Unvarnished Truth #3: Filters and preconceptions

[Doktor Howl]

Can you remind me of this in a few years when I'm bitching about what I did for my kids and their apparent lack of appreciation of my efforts?  Because knowing me as I do, this will happen. 

Sure, because they will be ungrateful from about age 16 to age 30, if my memory serves me correctly.  It is my perception that adulthood, in the real sense of the word, doesn't happen before age 30 (if at all).

[Doktor Howl]

So stop.

Soooo much harder for me than it sounds.

But I AM trying...

It's hard for most people (those who aren't win/lose apes), especially females.

[Jenne]

Can you remind me of this in a few years when I'm bitching about what I did for my kids and their apparent lack of appreciation of my efforts?  Because knowing me as I do, this will happen. 

Sure, because they will be ungrateful from about age 16 to age 30, if my memory serves me correctly.  It is my perception that adulthood, in the real sense of the word, doesn't happen before age 30 (if at all).

They're like that now, so I know it will be worse come testosterone-tiem.  Sigh.

DOOMED TO DISAPPOINTMENT.  Because I'm BUILT that way.

Breaking this mold sometimes breaks ME, you know.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

 This has made me think, because, truly, I'm an idealist, and that is why I get hurt a lot.  I totally expect more out of the primates I live with and love, and so I get monkey-fucked, in a bad way.  

The opposite of win/lose is lose/win.  <--- stupid corporate terms, but they apply.

Setting out to please everyone is a recipe for getting shat upon.

But surely there is the opportunity to define a less Territorial solution that 'I Win, You Lose', isn't there?

I mean, given Jenne's comment " I totally expect more out of the primates I live with and love, and so I get monkey-fucked, in a bad way"

Maybe its not win or lose, but just a modification of the game rules she's playing under. 'I expect more' seems like a preconception. If we don't expect our loved ones to behave a specific way (or our co-workers or whatever other monkeys we deal with), then getting monkey-fucked by our own expectations no longer exists as a problem.

As much as we are all monkeys together, we're also very different... if you use the Leary 'circuits' model, we ALL imprint either high or low on the second circuit, but there are a lot of other circuits involved and lots of stuff that didn't make it into his model that complete the individual.

Do we really only have the option 'win/lose' vs 'lose/win' or can we look for something outside of that?

[Jenne]

So stop.

Soooo much harder for me than it sounds.

But I AM trying...

It's hard for most people (those who aren't win/lose apes), especially females.

~~> I'm just going to let everyone know this is my face today.  And my general attitude about everything and everyone.

Everything is disafuckingpointing.  I feel sorry for the next jackoff who steps, because they really are going to get a kick to the nads.

I almost wish I was like this more often, because then I wouldn't BE a fucking doormat for my loved ones nor would I FEEL like this every so often.  Like everything I do and say and whatever is useless.

I hate the rules, I hate them.  I hate the exceptions too.  I think exceptions allow people to be assholes and get away with it.

Monkey behavior?  PAH!  It's an excuse for people to fuck each other and NOT pay!  Not give a shit!  Just WALK THE FUCK AWAY without caring!

It's like personal victimhood.

Man I'm a whiner today.  Sorry.

[Doktor Howl]

But surely there is the opportunity to define a less Territorial solution that 'I Win, You Lose', isn't there?

I mean, given Jenne's comment " I totally expect more out of the primates I live with and love, and so I get monkey-fucked, in a bad way"

Maybe its not win or lose, but just a modification of the game rules she's playing under. 'I expect more' seems like a preconception. If we don't expect our loved ones to behave a specific way (or our co-workers or whatever other monkeys we deal with), then getting monkey-fucked by our own expectations no longer exists as a problem.

As much as we are all monkeys together, we're also very different... if you use the Leary 'circuits' model, we ALL imprint either high or low on the second circuit, but there are a lot of other circuits involved and lots of stuff that didn't make it into his model that complete the individual.

Do we really only have the option 'win/lose' vs 'lose/win' or can we look for something outside of that?

Sure.  There's win/win, win/lose, compromise, lose/lose, and win or walk away.

The most effective is obviously win/win (some argue win or walk away, but that's not always possible), but it's difficult to achieve because people have been conditioned into one of the less effective solutions.

[Jenne]

  This has made me think, because, truly, I'm an idealist, and that is why I get hurt a lot.  I totally expect more out of the primates I live with and love, and so I get monkey-fucked, in a bad way. 

The opposite of win/lose is lose/win.  <--- stupid corporate terms, but they apply.

Setting out to please everyone is a recipe for getting shat upon.

But surely there is the opportunity to define a less Territorial solution that 'I Win, You Lose', isn't there?

I mean, given Jenne's comment " I totally expect more out of the primates I live with and love, and so I get monkey-fucked, in a bad way"

Maybe its not win or lose, but just a modification of the game rules she's playing under. 'I expect more' seems like a preconception. If we don't expect our loved ones to behave a specific way (or our co-workers or whatever other monkeys we deal with), then getting monkey-fucked by our own expectations no longer exists as a problem.

As much as we are all monkeys together, we're also very different... if you use the Leary 'circuits' model, we ALL imprint either high or low on the second circuit, but there are a lot of other circuits involved and lots of stuff that didn't make it into his model that complete the individual.

Do we really only have the option 'win/lose' vs 'lose/win' or can we look for something outside of that?

That would be nice, assuming there's something else, but really, doesn't it just delay the inevitable rise of bile in the throat when you realize YOU'VE BEEN HAD?  AGAIN?!

[Jenne]

But surely there is the opportunity to define a less Territorial solution that 'I Win, You Lose', isn't there?

I mean, given Jenne's comment " I totally expect more out of the primates I live with and love, and so I get monkey-fucked, in a bad way"

Maybe its not win or lose, but just a modification of the game rules she's playing under. 'I expect more' seems like a preconception. If we don't expect our loved ones to behave a specific way (or our co-workers or whatever other monkeys we deal with), then getting monkey-fucked by our own expectations no longer exists as a problem.

As much as we are all monkeys together, we're also very different... if you use the Leary 'circuits' model, we ALL imprint either high or low on the second circuit, but there are a lot of other circuits involved and lots of stuff that didn't make it into his model that complete the individual.

Do we really only have the option 'win/lose' vs 'lose/win' or can we look for something outside of that?

Sure.  There's win/win, win/lose, compromise, lose/lose, and win or walk away.

The most effective is obviously win/win (some argue win or walk away, but that's not always possible), but it's difficult to achieve because people have been conditioned into one of the less effective solutions.

Does compromise ever work?

Does anyone ever really use this?

Isn't this another form of giving up, in some way?

[Cramulus]

Jenne it sounds like you need some of this today: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URE7--qtHck

and also some of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOZ1QQqBtwc



ETA: i've been trying trying to remember which video I wanted to show you for like a few weeks now. And I just remembered it's THIS ONE: http://www.hulu.com/watch/39106/its-always-sunny-in-philadelphia-who-pooped-the-bed -- sorry, it's 21 minutes long, but worth it

[Juana]

Awesome stuff, Dok.

1) Can I post this on my facebook (with due credit and a link back here)? I have a libertarian I've been trying to coax into looking at this kind of thing, and I'd like to think he is capable of being in that 1%. However, he's refused to come here, despite my best efforts because he's a lazy sod.

2) Your comments about certain ideas hitting religious levels really makes sense to me, having seen (and having BEEN) one of those humans obsessed with the free market and libertarianism.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

  This has made me think, because, truly, I'm an idealist, and that is why I get hurt a lot.  I totally expect more out of the primates I live with and love, and so I get monkey-fucked, in a bad way. 

The opposite of win/lose is lose/win.  <--- stupid corporate terms, but they apply.

Setting out to please everyone is a recipe for getting shat upon.

But surely there is the opportunity to define a less Territorial solution that 'I Win, You Lose', isn't there?

