British woman beheaded in Tenerife. Royals fault.

[eFestivals]

If he's talking about others

I simply made a general comment.

The majority of people (if not everyone) are good at looking at concepts and applying them to others, while being far less good at applying those things to themselves.

[worm]

I simply made a general comment.

The majority of people (if not everyone) are good at looking at concepts and applying them to others, while being far less good at applying those things to themselves.

[worm]

But why don't they care? Because they're ill? Because they're perceptive enough to understand futility? Do you believe in learned helplessness?

Edited May 19, 2011 by worm

[eFestivals]

Indeed. Idealisations: Projections of how people should be. Like citizenship.

Hmmmm .... that's a different thing entirely.

Citizenship is about co-existence, an attempt to find a set of rules whereby the actions of one don't impinge on the rights of others to do similar.

[worm]

Hmmmm .... that's a different thing entirely.

Citizenship is about co-existence, an attempt to find a set of rules whereby the actions of one don't impinge on the rights of others to do similar.

[eFestivals]

Okay then. Each individual's notion of citizenship i.e. how they expect a citizen to behave. I'm taking you as saying that many preach it, but seldom practice it.

I'd say that the instances of 'good citizenship' (whatever the citizenship part might be) are waaaay different to what I initially referred to, to the extent that there's no relationship.

Mind you, if you want to take any of my comments here to be considered on a personal basis, then your liking for considering citizenship would be IMO a fantastic place start, given your many comments over many years where your expectations for yourself cannot be granted to others due to your expectations for yourself.

[feral chile]

I simply made a general comment.

The majority of people (if not everyone) are good at looking at concepts and applying them to others, while being far less good at applying those things to themselves.

[eFestivals]

That's because when you're looki8ng at others, you're objectifying them - trying to make them fit into a rule-based theory in order to make sense of their behaviour. So you attribute personality traits etc. to them.

I'm not wishing to get into this, but am happy to say you're very definitely 100% wrong.

When you're looking at yourself, you're directly reacting to a specific event - it's harder to see a pattern, because you're focused on a particular experience. You're experiencing yourself subjectively. It's only afterwards that you might ask yourself why you always act in a certain way. And because you're trapped in your particular perspective, your answer to that question might differ from an observer.

again, 100% wrong.

[feral chile]

I'm not wishing to get into this, but am happy to say you're very definitely 100% wrong.

again, 100% wrong.

Edited May 19, 2011 by feral chile

[eFestivals]

For the first part, what you say is not what I do. For the 2nd part it's simply nothing more than self-justification.

It's nowt more considered than that - because there's no need to consider beyond that.

[feral chile]

For the first part, what you say is not what I do. For the 2nd part it's simply nothing more than self-justification.

It's nowt more considered than that - because there's no need to consider beyond that.

Edited May 19, 2011 by feral chile

[eFestivals]

But if you think of how we explain behaviour, in the example I mentioned above, an observer would say the guy was paranoid. The guy himself would say other people were out to get him and he was defending himself.

And the reality? That requires facts, not theories. The theories can tell you nothing of the actual real facts (such as whether someone really is out to get him).

And so the theories are shown as worthless.

[feral chile]

And the reality? That requires facts, not theories. The theories can tell you nothing of the actual real facts (such as whether someone really is out to get him).

And so the theories are shown as worthless.

Edited May 19, 2011 by feral chile

[eFestivals]

it's hard to behave 'normally' if you're not being treated 'normally'.

it's no less hard to treat a fruitcake normally when they're not properly baked.

It all starts with something like this very thread title, where the lack of normality all springs from that.

[feral chile]

it's no less hard to treat a fruitcake normally when they're not properly baked.

It all starts with something like this very thread title, where the lack of normality all springs from that.

[worm]

it's no less hard to treat a fruitcake normally when they're not properly baked.

It all starts with something like this very thread title, where the lack of normality all springs from that.

[worm]

The expectancy effect would be, for instance, if you had someone who expected others to do them harm. They'd react with mistrust, defensiveness and hostility, might even counter attack, and alienate people. Then, when they could see they were disliked or disapproved of, they'd feel justified in their original premise. They'd have difficulty analysing how their attitude and actions had produced the result they were so afraid of.

[eFestivals]

Yeah that way round too I suppose. It's a question of degree though isn't it - what's normal?

It's far easier the other way around: what's abnormal?

And the answer is of course this thread title, cos it takes a humongous leap to get from a random and vicious murder in a foreign holiday island thousands of miles away to the monarchy. As I attempted to point out to Peter Dow the lack of any relationship between those two things is more likely to work against his aims than for them.

But of course according to some people, it's all media conspiracy anyway and nothing can be trusted. In which case I'm forced to conclude that he's clearly an MI5 plant working by devious means in support of the monarchy and not against it. When the 30 year rule comes around we'll probably get to find out that his boss is also Osama Bin Laden.

[eFestivals]

And you think that a fruitcake was born a fruitcake do you.

Nope, it was cake mixture - from Asda I think.

But now, although it's only half-baked, it's definitely a fruitcake.

[worm]

And the reality? That requires facts, not theories. The theories can tell you nothing of the actual real facts (such as whether someone really is out to get him).

Edited May 19, 2011 by worm

[eFestivals]

The person can might be able to though. They can might be able to tell you if the they are over-emphasising a threat. It's called neurosis.

corrected for you.

[worm]

corrected for you.

[eFestivals]

There's no ideal response to things.

Something I realise but you don't, else you'd have not made what you thought was an ideal response to what I'd said.

[worm]

Something I realise but you don't, else you'd have not made what you thought was an ideal response to what I'd said.

[eFestivals]

whooooooooosh