Weakness is strength??

[pilgrim-seeker_tom]

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.

[Arcturus Descending]

Is_Yde_opN

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

Which is a hilarious definition.

The first definition is for dummies.

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

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.

Either we think of my disability as a strength and therefore I am and do feel good (better) about it.

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?

Or we say weakness is good and I am worthy of special consideration because of my lot in life yadda yadda.

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.

[encode_decode]

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.

Well said.

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.

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

[Arcturus Descending]

encode_decode"]=D>

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

Most definitely.

Are you asking me to think 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.

[encode_decode]

Well . . .

Are you asking me to think or is it you who is pondering that?

It is I who am pondering that.

One of those weaknesses can be our biases.

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:





Anyhow . . .

[Is_Yde_opN]

The first definition is for dummies.

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.

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.

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.

[encode_decode]

Cool . . .

As for the rest,
- computing malfunction -

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

[Magnus Anderson]

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 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.

[WendyDarling]

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 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.

[Magnus Anderson]

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.

[Magnus Anderson]

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.

[Meno_]

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

[WendyDarling]

MA,

MA: We want MORE.

Is that an advocation for conspicuous consumption, greed?

MA: You need to sum everything. Don't be selective.

I did sum it all up over the long haul and average wins!

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.

[encode_decode]

The West has yet to learn this lesson.

I am interested to know why you think this - I have noticed that you have made a few negative comments about the west. I see a whole different set of mistakes that the west makes.

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.

There is a western fairy tale that talks of contradiction. Western science has a good grasp on contradiction - magnetism is a good example where it turns out that the contradictory forces oppose each other - something that is felt by children. Individuality - notice where duality fits after Indivi. I think the west tends to go where the east is not willing. I wonder about the value of having an east and west in the first place - especially in 2017. This is a division of the human race - is that humane? - a first division turns out to be a duality. Would it not be better if everyone gets their s#%t together and unite.

It reminds me of the girls versus boys crap we used to do at school. Is it such good philosophy?

Just saying . . .

[pilgrim-seeker_tom]

The West has yet to learn this lesson.

I am interested to know why you think this - I have noticed that you have made a few negative comments about the west. I see a whole different set of mistakes that the west makes.

I don't recall posting anything negative about the West ... perhaps you could explain your use of the word "negative".

Do you find the comment ... "The West has yet to learn this lesson" ... negative?

I suppose it may fall under the revelation JSS delivered recently ... "Truth is destructive"

[encode_decode]

You have a good point here and I could be mistakenly identifying something here . . .

I don't recall posting anything negative about the West ... perhaps you could explain your use of the word "negative".

Do you find the comment ... "The West has yet to learn this lesson" ... negative?

I suppose it may fall under the revelation JSS delivered recently ... "Truth is destructive"

I only find "The West has yet to learn this lesson" a little negative, nearly pessimistic - I am certainly not saying you are wrong but rather less objective than you should be. What about the truth of the East?



Chill . . . I just like to be objective about things is all . . . that does not mean you have to or should . . . I might be falsely detecting negativity for that matter.

[pilgrim-seeker_tom]

You have a good point here and I could be mistakenly identifying something here . . .

I don't recall posting anything negative about the West ... perhaps you could explain your use of the word "negative".

Do you find the comment ... "The West has yet to learn this lesson" ... negative?

I suppose it may fall under the revelation JSS delivered recently ... "Truth is destructive"

I only find "The West has yet to learn this lesson" a little negative, nearly pessimistic - I am certainly not saying you are wrong but rather less objective than you should be. What about the truth of the East?



Chill . . . I just like to be objective about things is all . . . that does not mean you have to or should . . . I might be falsely detecting negativity for that matter.

encode_decode ... I mostly enjoy our bantering ... though I'm still looking for a coherent position that glues your thoughts together ... or at least threads them together.

For example ... you rebuke me for being negative concerning the West ... is the term "Banana Republic" pejorative?

I do have some thoughts on this for example, some things would have changed but most would have stayed the same. As per the quote of George Sand's it seems that it does resemble the modern day in a few ways; where the palaces are even more numerous as well as more diverse*; the people still envy the rich**; the wealth is still in a few men's hands; avarice, immorality, and ineptness remains***;

* by this I mean the old palaces are still there but new palaces have arisen like palaces of corporation.
** Even at the expense of there own happiness.
*** People want everything the easy way these days. Sometimes they will break the law to achieve it.

