Staunch (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

DaddySatyr -> Staunch (8/19/2012 8:17:51 PM)

In another thread, this became part of the flow and I wanted to address it seperately.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NuevaVida
quote:

When I see people adamant about Limits or No Limits, to the point of getting emotional or angry about it, I think they're holding tight to a belief they *have* to have, because they don't know how to process believing otherwise.

What you said here is really interesting. I have never thought of it in those terms before. To tell the truth, I would be very interested in how others react to this statement.

quote:

I honestly don't expect anyone to post to that statement, and if anyone does, I suspect it would not be a favorable one. People tend to not like having their belief system questioned. It feels threatening, and can understandably cause feelings of defensiveness. At least that was always the reason for my past reactions.



I am not looking for this to become a discussion on limits (we have enough of those). I want to delve into the psychology of not being able to process new thoughts or ideas.

In my personal life this has been an issue and the results have varied, obviously. I have met ladies that have said: "I never thought of it, that way. You've given me a lot to think about" and I've met ladies that have just refused to even discuss certain topics.

I have a couple of "deal breakers" in my profile and I find some very unusual responses to some fairly benign comments.

I'm not sure I get it and I am also not looking to assign blame so I want to try to word this question carefully ...

What is the factor (or factors) that guide people to either come down on one side or the other of this particular behavior?

Input is encouraged.



Peace and comfort,



Michael



Kaliko -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 8:24:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

I am not looking for this to become a discussion on limits (we have enough of those). I want to delve into the psychology of not being able to process new thoughts or ideas.

In my personal life this has been an issue and the results have varied, obviously. I have met ladies that have said: "I never thought of it, that way. You've given me a lot to think about" and I've met ladies that have just refused to even discuss certain topics.

I have a couple of "deal breakers" in my profile and I find some very unusual responses to some fairly benign comments.

I'm not sure I get it and I am also not looking to assign blame so I want to try to word this question carefully ...

What is the factor (or factors) that guide people to either come down on one side or the other of this particular behavior?

Input is encouraged.



Peace and comfort,



Michael



I am very open to changing my mind. I don't think many of my beliefs are so set in stone that I can't at least appreciate a different viewpoint.

That being said, for me to change my way of thinking would take logic. Appeals to my emotions and sympathetic sensibilities or that are bent to the will of the masses are fluff and don't penetrate.

But if someone presents a logical perspective that I hadn't previously considered, I have no problem admitting that. I rather enjoy the mental leap.



LadyHibiscus -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 8:41:08 PM)

There is a person who no longer posts here that has a very good mind, but a very narrow one. I can't imagine living that way.

I have very strongly held views, but they are subject to change if a persuasive argument comes along. That's not to say that my ethical base is formed on whimsy: some things are immutable, others simply not up for discussion.




NuevaVida -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 8:42:07 PM)

For clarification, what I said above was in reference to folks who have a strong emotional reaction to certain topics - whatever they are.

I'm not saying people in general aren't interested in seeing different perspectives or aren't open to changing beliefs. The above was regarding a foundational belief system being questioned.

It's been my own past experience to dig my heels in the sand and adamantly defend my point of view, when an opposing point of view touches an internal nerve. Now when I feel that internal nerve being triggered, it's a trigger to me to look inward and figure out why I'm having such a strong reaction to it.

For example, if a major component of my life is built on XYZ being in place, and someone challenges me that XYZ can't really be in place....if I'm at peace with my knowledge in XYZ, I say "Coolio, thanks" and move on. But if the challenge I'm receiving riles me somehow, then it's time for me to re-examine what is it about XYZ I'm holding onto and why, and why someone else challenging it is causing me emotional upset. Maybe I'll walk away more secure in my belief in XYZ. Maybe I'll walk away completely rethinking it. But having my foundational belief system challenged wasn't always easy for me to receive, and I'd react strongly to it. I suspect others have had the same experience.



CRYPTICLXVI -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 8:42:54 PM)

Paradigm Theory.



NuevaVida -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 8:52:08 PM)

Interesting, but doesn't that have more to do with social/societal beliefs than personal/internal beliefs? Or do you think it's all related?



ARIES83 -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 8:55:57 PM)

It's all the same, some people have to
cradle their beliefs, some can throw them
out there, and if they break I guess they
wern't to solid.
The ones that cradle them will never know.

-ARIES



CRYPTICLXVI -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 9:04:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: NuevaVida

Interesting, but doesn't that have more to do with social/societal beliefs than personal/internal beliefs? Or do you think it's all related?

When I learned about it, it was within the framework of personal belief systems and it makes sense to me, personal opinion. When an individual is met with evidence which contradicts their belief system, they have to either change their beliefs or deny the evidence and hold tighter to their beliefs. Examples which I think clearly demonstrates this is when you are dealing with either religious or political beliefs. Still, make it even more personal. X feels that they are a victim because of previous abuse, they are shown how their perception creates who they are and not necessarily what happened to them. X either has to accept the new paradigm which empowers them or hold tighter to their perception of being a victim because that is how they define themselves. But anything which would threaten how someone defines themselves either can lead to new insight or strengthen their previous perception and belief.

Of course as you pointed out, this type of dynamic happens at a societal or national level as well. I had never really thought of it at a collective level before but it certainly holds, sort of like rippling waves from a thrown rock.



NuevaVida -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 9:10:44 PM)

That's fascinating, and makes so much sense to me. Thanks for clarifying.

Years ago I was working for an executive group at a company that was going through significant and stressful change. They brought in consultants to teach the execs how to lead the employees through all the change, and part of that training was to watch a video called "Paradigm Pioneers" (Charthouse Learning Corp, featuring Joel Barker), which stayed in my head for years to come. I've tried to get my hands on it but it's a corporate video - something like $1200 at the time.

Barker also has a book, "Paradigms: The Business of Discovering the Future."

I was thinking societal because those were the examples I recalled in the video. But I can very much see this at a personal level, as well.

Thanks!



gungadin09 -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 9:12:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: NuevaVida
When I see people adamant... to the point of getting emotional or angry about it, I think they're holding tight to a belief they *have* to have, because they don't know how to process believing otherwise.


I want to delve into the psychology of not being able to process new thoughts or ideas...What is the factor (or factors) that guide people to either come down on one side or the other of this particular behavior?



Most often, it's the delivery that makes the difference. Is someone really interested in discussing a question or are they just trying to prove they're smarter than me? Is their tone curious, neutral, aggressive, sarcastic, judgmental, or condescending?

I think I'm open minded about most things, as long as I don't feel attacked or talked down to.

Pam



CRYPTICLXVI -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 9:15:52 PM)

I learned about it in college while studying cognitive theories and so it was at a personal/ interpersonal level. This was back in the mid-eighties. Your example illustrates how it also works at a collective level as well. Hmmm... at the time I learned about it, I had an "awakening" moment, seeing things in an entirely different light, recognizing how shattering having one's beliefs "threatened" and how fiercely people could close themselves off from change resonated with me, though at that time, I was the opposite, trying to deconstruct my own beliefs after a Quixotically idealistic manner of seeking an ideal "truth". Still, your example has taught me something new, once again. Thank you.



tj444 -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 9:17:15 PM)

hmmm.. ok you want women/people to be open about things, discuss topics, etc but you have deal breakers which, since they are deal breakers, you are entirely closed about.. [&:]



CRYPTICLXVI -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 9:20:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

hmmm.. ok you want women/people to be open about things, discuss topics, etc but you have deal breakers which, since they are deal breakers, you are entirely closed about.. [&:]


[image]http://clutch.mtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/8evzy.gif[/image]



NuevaVida -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 9:30:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CRYPTICLXVI


quote:

ORIGINAL: NuevaVida

Interesting, but doesn't that have more to do with social/societal beliefs than personal/internal beliefs? Or do you think it's all related?

When I learned about it, it was within the framework of personal belief systems and it makes sense to me, personal opinion. When an individual is met with evidence which contradicts their belief system, they have to either change their beliefs or deny the evidence and hold tighter to their beliefs. Examples which I think clearly demonstrates this is when you are dealing with either religious or political beliefs. Still, make it even more personal. X feels that they are a victim because of previous abuse, they are shown how their perception creates who they are and not necessarily what happened to them. X either has to accept the new paradigm which empowers them or hold tighter to their perception of being a victim because that is how they define themselves. But anything which would threaten how someone defines themselves either can lead to new insight or strengthen their previous perception and belief.

Of course as you pointed out, this type of dynamic happens at a societal or national level as well. I had never really thought of it at a collective level before but it certainly holds, sort of like rippling waves from a thrown rock.


One last bit about paradigms -

In the video I saw, Barker used the Swiss as a (societal/business) example. The Swiss had 65% of the world watch market in the 1960's. In the 1970's they had only 10%. What changed? Quartz! Who invented the Quartz watch? The Swiss!

But the Swiss did not accept the Quartz as a viable option for watches. It couldn't possibly be the future of watches without any bearings, gears, springs, etc. They were so closed off to the idea, they did not patent or protect it - Seiko bought the technology and the rest, as they say, is history.

I wonder how many of us sell ourselves short with our own personal paradigms.

So, your example enlightened me, too. Thank you back.



CRYPTICLXVI -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 9:36:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: NuevaVida

I wonder how many of us sell ourselves short with our own personal paradigms.



I wonder how many of us don't???



tj444 -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 9:38:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: NuevaVida

I wonder how many of us sell ourselves short with our own personal paradigms.


imo, most people do that, they live in a box of their own making.. I would bet you that 95% of the people I went to school with live within 100 miles of where we grew up.. maybe another 3% live elsewhere in that province.. I am the only one that has lived outside of my home country.. and I am headed further away still.. [:D] I dunno why people do that, but thats what they do..



NuevaVida -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 9:38:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CRYPTICLXVI


quote:

ORIGINAL: NuevaVida

I wonder how many of us sell ourselves short with our own personal paradigms.



I wonder how many of us don't???


Zero? [:D]



NuevaVida -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 9:39:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444


quote:

ORIGINAL: NuevaVida

I wonder how many of us sell ourselves short with our own personal paradigms.


imo, most people do that, they live in a box of their own making.. I would bet you that 95% of the people I went to school with live within 100 miles of where we grew up.. maybe another 3% live elsewhere in that province.. I am the only one that has lived outside of my home country.. and I am headed further away still.. [:D] I dunno why people do that, but thats what they do..

I think it's human nature. We (generic) feel safer that way.



LanaDeVille -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 9:43:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: gungadin09
Most often, it's the delivery that makes the difference. Is someone really interested in discussing a question or are they just trying to prove they're smarter than me? Is their tone curious, neutral, aggressive, sarcastic, judgmental, or condescending?

I think I'm open minded about most things, as long as I don't feel attacked or talked down to.

Pam




All of this. Times ten.



Kana -> RE: Staunch (8/19/2012 9:43:19 PM)

quote:

I learned about it in college while studying cognitive theories and so it was at a personal/ interpersonal level.

Yeah, I actually learned this in poly-sci.
quote:

When I learned about it, it was within the framework of personal belief systems and it makes sense to me, personal opinion. When an individual is met with evidence which contradicts their belief system, they have to either change their beliefs or deny the evidence and hold tighter to their beliefs. Examples which I think clearly demonstrates this is when you are dealing with either religious or political beliefs. Still, make it even more personal. X feels that they are a victim because of previous abuse, they are shown how their perception creates who they are and not necessarily what happened to them. X either has to accept the new paradigm which empowers them or hold tighter to their perception of being a victim because that is how they define themselves. But anything which would threaten how someone defines themselves either can lead to new insight or strengthen their previous perception and belief.

Of course as you pointed out, this type of dynamic happens at a societal or national level as well. I had never really thought of it at a collective level before but it certainly holds, sort of like rippling waves from a thrown rock.

I was taught this at the national level. Nation states tend to use this frequently, and when they refuse to change, they often shift into an "enemy paradigm" where they begin to paint those opposite to the paradigm as "the other," which is a whole new paradigm to itself.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875