 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Family Forum / Marriage / Marriage / November 2009I'm doing OK
To all the wonderful people who took the time to help me here, i'm doing ok now. I'm smarter than I gave myself credit for. I'm optimistic about my resourcefullness and fortitude. love, Erin > To all the wonderful people who took the time > to help me here, i'm doing ok now. I'm smarter than [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Erin This sounds great, Erin. What happened? Just time? On Oct 23, 10:07 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> wrote: > > To all the wonderful people who took the time > > to help me here, i'm doing ok now. I'm smarter than [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > This sounds great, Erin. What happened? Just time? Maybe time, and introspection providing a more objective perspective. You're here all the time - wow! Bet you're a counsellor. Erin > On Oct 23, 10:07 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Erin Not exactly, but sometimes it feels like I'm a bit of both: a counselee and a counselor. :-) > To all the wonderful people who took the time > to help me here, i'm doing ok now. I'm smarter than [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Erin I'm glad you're doing better, Erin. I've always thought you to be smart, and it I'm glad to hear you're tuning into whatever internal resources you have. Tain't easy. Fill > > To all the wonderful people who took the time > > to help me here, i'm doing ok now. I'm smarter than [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Fill I think it's the old "is/ought" question is philosophy: you have to accept the world as it is, even when it ought not to be that way in some cases. Some things are not in your control-- that's what i've looked into. Erin >>> To all the wonderful people who took the time >>> to help me here, i'm doing ok now. I'm smarter than [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > accept the world as it is, even when it ought not to be that way in > some cases. I don't know how to do that, short of a lobotomy, or just not caring. (choose (a) or (b) of the above). Both alternatives suck. Well, maybe you have the answer, Erin, cause I sure haven't found it. > Some things are not in your control-- that's what i've looked into. And that also is so hard to accept (at least for me) too. Really hard. I agree, though, it is great if you can. I guess it just takes more work. On Oct 25, 1:27 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> wrote: > >>> To all the wonderful people who took the time > >>> to help me here, i'm doing ok now. I'm smarter than [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > And that also is so hard to accept (at least for me) too. Really hard. I > agree, though, it is great if you can. I guess it just takes more work. I decided a long time ago most things were not in my control. Seems like a good effort to control those things that are, most of the time. Tho sometimes I shy away from things where I might be more proactive. Well, personality... Think it does take alot of work, for many ppl, tho others seem to go thru it effortlessly, I'm not sure they always do (and I'm equally unsure that I would admire all who *do*) Fill > On Oct 25, 1:27 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > > Well, personality... Personality? :-) > Think it does take alot of work, for many ppl, tho others seem to go > thru it effortlessly, Ain't it the truth!! > I'm not sure they always do.. Sometimes it sure seems that way! > (and I'm equally unsure that I would admire all who *do*) Ummm, yeah, I think I'd have to agree with you on that point. I've decided that some things do not seem to be in my control, either. Like being able to faithfully follow the Serenity Prayer. :-) Well, you know what they say about the true path to salvation, and the "Razor's Edge". On Oct 25, 7:17 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> wrote: > > On Oct 25, 1:27 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > > Sometimes it sure seems that way! Appearances can be deceiving... > > (and I'm equally unsure that I would admire all who *do*) yeah, like I said, appearances can be deceiving. But I do admire those with a solid marital core. Didn't have that; thus, de-married. > Ummm, yeah, I think I'd have to agree with you on that point. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Well, you know what they say about the true path to salvation, and the > "Razor's Edge". When I clibmed (huffed and puffed my way up) Khatadin, I didn't take the Knife's Edge (razor ege) trail. Salvation for me,on that trail, would have been death, I don't even like rides at fairs, except for good bumper cars. Also it was a dry summer so there was no water to drink from Thoreau's pond. Ah, well. I do not have the feet of a mountain goat.... Fill > On Oct 25, 7:17 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 75 lines] > > Fill One strange this that has happened - the women who were so enthusiastically supportive during the possible break-up are now almost my enemies, that there is a chance of fixing the marriage-- strange? Mmmousemaid > On Oct 25, 1:27 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > Fill I am unclear what you are saying here. You would not admire someone who could easily deal with the fact that some things are beyond one's control? Is it a particularly non-admirable trait to be able to do that? > > On Oct 25, 1:27 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > could easily deal with the fact that some things are beyond one's control? > Is it a particularly non-admirable trait to be able to do that? No, not all-- I definitely agree- if that comment was directed to me? It's psychologically healthy to distinguish what can and cannot be accomplished within your resources. Denial and hope for somethning that can't be done is not realistic. Alas, we are human. Mmmousemaid >>> On Oct 25, 1:27 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> >>> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > > No, not all-- I definitely agree- if that comment was directed to me? I was responding to Fil's and I'm equally unsure that I would admire all who *do* > It's psychologically healthy to distinguish what can and cannot be > accomplished within your resources. Denial and hope for somethning > that can't be done is not realistic. Alas, we are human. > > Mmmousemaid > > On Oct 25, 1:27 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > > - Show quoted text - The operative word here is "all"--all I'm saying is that I do not necessarily admire *all* people who seem to effortlessly go thru things, for I've known too many who, after having done unconsciounable (from my perspective, of course) things, effortlessly move on without reflecting upon the havoc they have called or working toward improving themselves. They just repeat the damage in a new situation... That's all I meant. Those who can really "live in the Now" I would admire--immensely. >>> Think it does take alot of work, for many ppl, tho others seem to go >>> thru it effortlessly, I'm not sure they always do (and I'm equally [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > That's all I meant. Those who can really "live in the Now" I would > admire--immensely. Ah! Thanks for the clarification! On Oct 25, 2:27 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> wrote: > >>> To all the wonderful people who took the time > >>> to help me here, i'm doing ok now. I'm smarter than [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > And that also is so hard to accept (at least for me) too. Really hard. I > agree, though, it is great if you can. I guess it just takes more work. It's against my temperament too. And I will go to the limit to achieve or correct something in my life. But there comes a point in everything, when you have to accept that there is no hope in flogging a dead horse. I suppose that is the point when atheists start to have twinges of conscience, and Camus tells us to gaze at the stars. Mmmousemaid > I think it's the old "is/ought" question is philosophy: you have to > accept the world as it is, even when it ought not to be that way in > some cases. On the one hand - Reasonable men conform to the environment therefore all progress is made by unreasonable men. > Some things are not in your control-- that's what i've looked into. On the other hand - The Serenity Prayer has already been mentioned. God grant me the strength to change the things I can, the serenity to accept the things I can not, and the wisdom to tell the difference. Maybe this ends up meaning that wisdom equals sanity. Keep trying on stuff until you feel further trying is insane. But that also ends up meaning wisdom is frustration. Sigh. > > I think it's the old "is/ought" question is philosophy: you have to > > accept the world as it is, even when it ought not to be that way in [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > stuff until you feel further trying is insane. But that also ends up > meaning wisdom is frustration. Sigh. sigh (echo) > > I think it's the old "is/ought" question is philosophy: you have to > > accept the world as it is, even when it ought not to be that way in [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > stuff until you feel further trying is insane. But that also ends up > meaning wisdom is frustration. Sigh. Part of the problem is that you never know how far you should go before losing it-- I guess that's wisdom, but it is also hindsight, isn't it? I've noticed that when push comes to shove, people are creatures of habit and if you wish to know predict the most probable course of action Everyman will take, look at similar decisions he or she has taken in their past. Erin > > I think it's the old "is/ought" question is philosophy: you have to > > accept the world as it is, even when it ought not to be that way in > > some cases. > > On the one hand - Reasonable men conform to the environment therefore > all progress is made by unreasonable men. Not sure I agree. Accepting reality doesn't mean you don't change things. I'd say the opposite. If you can see reality clearly, you know what to change. If you are seeing things skewed, chances are you are off spinning your wheels on something irrelevant. Or anyway, that's what I was doing when I was deluding myself the worst. :-) > > > I think it's the old "is/ought" question is philosophy: you have to > > > accept the world as it is, even when it ought not to be that way in [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > things. I'd say the opposite. If you can see reality clearly, you know > what to change. Yes, I'm glad someone said that! >> On the one hand - Reasonable men conform to the environment therefore >> all progress is made by unreasonable men. > > Not sure I agree. Accepting reality doesn't mean you don't change > things. Accepting reality has zero to do with deciding to conform to reality or not. > I'd say the opposite. If you can see reality clearly, you know > what to change. If you are seeing things skewed, chances are you are > off spinning your wheels on something irrelevant. Or anyway, that's > what I was doing when I was deluding myself the worst. :-) Failing to see what reality actually is would tend to render your efforts ineffective. Einstein definted insanity as doing the same thing again and again and expecting different outcomes, which is a differnt view of the same notion. If what you're doing is not working, try something else. To me the problem with the cliche isn't the concept that progress and conformity are opposites. They are when phrased that way. To me the problem is using "reasonable" in that way. It's not unreasonable to work to change your environment. It uses reasonable to mean conformant, mild, socially maleable, friendly, but really it uses reasonable to mean wimpy. It's a polarizing cliche. >>> I think it's the old "is/ought" question is philosophy: you have to >>> accept the world as it is, even when it ought not to be that way in [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > off spinning your wheels on something irrelevant. Or anyway, that's > what I was doing when I was deluding myself the worst. :-) And also, if you can see reality clearly, you may know what needs changing, and may equally well know it ain't gonna happen in our lifetimes, if ever. At least in a fair number of instances, and albeit, sadly so. On Oct 27, 9:21 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> wrote: > >>> I think it's the old "is/ought" question is philosophy: you have to > >>> accept the world as it is, even when it ought not to be that way in [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > and may equally well know it ain't gonna happen in our lifetimes, if ever. > At least in a fair number of instances, and albeit, sadly so. - if you can see reality clearly - if reality can be disclosed - if reality can be perceived outside denials and rationalizations - if reality can be known through counselling - if reality is a long search that finally comes to revelation - if reality about human relations is as clear as reality about facts - if reality is constant - if reality is meaningful in human affairs - if there is a reality; I think it's pretty tough. But I have worked on it and it's da*n interesting. Erin > On Oct 27, 9:21 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >> ever. >> At least in a fair number of instances, and albeit, sadly so. I was talking about the reality of this world, and what's happened to it over the past half century. Well, ok, maybe even over all time, for that matter. (reference: the "state of humanity", or rather, the lack thereof, n'est pas?) > - if you can see reality clearly You mean seeing much of the reality of *this* world? Ain't too hard to see, at least for me. I watch the world news to get some measure of it, too. It's downright depressing. > - if reality can be disclosed Oh, it is. And painfully so. Well, at least our perception of it. In the end, isn't everything we "see" our perception of it? > - if reality can be perceived outside denials and rationalizations > - if reality can be known through counselling Oh, we're talking about internally, and not globally, here? Ooops! > - if reality is a long search that finally comes to revelation > - if reality about human relations is as clear as reality about facts I can tell you about of the reality of some human relations in this world. But then again, I know you can, too, so I think we're on the same wavelength, at least some of the time. > - if reality is constant I'm not sure if it is or isn't. Hmmm. Is anything? > - if reality is meaningful in human affairs Now that one opens up a whole new discussion.... > - if there is a reality; I don't know. Maybe it's all just a dream? > I think it's pretty tough. But I have worked on it and it's da*n > interesting. > > Erin Indeed. On Oct 28, 8:08 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> wrote: > > On Oct 27, 9:21 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 65 lines] > > Indeed. I mean that REALITY is a BIG word. Our lives are lived from moment to moment and focusing on situations is exclusive of so many factors that may be incidental or causal to any situation. You might say that human affairs when studied are like an "open system". In science controls make it much more certain to see reality. There is the Heisenberg uncertainty principle in physics, but you know maybe it applies to our perception of social interactions as well. Erin >> On Oct 27, 9:21 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> >> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > > I don't know. Maybe it's all just a dream? I had a bizzaro dream last night. I was pregnant with what we thought was going to be a girl, then doc said it was going to be a boy. We had to think of a name fast and decided on Bram William M. Then we got a call that our escrow closed on a house (which turned out to be one of my cousins' house) so then we were moving in. And I realized my DH had lost his job and couldn't figure out how we were going to make payments. Then we (the five of us with pregnant me) were boarding a Cessna 152 (not enough seats) that my husband was flying. Took off and soon heavy rain was pelting the plane. Looked out the window and a huge thunder cell was descending on us, more like a solid object instead of cloudness, and I feared this solid cloud was going to hit the plane and we were going to die. DH got the plane barely around the cloud and we made it over the houses but were still going down. Then ended up plopped onto a hillock behind the homes. My alarm went off and the dream ended. WTF? I just want to sleep!!! Vickie >> I think it's pretty tough. But I have worked on it and it's da*n >> interesting. >> >> Erin > > Indeed. > >> On Oct 27, 9:21 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> > >> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 88 lines] > > > Indeed. Really, WTF? Sleep is essential. I went to a conference for a few days (and it was an inspiring conference!) and slept great---and the gods know, there's been lots of them weird dreams from then til now. Then I spent a couple nights sleeping on my son's couch (he lives where the conference was, so I stayed the weekend with him)--and all dreams were good. But often they're not. So--what is your dream really about? The plane and flying and then the clouds that make it difficult to get there--those seem significant. Flying in dreams is escape or freedom, right? Houses--home, stability...don't know sh.t about your cousin, but is there a connect there? Babies...pregnancy....a girl then a boy...dunno?? Relates to a situation with kids you have? Name is cool tho. Bram (ie Bram Stoker, writer of Dracula?) and William (Bill in Co?). I suspect the M is the abbreviation of your married lastname? Dreams are cool, but often terrifying. I'm a dreamer, a nightmarer, and always have been. (ask my parents) I also used to sleepwalk... My counsellor told me in my dreams, I can learn to take control. Haven't done too well at that, tho, not yet. The best I can do is wake up, but too many times I go back to sleep into the same dream (with permutations). Also, I *always* have a similar dream before starting teaching--if not each semester, definately each fall semester. Ppl phoo=phoo Freud, but if you read his interpretation of dreams, I'd say he's onto something. And I think a lot boils down to our internal chemistry or neurology or whatever. >>>> On Oct 27, 9:21 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> >>>> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 84 lines] >> >> Vickie Sleeping pills can help. >>>> I think it's pretty tough. But I have worked on it and it's da*n >>>> interesting. [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > My counsellor told me in my dreams, I can learn to take control. In your dreams, or in RL? :-) Well, if you find out the secret, let us know. I'd give anything for being able to control my moods, and always be a happy lark, without a care in the world. > Haven't done too well at that, tho, not yet. The best I can do is wake > up, but too many times I go back to sleep into the same dream (with [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > say he's onto something. And I think a lot boils down to our internal > chemistry or neurology or whatever. But in all fairness to Freud, he came up with a lot of good stuff, too. It's too bad his name is always linked to the worst stuff. On Nov 1, 8:44 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> wrote: > >>>> On Oct 27, 9:21 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> > >>>> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 86 lines] > > Sleeping pills can help. What kinds> What kinds give you no dreams? Wake you up happy and refreshed???? > >>>> I think it's pretty tough. But I have worked on it and it's da*n > >>>> interesting. [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > In your dreams, or in RL? :-) LOL. No, my F2F couselor told me I could learn to take control in my dreams. So far, I'm earning a D- > Well, if you find out the secret, let us know. I'd give anything for being > able to control my moods, and always be a happy lark, without a care in the > world. Just what would you give to do that, Beams? > > Haven't done too well at that, tho, not yet. The best I can do is wake > > up, but too many times I go back to sleep into the same dream (with [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > But in all fairness to Freud, he came up with a lot of good stuff, too. > It's too bad his name is always linked to the worst stuff. I actualy only see him linked to the good stuff. I think he got more right than most ppl in the last 100 years, and I say that without discredit or awe to their contributions-- > On Nov 1, 8:44 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 93 lines] > > What kinds> What kinds give you no dreams? No, I didn't mean that. But they can help you fall asleep. The over the counter ones, I mean. They don't eliminate dreams! Does anything? I don't think anything does (except staying awake :-). Besides which, I don't think it's a good thing (i.e., no dreams) for the sleeping state, medically speaking. It likely won't be a deep enough state, otherwise, to get a full and complete rest. (They have some designations for those states; don't ask me what they are, though) > Wake you up happy and refreshed???? Ummm. No those pills can't exactly do that. :-) But they CAN enable you to more easily fall asleep, that's all. >>>>>> I think it's pretty tough. But I have worked on it and it's da*n >>>>>> interesting. [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > > Just what would you give to do that, Beams? My life? Not sure. I think they've outlawed lobotomies, haven't they? Remember "One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest"? Well, ok, that was a pretty pathetic state, on second thought. Forget that idea. >>> Haven't done too well at that, tho, not yet. The best I can do is wake >>> up, but too many times I go back to sleep into the same dream (with [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I actually only see him linked to the good stuff. I think he got more > right than most ppl in the last 100 years, Ditto on Classical Music, by the way. And a few other things too, probably including the Arts (although you have to go back a bit further in time). :-) > and I say that without discredit or awe to their contributions-- On Nov 1, 10:39 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> wrote: > > On Nov 1, 8:44 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 179 lines] > > > and I say that without discredit or awe to their contributions-- Sometimes a link falls in your lap. I've been reading about The Great Purge. I know little of history. What's curious about this interesting book, is that I can't recall how I got the reference to it -- from the net, i know that. From a cultural point of view and its influence, it is something I have never considered before. Mmmousemaid > On Nov 1, 10:39 pm, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudg...@earthlink.net> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 193 lines] > > Mmmousemaid Even Pavlov knew, that animals with a certain temperament are susceptible to intimidation. Sometimes you wonder, where did some people get these unsalable convictions-- from childhood --by authoritative parents or guardians whom they could not question due to their type from birth. The theory of the four humours may not have been so far off. Mmmousemaid |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.