In some ways it seems we have reached a cultural and spiritual entropy by keeping specific "imprints" strong. Hence a paradox.



Enter the new banana republics - makes you wonder that is for sure.

[phyllo]

I am interested to know why you think this - I have noticed that you have made a few negative comments about the west. I see a whole different set of mistakes that the west makes.

His overwhelming theme is that the East is spiritually superior compared to the West.

One can say that he makes negative comments about the West but more importantly ... are those comments correct or true ?

I don't think that he has shown any Eastern spiritual superiority.

[encode_decode]

Your argument makes sense to me(there is however a "but"):

encode_decode ... I mostly enjoy our bantering ... though I'm still looking for a coherent position that glues your thoughts together ... or at least threads them together.

For example ... you rebuke me for being negative concerning the West ... is the term "Banana Republic" pejorative?

I also enjoy our communication - my position is simply fair-mindedness on all subjects and I think that is fairly consistent in my behaviour. I am still not certain that anybody has any idea why we are alive in the first place - what purpose there is for us. For me to settle on any belief system, I feel is to give up on the truth which I am really not sure any human is capable of delivering. I am not convinced that I was rebuking you. Indeed the term Banana Republic is derogatory - I do however feel that myself being a westerner and applying that term to the west is simply stating that I identify with what you are saying about the west. I do think the west has achieved much in history and has a lot of mistakes it could learn from. The west has already learnt from its achievements and learnt many things from its mistakes. This is one world we live in - one globe - or for those who believe the earth is flat then one flat earth; this gives me an impression that humanities interests are best served by humanity not the notion of either east or west. I also wonder about the coherency when you talk about two separate entities of humanity - it sounds similar to the duality you profess the west has regarding the yin and yang yet I do not presume you are saying the west is inherently evil even though your words point to a slight probability of this being the case. I am willing to keep pursuing communication on topics that you bring up even if you are taking sides but know this - I do not take sides - I love all of humanity.

[pilgrim-seeker_tom]

Mags wrote:
I am simply a statistic of a product of a toxic world.

pilgrim-seeker_tom wrote:
Mags ... you are a flicker of light ... a glimmer of hope personified ... during a dark and gloomy night for humanity.

Mags wrote:
I think that's you.

[Magnus Anderson]

MA,

MA: We want MORE.

Is that an advocation for conspicuous consumption, greed?

Right, greed simply means wanting more and rumination simply means thinking a lot. Or is it perhaps that greed means consuming more than you can manage and rumination thinking more than you can manage? What do you think? What happens when you consume more than you can manage? You become less not more, right? I think that it is you, not me, who's being greedy here. Ask yourself why do you have these self-defeating thoughts. Is it because of over-thinking perhaps?

[Magnus Anderson]

Every measurement has a goal.

When you want to determine who of the two men is taller, your goal is to measure their heights and compare them to see which one is greater.

When you want to determine who of the two men is more able, your goal is to measure their abilities and compare them to see whose set of abilities is greater.

In both cases, the end-goal is to see which of the two measurements is GREATER.

The question is who has more and who has less. The question is not who can better achieve this or that goal.

Someone who is in possession of abilities such as A, B and C is greater, in terms of ability, than someone who is merely in possession of ability A. This is hardly disputable.

In reality, however, such an ideal containment relationship between sets is rare, so what we have to do is approximate.

[WendyDarling]

MA,

If one lacks the aptitude to excel, it is greed to waste resources on one's futility. Rumination is contemplation gone wrong or dwelling. For instance, it's easy to ruminate on ILPers who lack the potential to change, to become more. Pity isn't pretty.

MA: Ask yourself why do you have these self-defeating thoughts.

What self-defeating thoughts?

[MagsJ]

Mags wrote:
I am simply a statistic of a product of a toxic world.

pilgrim-seeker_tom wrote:
Mags ... you are a flicker of light ... a glimmer of hope personified ... during a dark and gloomy night for humanity.

Mags wrote:
I think that's you.

In the wake of my now slowly-receding recently-acquired physical weakness, yes I did have to acquire a different kind of strength formed by the new state I found myself in.. a lot of mental energy was involved during that time, which is maybe why the physical was not fully supported and so somewhat dis-abled by the brain.. a case of self-induced life support?

[Magnus Anderson]

MA: Ask yourself why do you have these self-defeating thoughts.

What self-defeating thoughts?

If your goal is to be average then those with a goal to be the best will certainly outcompete you. This is why your goal is self-defeating.