Weakness is strength??

google…
Loss - the state or feeling of grief when deprived of someone or something of value.

…or in my case, in my moments of realization, when it comes home to me in a manner of speaking, the life and person which I might have been and become, the unconditional love and relationship which I might have had, if I had had this someone of great value.

I almost gave up a friendship because someone could not understand how I could miss and ache and feel the loss of having not grown up with a father.
Once in a while, I conjure up images of reincarnation (which I don’t believe in) and how wonderful it might be having that kind of a relationship with a man. I’ll say to myself: I hope in my next life I get to experience this.
One cannot understand this loss unless they have experienced it.

So, yes, you can “lose” what you never had every moment you are reminded of this with the relationships between good fathers and their daughters.

‘Consciousness Seeker’ … taking your tag at face value … ergo: sincere/honest … supports your post. Similar experiences are reported in all spheres … philosophy … science … and religion.

Generally … any individual who claims more than a temporary … of very short duration … glimpse of “Consciousness” is a charlatan … including those individuals who translate their experience into human language.

The ‘experience’ is outside the envelope of main stream experience/thought … making efforts to explain it a waste of time and effort.

A logical and intuitive explanation is that the human mind is simply not equipped to handle such encounter(s).

Peter … thank you … thank you … thank you … for your constructive comments … a rare enough treat … for me at least … here at ILP

My google turns up
loss - the fact or process of losing something or someone.

Which is a hilarious definition.

I got another one.
Girl says - “Guess what, I lost something I never had.”
Me - “Your innocence.”
Girl - “You are no fun to play with.”
Me - “You lost your innocence at 18 but you never were innocent, you were born wicked.”
Girl - “Ha–Ha, very funny.”
Me - “Hey, I also know better things to play than word games.”

I’m such a klutz when it comes to the feelings.

Anyway, so I have this disability. Two options, guys.
Either we think of my disability as a strength and therefore I am and do feel good (better) about it.
Or we say weakness is good and I am worthy of special consideration because of my lot in life yadda yadda.
Actually, I’d like to have both if possible.
Guys, get on it. Figure this stuff out.

It makes no sense to talk about strength and weakness separate from intention, goals and purpose.

If you want to win an Olympic goal in Weightlifting, then you need lots of muscular strength. If you want to win an Olympic goal in Marathon, then that same muscular strength is a weakness. You need other ‘strengths’ to win Marathon.

I am strong now!

  • A guide how to feel good about yoself n’shit with word games.

I hear this is a legitimate thing.
And with legitimate I don’t mean it’s legal but I mean it as “it’s a good, positive, thing”.

The more word games change the more they stay about the same.

Perhaps weakness is strength because strength is weakness. That is to say, if you look at anything people regard in themselves as strength, you usually discover that they are strong because inside they are weak, and its a reaction to that weakness. A covering up of that.

The Chinese people(s) learned a very very long time ago that contradiction(s) … weakness/strength … dialectic(s) … weakness/strength … given enough time without intervention … without hostility and violence … would work itself/themselves out.

The West has yet to learn this lesson.

Is_Yde_opN

:evilfun: The first definition is for dummies.

Maybe that is not such a bad thing. That realization might make you tred more lightly.
Sometimes what people are looking for is more understanding than simple sentimentality.

Just for clarity, is this disability referring to your being a klutz when it comes to feelings or anything which you might consider to be a disability?

A man who is blind DOES have a disability but at the same time he doesn’t allow that disability to get in the way of living his life in the best possible way. It isn’t so much of a deterrent for him.

Anyone who has gone on a job interview realizes how important the perception of a weakness also being a strength is.
For instance, some might consider being a perfectionist as being a weakness of sorts but it is the perfectionist who would always strive to turn in the draft of the brief with no errors.

Some would think that always needing to be on time for things could be a weakness and it might be under certain conditions a sign a neurosis lol - but to an employer it would definitely be a strength. Who wants an employee who shows up late?

