[HN Gopher] The art of not taking things personally
___________________________________________________________________
The art of not taking things personally
Author : LoriP
Score : 122 points
Date : 2021-08-31 16:05 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (medium.dave-bailey.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (medium.dave-bailey.com)
| black_13 wrote:
| I really dont want to understand your poor behaviors or empathize
| with an abuser.
| dwaltrip wrote:
| Without understanding, we can't take productive action. Of
| course, one can instead exit the situation, which may be the
| right move and doesn't require much understanding. But that is
| often not an option.
| watwut wrote:
| > Without understanding, we can't take productive action.
|
| That is not true. You can protect against abusers without
| understanding them. Whether making sure you respond (so that
| you are not attractive target) or leaving or going public or
| retaliating.
|
| But, victims who believe they need to understand and
| emphasize with them end up excusing abusers, blaming
| themselves and end up perpetual victims.
| dwaltrip wrote:
| That's a good point. And for victims that may be the best
| way to move forward.
|
| However, beyond helping any victims -- which is incredibly
| important and should be the first priority -- the type of
| productive actions we can take are limited if we don't have
| understanding of what is going on.
| wnoise wrote:
| > You can protect against abusers without understanding
| them.
|
| You can, but not as fully nor as well.
|
| > Whether making sure you respond (so that you are not
| attractive target)
|
| You have to know that responding indeed doesn't make you an
| attractive target. Which varies depending on the motives of
| the abuser. Some are looking for a response, where the
| cruelty is the point.
|
| > or leaving or going public or retaliating.
|
| All of these may or may not be helpful. The first two
| largely based on power relations and PR. But the last is
| vitally dependent on the reactions of the abuser -- and
| again understanding the abuser is needed to predict whether
| that's a useful response.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Sounds like a reliable recipe for loneliness. All people, even
| the perfectly nice ones, occasionally misbehave.
| silicon2401 wrote:
| I think the world would be better if more people practiced the
| suggestions in this page. Many humans lack compassion. People on
| all sides of all issues behave due to similar fundamental
| reasons: fear, uncertainty, anxiety. If people looked past the
| superficial and helped comfort people who are unlike them in
| addition to those who are similar, we might be able to find
| solutions to more issues.
| scns wrote:
| When i read the headline, i immediately thought of a talk [0] by
| a belgian actor who worked as a football (soccer) referee in an
| amateur league to learn this. Not a fan of videos but glad i
| watched it.
|
| [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnJwH_PZXnM
| zwkrt wrote:
| As I get older, the less I identify as my current state and the
| more I identify with the person who transitions through states.
| My change in perspective has reduced my anxieties and anger
| significantly. "This too shall pass" and all that. The more of my
| self image is focused on superficial things, the more I will take
| things personally. What we are angry about tends to be a
| reflection of ourselves more than the current state of affairs.
|
| If I see myself as a busy professional I might be much more
| aggravated by someone at the grocery store holding up the
| checkout line with EBT (since I am busy they must be lazy!). If I
| see myself as a social climber I will always be worrying if
| people are using me for something (since I am using them!). If I
| identify with my wealth I might develop some neurosis regarding
| the sight of the homeless (since they represent ultimate
| failure!).
|
| I don't believe in reincarnation but it is a helpful thought
| experiment to think about what benefits and drawbacks your
| particular incarnation of life holds and how those might be
| different if you were incarnated elsewhere.
| minikites wrote:
| Your comment is very well put and reminds me of this quote from
| Boethius:
|
| >It's my belief that history is a wheel. "Inconsistency is my
| very essence" -says the wheel- "Rise up on my spokes if you
| like, but don't complain when you are cast back down into the
| depths. Good times pass away, but then so do the bad.
| Mutability is our tragedy, but it is also our hope. The worst
| of times, like the best, are always passing away".
| mcguire wrote:
| That's interesting and well-put!
|
| I've thought for a long time that the world is, in a sense, a
| mirror: what you see out there is a reflection of yourself. A
| social climber worrying about being used is a part of that I
| hadn't considered before.
| scns wrote:
| In psychology it is called projection.
| dQw4w9WgXcQ wrote:
| There's many degrees of accuracy for truth that have nothing
| to do with ourselves. What you see and experience generally
| can reach a high level of accuracy -> "He is already an L6 by
| 30."
