Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="barsoomcore" data-source="post: 679429" data-attributes="member: 812">I understand completely.Well, I would certainly shrug and say, "Next time you change your target, let me know BEFORE you fire."My point was not that you never fail. It was that you don't need to tie yourself to any particular METHOD of succeeding. That's the whole point of the Chet Baker story. Which was a digression from the main discussion anyway. I'm not a relativist and don't wish to be made out as one.I care what lots of people do and I'm not angry with any of them. I care what she does maybe because I love her. Maybe because I love the people she's hurting. Maybe because I love myself and won't allow myself to be treated in the way she's treating me. I won't address the rest of your "butcher knives and emotions" rant because it has no basis in anything I've said. I have never, ever said that one should stomp out emotions so don't pretend I did.As for what one might do about CG, well with or without anger this is a difficult problem, of course. If we just yell at her she'll probably yell back and other people will start yelling and nothing gets solved. If I never return her calls then maybe my whole family will take her side and shun me and that will hurt a great deal. Yes, this is a difficult problem. But that has NOTHING to do with the source of your anger. Or rather, whatever the source of your anger, this remains a difficult problem.It seems in all three cases that I am saying, "You are angry with yourself for having allowed a situation to develop to this point." And you are saying, "No, I'm not. I'm angry at the person or situation itself."Here's what I have found in my life and in the lives of everyone I know who's ever tried it. When I consider my anger to be a thing I have generated within myself, it ceases to exist. I don't suppress it, I don't turn into some emotionless robot, but I cease to be angry.Having practiced it, I don't even GET angry at most of the things that used to make me angry. Or got me to make myself angry (I'll admit that my way of thinking can get a bit unweildy to discuss<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />)When people blame their anger on others, they absolve themselves of any responsibility to deal with their anger. They can just run around being angry and hurting people to no purpose. When we take responsibility for our own anger, we can deal with it and solve our problems with as little pain to ourselves and others as possible.Whatever. Losing or having stolen, I don't care. The important bit is that you are afraid of no longer having some degree of control you think you currently possess.I happen to believe you have a hand in everything that happens to you, but I won't insist that you believe that, too.No, it's not. It's an illogical response. The logical response is to make sure that you retain your own freedoms. To guard against their being taken away from you. I don't need to be angry to do that. In fact, I'm better at it when I'm not angry, and that's why I'm concerned with understanding anger and if possible teaching myself to abolish it. Because I'm better at all the things you say you need anger for when I'm NOT angry.Not at all. I am proposing that fear triggers the anger response. That we get angry because we are afraid. Were we not afraid, we would not be angry.I don't need to be afraid in order to take steps to protect myself. I don't protect myself because I'm afraid, I protect myself because I value myself and I want to continue on in my life. That won't happen if I don't (for example) drive safely, so I try to be a safe driver.</blockquote>

Verification