a viable condensation.
There is no judgemental distinction between shunning or embracing
inference. They just different types of emphasis.
For me they are different ... yet NOT SO DIFFERENT ...
In working though what Ann was expressing and trying to understand it I
became sensitized to Ann's message. ...
WYSIWYG is beautiful.
WYSIWYG is beautiful, specifically because it does NOT require
inference.
What's wrong with inference, I say ?
I know that nothing is wrong with it. ... just a different
style/emphasis.
So why should Ann care ?
=2E.. At a higher level it is clearly an emotional response.
At this lower level the distinction is just as evident YET
considerations of emotion don't pertain.
I am stalling . I must move to the answer fast. ....
Just before the EUREKA hit me, I WROTE ...
[vbcol=seagreen]
> NEVERTHELESS, most people make exactly the opposite/inappropriate
> inference most of the time w.r.t. myself ( and perhaps everyone's self
> ???? )
>
> I am no different. I make the same mistake.
Voila ! Before my very eyes was a problem and limitation caused by
using inference.
It is very susceptible to asymmetrical mistakes via inversion.
Acept WYSIWYG whilst shunning inferences and there are NO ISSUES
arising from axis selection or directional orientation. WYSIWYG is
insensitive and/or ambivalent to such features.
*bingo*
I realize that when I choose to emphasize and extoll the virtues
inference, I am also *seeming* to embrace asymetry.
I understand and appreciate WYSIWYG sufficiently to know that it's
strength is the abcence of asymetrical considerations.
Inference *seems* to be the antithesis of WYSIWYG
This understandably drives Ann ape shit gonzo because life's
experience naturally teaches that such a choice
neutralizes/discounts/contradicts Ann's specific strength.
=2E.. Duh. In retrospect it is obvious.
Spelling Ann as Anne is a *weak* example of introducing asymmetry. ...
A=2EK.A. A small red flag.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Postscript
1) The fundamental issue for a person is *MAKING EFFECTIVE USAGE* of
one's own very specific and individual skill. This ivariably involves
having it recognized, accepted and used by others.
=2E.. When this skill is belittled, ignored, discounted or misconstrued.
..=2E It drives the very core of emotion. It is the root of most
everything.
Example: .. I know what I do well. It is remarkably specific. I am
astonishingly effective at it. It costs me nothoing to use my ability.
It is the ONLY commodity that I have to offer the society <of which> I
am a member. At everything else I am plodding, mediocre, struggling
and inefficient AT BEST.
My ability .... it's worth, meaning and significance is EVERYTHING.
It's pretty much the ONLY thing.
Ann does the WYSIWYG thing. ... Good for her!
2) I work with inference and asymmetries. Curiously, I work with them
in a manner which permits them to be ambivalent for me. ... Which
inference I choose ... which direction I look at it doesn't make any
difference.
My way is not a contradiction or exclusion of Ann's way. ... I know it
=2E.. I *inherently* understand it ... I am confident and secure in
that knowing.
I can easily appreciate that others may not be aware of what I know.
Very roughly AMBIVALENCE =3D SYMMETRY =3D ABSTRACTION =3D EQUIVALENCE =3D
INFERENCE ( at least specifically for myself, here in this one )
3)
Ann write ...
[vbcol=seagreen]
TRANSLATION: Strong ABSRACT ability. ... one shell is as good as
another. They all meet and align at the surface of the envelope.
RL
| |
| Ra♥ïⁿg L♂♀♫iε 2005-10-30, 6:20 pm |
| Ra=E2=99=A5=C3=AF=E2=81=BFg L=E2=99=82=E2=99=80=E2=99=ABi=CE=B5 wrote:
> Ann wrote:
[snip]
----
I wrote this a day or two ago and mailed it to myself.
** NOW ** posting it.
----
> Amazing.
>
> What you have written, here is sparse in DIRECTIONALITY. As in a lack
> of:
>
> ... right versus left
> ... up versus down
> ... good versus bad
>
> a.k.a. WITHOUT needing to DECIDE
>
> Veritably self-defines ACCEPTANCE and SELF-FULFILLMENT
> ( As in a tautological sense ... INHERENT, implict, automatic,
> guaranteed )
>
> Quite astonishing, really.
>
> -----
>
> Last night, I wrote out the feature that I saw in the 'Eureka' moment
> and mailed it to myself. I shall post it, forthwith ...
>
>
> A huge problem with exploring 'context' ...
> with discovering 'implicits' ...
>
> ... is that it is EXCEEDINGLY 'forgettable'. Unsurprising. Such things
> are intended to be forgotten.
>
> By Axiom, the focus of thought is proven/assumed INDEPENDENT of such
> concerns.
>
> ... so like, "purge", already?
>
> ----
>
> Eureka #2
>
> I know why Ann has ADD!
~~~~~~> .... a.k.a. WITHOUT needing to DECIDE
Old King Cole was a very old soul and a merry old soul was he!
He call for his wife in the middle of the night and he called for his
tailors three.
"Fiddle, diddle, diddle, dee, diddle dee" said the fiddlers
"Throw the balls in the air, in the air" said the jugglers
"Stick it in and out, in and out" said the tailors
=2E.. "What merry me are we"
... "There are none so fair as can compare with"
....
"Association" has pulled me back to this bawdy song.
What always delights me about it is it's mechanics.
"Fiddle, diddle, diddle, dee, diddle dee"
"Throw the balls in the air, in the air"
"Stick it in and out, in and out"
... are independent, isolated considerations.
... Individual thoughts.
... Seperate snap-shots of reality
Each verse introduces a new tradesman to Old King Cole's court.
The innuendo is created by connecting the independent focal concerns in
close proximity
SO INCREDIBLY EASY TO FORGET THINGS WHICH ARE SO CLOSE AND OBVIOUS ...
> Eureka #2
>
I know why Ann has ADD!
~~~~~~> .... a.k.a. WITHOUT needing to DECIDE
Ann can throw one heck of a lot of balls in the air. !!!!
a super juggler ...
This is a benefit of ...
' WITHOUT needing to DECIDE '
... No worry about entanglements or contradictions.
Individual thoughts/experiences accreate in a completely linear manner.
( A 'sort of' formal mathematical definition of INDEPENDENCE )
RL
>
> ... yadda, yadda, you were born with it, etc. , etc.
>
> I don't mean it THAT way ...
>
> I intend it in the <<sense of>> your THINKING STYLE ( ... read "this"
> as attentional style. Ergo ... what happens to grab the fancy of your
> mind's eye )
>
> Verrrry interesting.
>
> Now I shall hurry off and send a second posting to myself ...
|
| |
|
|