I mean, given Jenne's comment " I totally expect more out of the primates I live with and love, and so I get monkey-fucked, in a bad way"

Maybe its not win or lose, but just a modification of the game rules she's playing under. 'I expect more' seems like a preconception. If we don't expect our loved ones to behave a specific way (or our co-workers or whatever other monkeys we deal with), then getting monkey-fucked by our own expectations no longer exists as a problem.

As much as we are all monkeys together, we're also very different... if you use the Leary 'circuits' model, we ALL imprint either high or low on the second circuit, but there are a lot of other circuits involved and lots of stuff that didn't make it into his model that complete the individual.

Do we really only have the option 'win/lose' vs 'lose/win' or can we look for something outside of that?

That would be nice, assuming there's something else, but really, doesn't it just delay the inevitable rise of bile in the throat when you realize YOU'VE BEEN HAD?  AGAIN?!

I suppose it depends on the situation. Someone once said that in a game of 'tug of war' there were three way that someone was gonna hit the ground , you could pull the opponent and force them to fall down... they could pull you and force you to fall down, or one of you can just let go and the other person will fall on their face.

"Not win/lose" doesn't have to mean being gullible or naive or allowing someone that's monkey-fucked you to get another go at it.

There could be win/win assuming that the other person actually cares to work at both sides winning. There can also be "  /   " where you simply refuse to play the monkey game of  "me vs you".  There can simply be "me interacting with you" If its win or lose, then you're putting yourself in a position where you expect to gain (thats 'win'). But if you don't expect to gain, if you simply interact... then it might not be possible to 'be had again'.

I know I'm an optimistic hippie...  

[Doktor Howl]

But surely there is the opportunity to define a less Territorial solution that 'I Win, You Lose', isn't there?

I mean, given Jenne's comment " I totally expect more out of the primates I live with and love, and so I get monkey-fucked, in a bad way"

Maybe its not win or lose, but just a modification of the game rules she's playing under. 'I expect more' seems like a preconception. If we don't expect our loved ones to behave a specific way (or our co-workers or whatever other monkeys we deal with), then getting monkey-fucked by our own expectations no longer exists as a problem.

As much as we are all monkeys together, we're also very different... if you use the Leary 'circuits' model, we ALL imprint either high or low on the second circuit, but there are a lot of other circuits involved and lots of stuff that didn't make it into his model that complete the individual.

Do we really only have the option 'win/lose' vs 'lose/win' or can we look for something outside of that?

Sure.  There's win/win, win/lose, compromise, lose/lose, and win or walk away.

The most effective is obviously win/win (some argue win or walk away, but that's not always possible), but it's difficult to achieve because people have been conditioned into one of the less effective solutions.

Does compromise ever work?

Does anyone ever really use this?

Isn't this another form of giving up, in some way?

Compromise is actually a losing proposition.  1+1 = 1.5

Sometimes it's required, of course, but not as often as people think.

[Doktor Howl]

Awesome stuff, Dok.

1) Can I post this on my facebook (with due credit and a link back here)? I have a libertarian I've been trying to coax into looking at this kind of thing, and I'd like to think he is capable of being in that 1%. However, he's refused to come here, despite my best efforts because he's a lazy sod.

2) Your comments about certain ideas hitting religious levels really makes sense to me, having seen (and having BEEN) one of those humans obsessed with the free market and libertarianism.

1.  Yes.  ETA:  Lazy libertarians?  Who'd have thought it?   

2.  The lure of it is that it seems to make sense.  The problem is, it requires that humans act rationally for a significant percentage of the time.

[Doktor Howl]

Okay, let's assume that three people have primitive resources (wood for cooking, hand tools for agriculture, etc).  One has grown corn, one has grown carrots, and the other has raised some chicken or beef.

If everyone eats only what they've produced, they'll die of malnutrition, eventually.

What is the most efficient solution, and why will that solution fail on a large scale?

[Freeky]

The effective solution is that the three of them trade between each other for the things the need. On a large scale, however, people are clawing and scratching to be the guy that everyone goes to for their carrots, or whatever, and everyone wants more than what they really ought to have.

Am I right?