Who would say that weakness is good except for those who seek self-pity or the pity of others. All that does is weaken one all the more.

On the other hand, seeing that we do have our weaknesses - that at times we are weak - reminds us that we are after all only human. But we don’t stop there.

=D>

Well said.

The ability of “seeing that we do have our weaknesses” I would actually consider a strength.

:-k

encode_decode"]=D>

Most definitely.

Are you asking me to think :mrgreen: or is it you who is pondering that?
I necessarily think that asking another to think can be like that other turning on a light.

One of those weaknesses can be our biases. The ability to see that we have them (which is difficult for us humans) and to embrace them while at the same time trying to transcend them is a positive tool or a strength.

Well . . .

It is I who am pondering that.

I could not have said it better myself.

I always hope to not leave the wrong impression - it seems I do it often - sometimes I present a biased argument because I forget to present the other half of what I am thinking. A mental Achilles’ heel of mine.

Now for something completely pointless - I just like the following Smilies:

](*,)

:angry-banghead:

Anyhow . . .

:laughing:

The next time you could just make up some definition. Eventually it can also be found on google.
Who knows, maybe you did so anyway and the google talk was just deception.

Very clever, you have outsmarted me here.

Mhm.
Understanding what the other is saying… okay, I’m taking notes here.

As for the rest,

  • computing malfunction -

Must be a klutz malfunction.

What I will say about it is the realisation that deception and self-deception only work if it is not recognised as such.

Cool . . .

I get those a lot - especially where my own weaknesses are involved but I have found them to happen among strengths too.

I don’t think that’s true. The concept of power has nothing to do with goals and everything to do with what one can do i.e. the range of actions one is expected to perform in certain situations, based on one’s history, including the history of one’s family.

The fact that muscular strength makes certain actions, such as running, difficult to perform does not make it a weakness.

Weakness simply means not being able to do much. It’s the polar opposite of power.

I agree.

Isn’t this where “average” everything is optimal in the long run? Too much muscle is slowing, too little muscle is slowing. Too tall is slowing (wind retention), too short is slowing (short stride). This may drive some superior objectivists crazy, but there are numerous reasons, advantageous reasons to being average or what was once called a well rounded individual or jack-of-all-trades (no obvious strengths or weaknesses), simply capable.

Well rounded does not mean average. It simply means having breadth. And it does not mean having no depth though it is generally expected of all-arounders to have less depth than specialists. In the long run, all-arounders want more depth. They don’t want to remain at the same level of depth.

It happens that the best sportsmen are all-arounders. Way above average, in other words. Don’t confuse average in general with average in depth. All-arounders have average depth – that I can accept – but their breadth more than makes up for it. You need to sum everything. Don’t be selective.

What’s with this hatred of quantities? “Less is more”, they say. “Average is the best”, they say. “Weakness is strength”, they say. Can’t you be more self-contradictory than that?

The time has come when a man has to restate and repeat and reinforce – because it has been forgotten, obscured, denied – that “best is best”, “more is more” and “strength is strength”. Seriously.

We want MORE.

Who the fuck wants less? Unless that less is generally more, of course. Who wants average? Who wants these imaginary, entirely arbitrary, middle points?

Noone.

No-fucking-one.

Ability has nothing to do with goals. Too much emphasis on goals. It has to do with number of actions one can perform. It has to do with QUANTITIES.

Too much, too little, too weak or too strong,who be the judge?
The safest bet is average.

MA,

Is that an advocation for conspicuous consumption, greed? :evilfun:

I did sum it all up over the long haul and average wins! :astonished: :laughing: :-"

95% of people lack the aptitude to become “more” in ways that truly matter. What you consider all-arounders, I consider average which didn’t use to have the bad rap it does today. Now average is a dirty word which most people fall below unbenownst to themselves. Today, everyone is a specialist who doesn’t know jack about jack so its irony all-arounders me. :mrgreen: