This item text has been erased.

68 responses total.

actually, the best example of this of which i can think is in _war and 
peace_. one of the scurrilous characters, dolokhov, who is a drinker, 
card player (cheats), bully, and general provocateur, spends a good part
of the novel interfering maliciously in the lives of others for his own
amusement. but underneath, he turns out to be something more (not something
different). i don't want to spoil it for anybody who might be picking up
the book soon (a good summer read), but if you do--keep an eye on dolokhov!

He can't possibly be more of an asshole than Prince Andrew, IMNSHO.
  
I wouldn't call it a 'discovery', more of a confirmation, but I've recently
affirmed my long-standing belief that the world is an ugly, nasty, unpleasant
and very dangerous place.  I know a number of people who are optimistic
and 'innocent' (or "naive" if I'm feeling especially cynical).  I admire
their perseverance and faith, but I'm always torn between trying to protect
them from getting hurt by disabusing them of their naivete, and trying to
keep them from becoming safe but bitter and cynical.  It's terrible to
watch somebody get hurt because they were nice, but I don't like to watch
people turn hard-edged, either.

I can stand a certain amount of hurt in the maintenance of what I hope will
be personal niceness, but only a certain amount.  I fight bitterness like
hell, and use cynicism only for occasional humor value.  I encourage others
to fight bitterness - it seems capable of making people stop trying, and
then they can't maximize/actualize their own potential as humans.  None
of this is easy, but so what - easy is boring and unchallenging and doesn't
let one feel as good when all is done.  I go for the hard stuff - it's 
definitely more fun.  I let the naive enjoy it while they can, but take care
that they not be permanently damaged in doing so - at least I try to educate
them so they don't get seriously hurt.  .......  <Uncle Unh-unh yawns> ...
(It's too late for this stuff - 2AM.  More later ...Zzzzzzzzz)

I attempt to balance Optemism and exhuberance with caution.

I used to have my optimism continually torn away from me like so many
dead leaves torn from a tree by a November wind.  Then I stopped
trying to ask women on dates, and it stopped.  (Partial HHOK)
Now that I've stopped thinking of the Universe as an inherently
evil place to be, fewer "evil" things happen to me, and the ones
that do, I can deal with much better.

When I was younger ( not as young as I'd have liked, I'm afraid ) I was
studying at the library. For some reason, I suddenly no longer saw shelves of
books, but rather I "saw" shelves of peoples lives, experiences, the best of
themselves preserved for me to learn from.  This was felt as a profound
experience for me, and significantly changed the way I used libraries.

        This wasn't recent for me, either, but... not all that long ago,
really.  It's sort of an ongoing thing.
        When I was a kid, I thought of myself as a hot shot superbrain.  I
was sure I was smarter than everyone else, and that made me better than
them, too.
        Well, I'm neither.  Even college didn't teach me that; the National
Guard did, and it is why I will remain grateful to the Army for the rest
of my life.  In the National Guard I met a *lot* of different kinds of
people, people (and types of people) I never would have met otherwise.  I
found out you don't have to go to college to have lots of ability, and I
found out you don't even have to be an intellectual to be a great (and
worthwhile, and highly capable) person.
        I learned what I know about humility.  It may not be apparent to
everyone, but if there's anyone who knew me in high school, I'm a
different person now.  I don't classify people as "smart like me" and
"everyone else" any more.  I don't write *anyone* off.  I don't think of
myself as a higher class of human any more.  I'm just another guy.  I was
all along, of course, but I didn't admit it.  Now I'm very happy with it.
I'm happy with myself.  And I'm much happier with other people.

(nice response, john, though by that i don't mean to say you're alone in
providing one...)

what has always confused me is that the potential truly to hurt us resides
naturally with those closest to us--and more so, that we've failed to
learn as a people not to avail ourselves of that galling weapon.

Military, the valuable leveler, true.

The media gave Dice a bad start with his movie, but how many who are commenting
badly about him have seen it?

   I'm an optomist about life (my own, anyway), but somewhat
cynical (cautious?) about people.  People who are close to
you have a lot more ability to hurt you, because you generally
respect and value their opinions and take them to heart.  
   Over the years, I've come to look at how people behave and
what they do, rather than what they say.  Not because people
are inherently hypocritical, but because many people don't
fully understand themselves.  (I've been told that one gains this
understanding with age, but can't judge the validity of that
hypothesis yet).  There are few thoroughly 'bad' people; I
think almost everyone feels themselves to be mostly 'good'.
We just don't all agree on what 'good' and 'bad' are (and
most people have less 'desirable' impulses, whether they give
those impulses expression or not).

    The world, I think, is basically benign.  Our society in
particular, I'm not sure about.  There is a lot of beauty, joy,
and pleasure in both.  You just have to have enough knowledge
and caution to avoid the dangerous and the unpleasant.  And expect
to occaisionally get hurt, and heal.  Better to take risks, and
live, than to spend all your energy guarding yourself from any
possible hurt.

  Oops: optimist.

    To answer the original question, I've had few 'revelations'
that radically change the way I view a situation or the world.
Perhaps that's because I tend to hold several contradictory
views on things, when I don't see a clear answer. (For
example, my earlier statements that one has to take risks to
be truly alive, and that you can avoid the hurts with some
caution and knowledge.)

# 13: I agree pretty much with that.

I agree that you have to take risks to stay alive and in touch,
but a risk is a risk, and hence, while knowledge and maturity can
reduce the probability of hurt, it cannot eliminate the possibility.

I also agree with the statement in #11 that behavior tells you more
than words.  That one's been confirmed for me time and again.

There are some well-known aphorisms that pretty well encapsulate
these viewpoints:

    o Nothing ventured, nothing gained.
    o Experience is the best teacher.
    o Actions speak louder than words.

# 11: I also agree with 11.
# 15: I have to put a warning regarding the third point of remmers.
      The problem with evaluating actions lies with ourselves, it is a
      judgement, and we can be awfully wrong if the context contains
      elements which we are not familiar with or never been exposed to.  I
      did stumble over that significantly, and see others doing the same all
      the time.  People seem to notice that very seldom.  Actions of todays
      more or less complex life don't always disclose the motivation, as it
      would have been the case a few decades back.  And maybe even not so
      back then.

My point was not so much that motivation can be inferred from actions,
but rather that what you observe a person *doing* is a much better
indicator of what you can expect from that person in the future than
what you hear them *saying*.  When it comes to people, consistency of
behavior patterns is the rule, change -- although it can certainly happen
-- the exception.

In particular, when I observe that someone's words contradict what I
see them doing, I consider that they are *less* likely to change their
behavior than otherwise, because it indicates to me that they are not
working on change.  More that they are deceiving themselves than that
they are willfully deceiving others.

Maybe this isn't the same thing as Tom's original point, but it's
something I've observed about people.

   On risk, at least, my view is a bit different.  Taking risks
adds brightness and joy to life.  It is part of discovering the
world and stretching the boundaries of what you can do (or
think you can do).  Life without risk taking can be a dreary grind,
a long wait for death. 

  One can definitely learn from others, and keep from taking
risks unknowingly or foolishly.  Still, taking a risk is a
step into the unknown, and you have to expect that things
will not always work out well and be ... er, philosophical,
about them.  (Experience is the best teacher is not at all
what I meant.)

  I agree with the last of the aphorisms.  Sometimes, though,
words express what a person wishes they were like but doesn't
have the self-discipline (or whatever) to actually become.  No
malign intent or ignorance, just wishful thinking.  And there
are always 'speech acts', which are both. :)

Why not just don't worry, be happy. You're too serious.

okay, so what makes folks the happiest? i, for example, cannot get enough
of having quiet, secluded time to think, read, or just attempt to lower
my blood pressure by doing nothing. i crave time for nothing. what do others
consider happy activities?

        Happiness is an imaginable (but not achievable) state of mind, the
contemplation of which involves thinking of something, anything, else that
you might be doing.  The grass really is always greener on the other side
of the fence.

This response has been erased.

oops.

        (I offered what wisdom I could on the subject of happiness.  Surely
you don't believe in generic, all-purpose wisdom!)

what good _is_ wisdom if it doesn't lead to happiness, anyway?

   It leads to justice, mercy, and other not
always happy things.

well, why do we want justice or mercy, if not to ensure happiness?

To mitigate the inevitable misery?

This response has been erased.

unfortunately too true. it's another of the long lists of sad facts that
eventually, people we treat well come to expect to be treated well and
stop appreciating such treatment as special. it's unfortunate, but when
one continually extends oneself for another, in virtually every case, the
result (finally) is to be taken for given. 

i guess the few cases where this isn't so is what we call genuine love.

This response has been erased.

   In addition to happiness, we also want life and
liberty.  Sometimes those last two get in the way
of happiness (the world isn't perfect).

   I think I disagree about good treatment getting taken
for granted.   In fact, as time wears on, most people
start to appreciate more and more the people who treat
them well.  There may be a period where they are taken
for granted (like parents), but after more time, they are
noticed and deeply appreciated.

Love is a lot like oxygen, isn't it?
( No, it's nothing like oxygen. )

actually (re #32--i'm not sure whether or not love is like oxygen), i think
parents are a wonderful truism, an excellent example of people we take for
granted until we lose them. the problem with being a child is that there is
no experience to tell one that one is not magically entitled to all the 
things parents erect in a good home and give through good parentage. at best,
i don't think one learns (normally, anyway) to appreciate one's parents until
sometime after high school, in early adulthood, when what we've been given,
what we can have, and what we must earn all become clearer. 

  I'm more inclined to think that love acts in a manner opposite that
of oxygen..  It's love's presence, not its absence, that seems to make
people act brain-damaged..

heh.

Yes, the more I discuss love with one of my friends, the more she makes
it sound like a cross between a frontal lobotomy and being taken over
by the Body Snatchers.  (As in, "Invasion of...")

Now and then, something you come by rather gradually or accidently
doesn't generate its tru merit until it disappears suddenly. I've
unfortunately had a couple "revelations" along that line. It's 
been quite difficult, I've discovered, to let go of the different
situation - actually, to let go of the previous situation and do
something non-destructive with the new situation. 

Mike, you sound like an old curmudgeon.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss