You know what I wonder?  What do you say when you tell someone
about your problems, and the best thing they can say is, "Life is tough."
What would you say?  I can't exactly disagree with them.

Bryan

52 responses total.

I might ask them if there si any advice or input they can give me.  Yes life
is tough.  I might ask if they have any ideas on how to handle these problems.

One of my friends said men listen to problems to fix them, women listen to
get them said.  I don't know if this is true, but it brings up an
interesting point:  Sometimes, just getting sympathy from someone helps. 
I may be that they *don't* have any advice.  It has happened to me before.
You can ask for advice, or just accept the sympathy.  Either way, it'll
probably help.

And then again sympathy isn't always what is desired- sometimes people just
need to vent, and it can be useful just to have a person to vent to.  I know
that sometimes when I get angry I don't really want answers, I just want to
complain for awhile.  I'll eventually feel a bit better, and then I can
work towards solving the problem... (although throwing a roomate out the
window just isn't an option- no matter how much I wish it were!!!!)

poor anne!!!  well, i'd prefer you don't do that to me next year..:)

and i'm not realy sure if that's true...it almost seems the opposite.  
women seem better at solving the problems then the men do.

Meg- don't worry, you aren't the rrommate I have in mind....

<chuckle> I suppose than anne, that it's not xactly imperative that I remember
this persons's name, is it? <er then> And when it comes to solving problems,
there's not al ot you can do if the person just complains about their situation
an finds all of the excuses in the world why not to pick to easiest solutions,
or find excuses in order not to have to solve them in the first place, and just
keeps saying "woe is me", and refuses to get their priorities straight. If you
don't tell them up front to get some perspective, all you ging to succeed in
doing is make life miserable for yourself, and you'll not like having that
person around. Personally I can't stand having someone come up to me with a
problem, and gives excuses, petty or otherwise about why they can't do that,
when if they had their priorities in order, these solutions are easily
implemented.

However, sometimes, emotions get in the way of solutions, and need to be
vented.  I've done it before.

but alot of times, emotions  need to be part of the solution...we are human.

True.

<Bryan is laughing>  Wow, this place is cool.  Hmmm, I dunno that
women solve problems better than men, or vice versa.  I think that
generalizations could be made about mena being better able to solve
something better than women, or vice versa, but that's about it.  Gosh,
humans are so darn confusing.  You never know what someone else thinks,
and it drives you crazy.  Don't you wish we were empathic?

what makes you think that we aren't in some ways?

now, mind reading would be areally great thing to have...:)

Bryan- some people areound here ARE empathic... to some degree at leasst, 
kinda scary isn't it?

I think that we are empathic, to some degree, with people we cared about.  
Now if only we could be telepathic, this would be a perfect world.  Anyways
I have a lot to say on subject of the giving and taking of advice, because
it's something I do a lot.  Well, that's not true.  I rarely give advice.  
But I often listen to people complain about their problems.  I like doing it,
and it's something I'm good at.  I have found, though, that in cases when 
people aren't just trying to blow off steam, or get some moral support and 
a couple of free hugs (:  that they generally know what they should do, and
if you the adviser ask them questions in the right way about what is really
important to them, then they will usually figure out what to do for themselves.
If you actually have to tell them what to do, then either they aren't being
honest with themselves, which is usually a bigger and more immediate problem
than the one that they were complaining about; or you haven't done it right.
Now, this system of advice giving is not guaranteed, it's only a vague 
explanation of what goes through my mind when I give advice, and other people
may have other ways of giving advice that are at least as valid as mine.  And
mine may not work for all people.  But it works for me.  
        One very important thing to consider when asking for advice or giving
advice is how much you love the other person involved.  I find it very hard
to give good advice if I don't love the other person, and I wouldn't even 
consider going for advice on something important to someone I didn't love.

That's all for now.  

love,
flem

advice......................free
hugs........................free
bad puns....................free
spellchecking...............free

and he gives all of the above, whether or not you want any of them...:)

I would like to know why if we were telepathic things would be so much
easier...  

Well, it has the potential to be either very good, or very bad.  You see,
we could know what was in their minds.  That covers moth sides.

But if we were all telepathic people would know how to shield- so that they
might be able to know other's thought, but no one would know there's. 
And would you REALLY want someone poking into your head without your 
knowledge, and / or permission?

What says that we would be able to shield?  Telepathy is possible
according to physics, shielding is not.  You could disguise your thoughts,
but not shield them.  I don't know if I would like it.  It sure would make
lying impossible, and therefore improve comunication.  Criminals could be
positively identified, and many benifits could be found.  The only
disadvantage would be lack of privacy.  Is this enough of a problem to
outweigh the advantages?  I don't think so.  Imagine beign able to know if
your SO really loved you?

imagine important info getting into the wrong hands...bye-bye state secrets!

Shielding is not very difficult, once you learn how to do it. Some people
are naturally very good at it, while others consciously put shields on.
I think lack of privacy is the strongest deterent, if I wanted people to
always know what I was thinking I would say exactly what I thought at all
times.  Occassioanlly people think things that would be inappropriate to
say given the circumstances.  And criminals might not always be properly
identified if they couldn't remember what they were doing because of a drug-
and it is very easy to change the memory of a person, or they might chose
to remember an event in a way so that when you look into their mind you
would see how they chose to remember it, and not necessarily the "truth"
The mind is a tricky thing, and I still say I wouldn't want just anyone poking
around.  Who knows where they would stop, if they could read, what would
stop them from altering?  They aren't that different.

Why is shielding impossible according to physics, Dang?  You lost me.
It assumes an active facet to telepathy, that's all.  Telepathy is based
on the concept of reading soneone else's electromagentic field... if 
you're the generator, can't you direct your electromagnetic field to prevent
others from intercepting it?

As far as I know, and I admit I don't know it all, there  is no such thing
as an electromagnetic shield.  We could put a grounded metal shield around
our heads, but nothing we could do with our minds would block the signal. 
As the generator, we could alter the signal, but not block it.  Now there
are tow theories of telepathy, as far as physics is concerned.  The first
is that there is a small transmitter puried in the brain somewhere, and we
can use it to send/reiceve thoughts.  In that case, assuming concious
control, you could shut it off, and noone could read you mind.  The second
one is that, and this part is true,  the mind creates an electromagnetic
field around it, and, this is the debated part, other minds can pick up
and translate theis field.  Thus, it could not be shielded mentlaly, and
could not be controled.  Blast this stupid talk messate, I can't see what
I'm typing.  <sigh>  Oh well.  Anyway, those are the theories of telepathy
as far as physics is concerned.  There may be others, but I don't know
about them.  Anne, I was operating under the second one, which I think is
more likely, and according to it, you could not shield.  At least, not
without a metal hat.  :)

This is much too deep for me.
..

I was assuming the second as well... I guess I was assuming that you could
muffle the signal by generating the anti-signal.  I don't know if that would
work though.  (You know, sin(x) + sin(x+180) = 0, for all x.)
I'm speaking oversimplistically, of course.

You all talk is if this were feasible.

If you think about it, it could be. If not naturally,
many years down the road (fewer than you think) it could
be a technological innovation.

Well, if it's possible to rebut yourself, steves, anythings possible.

Well, the field exists, and we can measure it, we just can't understand
it.  Brighn, I don't think a counter field could be generated by the same
generator.  Another, exterior, one might, but it's too complicated a
field, and changing too rapidly.  It would take one *hell* of a computer.
(Like, better then the human one :)

Maybe.  The only generator that *could* reliably generate a counterfield
would be the one that generated the first one.  Hmmm... we parallel
process, don't we?

And all we would really have to do is start thinking about something
else and the person 'reading' our mind would only get the new ideas...
another way to confuse them. 
I still maintain that shielding could be, and is, done.

I don't think that you could generate the counterfield, because you would
have to generate exactly the cancelling wavelength, in every direction.  I 
suppose it might be possible to automatically detect and counter the 
specific wavelength of the incoming signal, but that would assume a *lot*
more sophisticated understanding of telepathy, that could probably come only
with years and years of experience.  Not necessarily, but...

Anyways.  What I meant when I said that telepathy would solve all of the 
world's problems (or something to that effect) assumes a group mind sort 
of telepathy, where everyone was telepathic, and didn't shield.  It would
result in every human being knowing the sum total of human knowledge from 
before birth, and, what's more important, we would finally all *understand*
each other.  I don't think we could become a true group mind, losing our 
identities, at least not for a thousand years or so.  You have to understand,
this is all purely speculation.  BTW, this idea is straight from Spider
Robinson's StarDance and sequels, if you want a better description (and 
a damn fine literary treat).

So we have this great group mind, but what about individual personalities?
There are secrets about ourselves that we all hold, they may not be earth
shattering or anything, but they are still our secrets.  It we have this
group mind- we wouldn't have that.  We would cease to be individuals
and become the Borg!

No, we wouldn't cease to be individuals simply because we've lost our secrets.
Haven't you ever wanted to have someone who you could completely share all
of your secrets with, who would forgive you and love you and respect you 
all the more for it?  That's what I believe would happen, on a global 
scale, simply because we all do have secrets, and if we all were to let them
out all at once, we probably would find that no one's secrets were all 
that much worse than anyone elses.  

  Flem, the problem is that we CANT overcome our individualism.  You sound
like a modern day marxist.  The idea is fine, the practicality is that it
doesnt work.  People want their OWN dreams, and their OWN fears and their
OWN realities.  
  I think this one mind concept is interesting though, reminds one of
certain eastern religions.  Isnt that what transcendental group 
meditation is supposed to achieve?

Strangely enough, I find myself agreeing with Kerouac.  I for one don't
want everyone to know what was going on in my mind.  I share most of
that stuff with a elect few.  People like having secrets, they like
having things that seperate them from everyone else.... >

  Strangely enough? Anne finds it "strangely enough" that she agrees
with me on something?!  Sheesh, I didnt realize I was THAT radical! hehe
I thought we agreed on lots of things, except maybe for country music and
dominoes pizza

Well... I do believe there are a few other things we disagree on....
probably more then a few... but that's okay, things would be boring
if we agreed on everything. :)

I would consider myself a Marxist, if it had any chance of working.  No, 
let me rephrase that.  I would call myself a Communist, or maybe a Socialist.
I forget the difference.  But Marx was a pretty loony guy.  

I never said that it would/could work...just that it would be better if it did.

 
        Anne's right ... shielding isn't all that difficult for most people
... and most people do it more than they're aware, in a metaphysical sense,
and in a personal one, too.  

        Hell, I do it all the time.  If people could see through my eyes,
they'd know I was crazy.

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