|
| It is the motives and reasons behind events that are most
| subject to gap filling with our personal experiences "He must
| be climbing the corporate ladder."
|
| When the Bible (via Jesus) speaks about judging, it is
| referring to being cautious with assessing motives, not
| drawing conclusions about factual happenings.
| SkipperCat wrote:
| So true. I read an article ago where they studied aging and
| they found that everything about a person degrades, eyesight,
| strength, cognition, etc with the exception of impulse control
| and patience. As you age, you mellow out and are less tethered
| to knee jerk reactions.
|
| For me, as someone approaching 'early geezerdom', I see it in
| my work interactions. What used to bother me, I can now let
| pass.
| scns wrote:
| This progress can be be sped up with meditation.
| datameta wrote:
| Sans side-effects of aging, of course.
| foobiekr wrote:
| I've had this experience myself. Actually, your description is
| so much kinder than mine that I think I will adopt it. What I
| have said up until now is that as I've gotten older, my
| emotional level has declined very substantially, especially in
| the last ten years. It's like the volume got turned down. Very
| few things bother me, and very few things excite me. I'd
| associated it until now with a sort of depersonalization but
| instead I will identify as just being the thing that passes
| through different states of being.
|
| They're kind of the same thing, but I'd feel less weird saying
| it the way you did.
| only_as_i_fall wrote:
| You could just be depressed
| packetlost wrote:
| That's me, except I'm in my early-mid 20s and I've always
| been like that. I describe it as being 'the opposite of
| neurotic' in a psychological sense.
| weitzj wrote:
| I had the strategy/mindset that when you are born you get a
| fixed credit on how you want to spend your emotions in life.
| When you are young you still have plenty of credit so you
| spend it on anger that other kids have a nicer laptop or
| whatever. When you get older you realize that you only have
| that much credit left to spend wisely on emotions in your
| life.
|
| Pro tip from me: this mental model sounded nice in bad times.
| But I would not follow it again any more today, and I would
| say you have an endless credit of emotions if you want it.
| Saving your emotions for "the day when you need it" does not
| make sense any more to me and makes me more happy.
| scns wrote:
| Aristoteles wrote this is the goal IIRC. In buddhism they aim
| for something similar, neither being swayed by your desires
| nor fears, stay calm enables being able to act instead only
| reacting to external stimuli on autopilot. Nothing wrong with
| it IMSO.
| rojobuffalo wrote:
| i love coming back to the 4 thoughts (buddhism). 1.
| impermance 2. suffering 3. karma 4. precious human birth
|
| suffering arises as a failure to recognize impermanence.
| thoughts and behaviors that reduce suffering create ripple
| effects (karma), and the same is true of thoughts and
| behaviors that increase suffering. and it is a rare
| opportunity to be born as a human and to reflect on our own
| conciousness and the 4 thoughts.
| jetrink wrote:
| > IMSO
|
| In my stoic opinion?
| weaksauce wrote:
| you sure that's not a depressive episode worth talking to
| your doctor about? depression isn't just the stereotypical
| dread and angst that the movies typically display. it's more
| of a nothing tastes great anymore, I'm apathetic toward life,
| nothing excites me, etc.
| tharkun__ wrote:
| Disclaimer: not the OP here.
|
| I can echo what he said though and I can tell you I am
| definitely not depressed. Some things do excite me, some
| thing do still piss me off. But overall it's definitely
| less. Good on the getting aggravated 'for no good reason'
| side. Sort of sad (not in the being depressed way) on the
| being excited for something side.
|
| E.g. I still have my pet peeves at work that I will
| passionately talk about or convince you of. I will not get
| mad at you any longer if you don't change that variable
| name to exactly the wording I suggested.
| jacobr1 wrote:
| I'm not the OP, but I've noticed something similar myself.
| I still have certain things I'm passionate about. But I no
| longer feel the need (or rather I don't just automatically
| become invested in every topic that comes up in my
| environment).
|
| People do outrageous things in the world, and an earlier me
| might have had a self-righteous anger about it. Today,
| while I certainly have an intellectual care, I have the
| luxury of putting such things out of mind and just enjoying
| my day. I still take proactive steps to better the world
| where I think it makes sense, but not out any emotional
| fervor. I save my passions for my family, hobbies, and a
| subset of professional interests.
|
| I haven't read the book, but from the abstract, I suspect
| "The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck" by Mark Manson is
| basically where I arrived. I have learned I have only so my
| F's to give, and so spend them more wisely.
| tomcooks wrote:
| I highly suggest books on stoicism by William B Irwine if you
| want to learn simple ways not to take things personally, a true
| gem of an author.
|
| https://www.williambirvine.com/books
| zz865 wrote:
| The problem I'm getting as I get older I'm starting to overshoot
| and not care about anyone's opinions, turning into a grumpy old
| man who doesnt care any more. :)
| bittercynic wrote:
| Full article: https://outline.com/2wGcn2
| totaldude87 wrote:
| thanks, i hate medium paywall and paywalled posts here in HN
| throwaway98797 wrote:
| Fragility comes from insecurity.
|
| Insecurity is both objective and subjective.
|
| On different days you may feel more or less secure.
|
| To not care _too_ much about yourself is the first step. The
| world is what it is and our desires are just that. Desires. Easy
| to forget that the world owes or cares. It does not. Luckily it
| does not care about anyone else.
|
| We only have this life to live.
|
| "We have two lives, and the second begins when we realize we only
| have one." --Confucius
| andrewmcwatters wrote:
| What do you mean by "fragility?"
| drewcoo wrote:
| Throw-away deepities.
|
| https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Deepity
| abbub wrote:
| I love that the 'deepities' wiki page has a link to the page
| on Deepak Chopra... lol
| yesenadam wrote:
| I don't think that's Confucius. Doesn't sound like him, can't
| find any source mentioned online.
| psychomugs wrote:
| "Live as if you were living already for the second time and as
| if you had acted the first time as wrongly as you are about to
| act now" - Victor Frankl
| courtf wrote:
| Counterpoint: enlightenment is overrated and life is meant to be
| taken personally. In some senses, it is a bit cowardly to run
| away from the current moment we live in by stepping back and
| viewing the big picture too often. "Negative" emotions and
| experiences are valid parts of life. Anger, anxiety, fear etc are
| all part of being a human being and have evolved over billions of
| years to reach their current forms. We may not always enjoy these
| parts of life, but avoiding them completely would mean stunting
| ourselves.
|
| Learning to observe and not react to the complex interplay of
| emotional states that constantly dance across our consciousness
| is a powerful tool, but you cannot survive inside the epiphany.
| We all must descend back into the messy day-to-day needs of
| maintaining our bodies, no one is actually the Buddha. I think we
| should all have more patience with inability to behave
| appropriately under all circumstances, because we will all fall
| short of grace.
|
| "Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must
| lead."
| pessimizer wrote:
| It's important not to judge the world by its effect on your
| internal state. The world isn't party to your internal state,
| although you walk around with an _illusion of transparency._
| People are doing things _for their own reasons, not for yours._
|
| Referring to the Buddha in order to make emotional regulation
| seem like an unachievable perfection is not really a good
| support, because the argument you're making is that we _shouldn
| 't always try to control our irrational emotions_, not that we
| sometimes fail to control our irrational emotions, even when we
| try. That's just an objective fact.
|
| Getting away from billions of years of reaction is the reason
| why we have civilization. It's a little more cowardly to
| interpret the world in terms of how it makes you feel rather
| than the complicated, messy problem of navigating the world in
| terms of how it may be making everyone feel.
| courtf wrote:
| > It's important not to judge the world by its effect on your
| internal state. The world isn't party to your internal state,
| although you walk around with an illusion of transparency.
| People are doing things for their own reasons, not for yours.
|
| Sure, I agree. This isn't a contradiction with my post.
|
| > Referring to the Buddha in order to make emotional
| regulation seem like an unachievable perfection is not really
| a good support, because the argument you're making is that we
| shouldn't always try to control our irrational emotions, not
| that we sometimes fail to control our irrational emotions,
| even when we try.
|
| One core message of Buddhism is that we fundamentally cannot
| control ourselves, even when we try. You are correct that I
| am saying we shouldn't always try, and I stand by that, but
| the idea is that it isn't actually possible to achieve.
| Buddha is indeed an unachievable perfection, and supports my
| point because trying is truly futile in the end.
|
| That is not to say we should always act however we want and
| treat others terribly for our own amusement, just that we are
| not actually in control. We can try to steer the elephant,
| and may have some success with that on occasion, but complete
| control is not possible. What I am saying, is that it's ok to
| let the elephant do what it wants sometimes, because
| ultimately it's going to do that a lot of the time anyway.
|
| > Getting away from billions of years of reaction is the
| reason why we have civilization.
|
| How would you say that experiment is going? Civilization
| isn't more powerful than evolution is what I would say, and
| we have seen a lot of man's worst impulses expressed with
| greater force than ever during the modern period. We haven't
| escaped evolution yet.
|
| > It's a little more cowardly to interpret the world in terms
| of how it makes you feel rather than the complicated, messy
| problem of navigating the world in terms of how it may be
| making everyone feel.
|
| Not sure how this relates to what I said. Sounds like you
| just wanted to turn my words around. I never said anything
| about substituting personal feelings for the act of being
| empathetic with others, and the topic is about not taking
| things personally, so this is a new goalpost. Nonetheless, I
| don't disagree. Part of having empathy for others is not
| judging their behavior from a position of assumed
| superiority.
| qqtt wrote:
| I agree. A lot of discussion and these philosophical quotes
| about living tend to want to inspire you to rebel against your
| nature. Think abstractly. Think rationally. Make the right
| decisions (for some value of "right").
|
| But people aren't really wired like this. Maybe rebelling
| against your nature is the "right" choice, but maybe just
| living your life isn't so bad either. Take things personally.
| Don't take things personally. Be angry, be frustrated. Get
| depressed. Also, be happy sometimes.
|
| You only have one life. The guy who never gets angry is going
| to the same place as the guy who fully feels those emotions.
| Maybe one will be less productive at a certain point in time
| than the other, but does it matter?
|
| These cosmic balance scale games are at the end of the day
| silly and superfluous.
| scns wrote:
| Khalil Gibran expressed it like this: "You can avoid crying
| all your tears, but you won't laugh all you laughter then."
| Highly recommend reading The Prophet by him. A thin book,
| saying a lot with a few words.
| courtf wrote:
| It's always a bit fraught to bring up the upsides of
| irrationality and potentially dangerous/destructive emotions
| and impulses. Bukowski didn't win a lot of popularity
| contests. I agree with what you've said here though.
|
| We may be abstracting the conversation beyond the limits of
| what is appropriate in the workplace here, but I tend to
| think the workplace should and could be a more relaxed space
| if we were more patient with the negative emotions of others.
| At least for me, that starts with recognizing my own
| emotional states, and not always being afraid to experience
| them authentically.
| sammalloy wrote:
| > no one is actually the Buddha
|
| I'm an atheist, but I've studied this, and I think this is a
| matter of major disagreement in the different schools.
|
| In the west, more contemporary (and often secular) teachers
| talk about how everyone is a potential Buddha.
|
| There are also close parallels with the more hippie, Christian
| schools that arose in the 1960s-1970s era (intentional
| communities) which also taught (quietly I might add), that
| everyone is a potential Christ.
|
| While this might seem like a trivial point, we do see signs of
| these teachings arising in the past, from century to century.
|
| These ideas are generally criticized as heretical and repressed
| because they threaten the hegemonic, institutional nature of
| religion, which still maintains that the one true
| interpretation is that there is a single figure (Christ,
| Buddha, etc) that adherents should aspire to worship, and that
| they can never equal or match.
|
| The heretical version states the opposite. These adherents
| believe that Christ and Buddha (assuming for the sake of this
| argument that they are real, historical figures) did not teach
| so that they could be worshipped, they taught so that others
| could become like them.
|
| When you see the religions in this way, then yes, everyone is
| truly the potential Buddha and the potential Christ, and the
| vast institutional power of the church disappears, and the
| roles of priests and clerics vanishes with them.
|
| This kind of change has the effect of emphasizing philosophy
| over ideology, and places the onus of being a good person and
| doing good works on the here and now, not on some mythical
| afterlife or legendary heaven or hell.
| courtf wrote:
| That seems reasonable to me, emphasis on "potential."
|
| Whether that potentiality can be realized here on earth, in
| this life, is where I would start to quibble.
| sammalloy wrote:
| Yes, I am reminded of the differences between, let's say,
| Joseph Goldstein, who non-dogmatically insists (hopefully
| that's not too strong a word, but it was the impression
| that I got from him) that one must conclude in the reality
| of rebirth; whereas someone like Gil Fronsdal can't quite
| be pinned down, but I have seen an essay by him (again, I
| hope I'm not misinterpreting things) that suggests that the
| concept of rebirth was invented by later Buddhists, which
| would support the secular endeavor.
|
| The best description of the doctrinal differences between
| the Buddhist schools that I've ever heard expressed clearly
| and with great humor was by Hyon Gak Sunim.
| courtf wrote:
| Thanks for these names! I will have to look into them.
|
| Rebirth is a tricky one for me because it just seems too
| fantastical, but then many things about our world and our
| selves remain inexplicable, if not outright fantastical
| themselves.
|
| Rebirth also might not be a true continuation of our
| individual consciousness, but a repackaging of sorts.
|
| I try to square these ideas with the physical world we
| inhabit, where our consciousness is very much affected by
| the environment and the state of our bodies and minds. It
| seems hard to believe in a soul (or anything ineffable
| that is a part of us lasting beyond death) in the
| traditional sense, when we are so malleable and our
| experiences so subjective. A tweak to my brain chemistry
| can drastically alter my behavior etc.
|
| So if I still want to think about rebirth, I feel I must
| conclude that whatever can survive death must be quite a
| bit more abstract than the consciousness I am familiar
| with.
| sammalloy wrote:
| > Every Negative Emotion is Driven by an Unmet Need
|
| > When you notice a negative emotion in someone, get curious
| about what that emotion might be -- and try to uncover the unmet
| need that accompanies it. 'Are you feeling X because you're
| needing Y?'.
|
| I have a sense that this practice could change the world and make
| life better for everyone. I wonder what it would take for
| everyone to start doing it.
| drummer wrote:
| Interesting how the author avoided sex and intimacy in his "list
| of common universal needs".
| Swenrekcah wrote:
| The list is "common" not "comprehensive".
| echlebek wrote:
| The uncommon need for sex and intimacy?
| panzagl wrote:
| At work, yes.
| echlebek wrote:
| Fair enough!
| EricE wrote:
| In public or interacting with co workers? I would hope sex
| would be uncommon in those situations!
| stronglikedan wrote:
| Neither is a _universal_ need. Plenty of single hermits are
| perfectly happy hermitting alone.
| mcguire wrote:
| " _Here's a link of commonly unmet universal needs at work:_ "
|
| 1. Commonly unmet.
|
| 2. At work.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| This reminds me of a conversation I overheard regarding
| legality of sex work.
|
| Apparently the individual was in favor of it, but when asked
| about hybrid options, where a administrative assistant would
| be available for office support and sex, they weren't quite
| able to explain why that should be illegal.
| Swenrekcah wrote:
| Interesting thought. My reply would be that a similar
| situation as with drugs, gambling and other vices applies.
|
| That is, it can be allowed but in specific establishments
| with clear rules and expectations.
|
| Not that sex is exactly like the other vices, but the lust
| variety kind of is.
| mrkstu wrote:
| There was a reason Mormon's tended to be hired by casinos
| in Vegas- their exposure to the local vices (and hence
| their corruptibility) was lower than average.
| whoomp12342 wrote:
| This article has a paywall. I will not take this personally and
| just not read it.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| I don't know if this is a mental hack or not, but I found years
| ago that if I mentally sing the comments (that I know would upset
| me otherwise), it totally removes the emotional impact of other
| people's negative writing.
|
| When I was contemplating why this might be so effective, I was
| reminded that satire of old often involved singing to point out
| other peoples absurdity. When you think about how much the
| powerful fear humor and satire, there might be something there...
| mkaic wrote:
| Wow, I've never heard of this before, I'm 100% trying this next
| time I'm in Twitter. Thanks for the tip!
| DangitBobby wrote:
| Singing and speech are different processes in the brain. It has
| been observed that some people with a stutter can still sing
| without any hint of a stutter. So I wonder if your trick is a
| result of some sort of personality difference in left brain
| versus right brain.
|
| 1. https://www.stuttering.co.nz/news/why-dont-we-stutter-
| when-w...
| hammock wrote:
| Love this. It reminds me of the whole "celebrities read mean
| tweets about themselves on Jimmy Kimmel" thing. Taking a
| comment out of context really blunts its power
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-08-31 23:00 UTC)