Right Speech: Getting Personal

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).

I can see how the following comment(s) might reasonably be taken personally by someone else.

(1) "I disagree with you."
2
3%
(2) "You are incorrect."
6
8%
(3) "How could a person with the qualities you advocate ever take the position you hold to be true?"
6
8%
(4) "Here is the source of your confusion." (When you do not believe you are confused.)
7
9%
(5) "... backing away slowly ..." (followed by eye-roll emoji)
13
17%
(6) "You are too pig-headed to listen."
14
18%
(7) A post pointing out "your increasingly hysterical comments."
10
13%
(8) "You are a solipsist."
7
9%
(9) "That is your own idiosyncratic view, but the Buddha teaches ..."
7
9%
(10) "I can see how my comment may have offended you."
4
5%
 
Total votes: 76

User avatar
L.N.
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 6:01 pm

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by L.N. » Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:48 am

SDC wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:33 pm
Do you know what makes your efforts typical? That you, like so many others, assume public activism will affect change. All it does is break down the community. Everything you are doing here is a carbon copy of someone else's previous efforts to take the forum in one direction or another.
What are you talking about? You may be conflating this with the other Topic about disparaging other faiths. There, I was assuming a role of public activism. Here in this Topic, I was trying to start a friendly and respectful conversation at the invitation of Sam Vara, whose idea it was to start a different thread.
Truth is, there is no right thing to say to directly and immediately affect the change you claim to represent.
What are you talking about? I have not claimed to represent any change. Rather, I have suggested that we all have personally responsibility for the kamma we perform. Again, you may be thinking of the "disparaging other faiths" Topic.
Many right things need to be said repeatedly in order to create the appropriate context which can then help generate enough momentum to allow for the necessary density to be there in your words so that they won't go to waste. And not all of those words must be in reference to that proposed change. Either way, you skipped over that step.
What last step?
Perhaps you have the whole history of the forum at your disposal and figured that was enough, but I assure you it isn't. Because even if you're a former member I doubt enough of your fellow members know enough about you to trust in what you are claiming to stand behind.
Please be more clear. What specifically are you referring to?
You're an echo for what you despise and you're maintaining one another's prominence.
What are you talking about? What do you think I despise, and how is that relevant?
You have me perplexed in same way your predecessors did. Now what? If people like you only knew the influence regular members have had working in good faith behind the scenes you would realize why the public displays such as this accomplish very little in comparison.
What are you referring to by "public displays such as this"? I created a Topic. This is a forum. I am not following what you are trying to say to me. Can you be explicit?
I've been tending to some affairs off the forum so please do not offended if I don't return frequently to this discussion.
No worries. I just would like to know what you're talking about.
Sire patitthitā Buddhā
Dhammo ca tava locane
Sangho patitthitō tuiham
uresabba gunākaro


愿众佛坐在我的头顶, 佛法在我的眼中, 僧伽,功德的根源, 端坐在我的肩上。

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18545
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by retrofuturist » Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:00 am

Greetings,
L.N. wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:38 am
I have no idea why you are asking about my beliefs, as they are irrelevant to the Dhamma.
This is a Buddhist forum and I asked about how you understand kamma. Is that some kind of egregious sin according to L.N.'s fastidious laws of discourse?
L.N. wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:38 am
Your kamma is, as administrator, choosing not to prevent horrible comments

...

I never said other people's actions were your kamma. I don't know where you get that from.
Pick one.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

User avatar
L.N.
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 6:01 pm

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by L.N. » Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:01 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:39 am
Greetings L.N.,
L.N. wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:19 am
If you step back and look at the overall Topic, giving everybody the benefit of the doubt, you see the potential pitfalls of making personalized comments.

:rofl:

Stepping back and "giving everybody the benefit of the doubt", you'd understand that you've twisted what is otherwise general discourse into an exercise about fretting over so-called "personalized" comments, such that nobody dare address you or what you're doing, lest they get accused of the blanket crime of "personalized comments".
Where did that come from? I have never said "personalized comments" are a crime. I have made personalized comments, such as when I praised Sam Vara's post early in this Topic. Personalized comments are not the issue in and of themselves.
L.N. wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:19 am
If some other person had created the Topic, I suspect the reaction would be more positive.
Further to my last point, I think you over-estimate the extent to which participants (other than you), care about "you". I have no idea who "L.N." is. All your name and avatar do is provide a degree of continuity that signals that it's the same stranger who made one post, as who happened to make another.
Ok, so you don't care about me. That's fine. Then why the big effort to hijack this Topic for the purpose of directing repeated negative personalized comments toward me? Do you comprehend that I am not the subject of this Topic? Nor do I want to be the subject of this Topic? I had hoped people would play the ball. You have played the person and continue to do so.
Yet, from that continuity, I can discern that "L.N." expresses desires to control the nature of discourse.
What are you talking about? I don't want to control anything. I want to cultivate self control. I wanted to start a topic about Right Speech and personalized comments. How is that trying to control people?
I can see that "L.N." wishes to shut down certain topics of discussion, and certain modes of interaction.
Huh? I wish no such thing, except to the extent that I do believe blanket disparagement of other faiths should be strongly discouraged on a forum devoted to Dhamma discussion, and that friendly discussion is conducted best if Members self-regulate and take a friendly approach. Also, you habit of calling people names and demeaning Members should be reined in. So, yeah, I guess I can see what you are saying. I would like to see certain types of comments "shut down" so to speak, but it's not up to me, as I have acknowledged.
I can see that "L.N." wishes to exert control or influence over what others say, do, and possibly even think.
Why are we still talking about me?
I can see that "L.N." frequently makes baseless accusations about others, their intentions and their motives.
Please look in the mirror, friend.
I see as clear as day that "L.N." does not practice what he preaches.
That is your judgment, but my responsibility. I certainly try to practice what I preach, and if I do not, then I should. But why are we still talking about me? I thought you didn't care about me.
So what to make of this? Well, it doesn't paint a pretty picture, but since I don't really care about your identity, I'd be perfectly pleased for you to start afresh... stop making ordeals over preserving identity... stop hectoring others and trying to control them.... and just try to move forward without trying to interfere with the autonomy of others.
Well, as I have not tried to do any of those things, I'm not sure how to respond. Will you stop beating your wife?
Just chill out, calm down, be decent... and start saying and doing things that aren't so uptight and intolerant.
Well, I have felt very relaxed and tolerant, but I understand you do not see inside my mind. I think you are overlaying your perceptions on me, but it doesn't matter.
It's never too late...
I fully agree.
Metta,
Paul. :)
Metta
Sire patitthitā Buddhā
Dhammo ca tava locane
Sangho patitthitō tuiham
uresabba gunākaro


愿众佛坐在我的头顶, 佛法在我的眼中, 僧伽,功德的根源, 端坐在我的肩上。

User avatar
L.N.
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 6:01 pm

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by L.N. » Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:11 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:00 am
This is a Buddhist forum and I asked about how you understand kamma. Is that some kind of egregious sin according to L.N.'s fastidious laws of discourse?
L.N. wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:38 am
Your kamma is, as administrator, choosing not to prevent horrible comments

...

I never said other people's actions were your kamma. I don't know where you get that from.
Pick one.

Metta,
Paul. :)
I pick both. Your kamma is as follows:

(1) not enforcing TOS in a manner which cracks down on highly offensive and provocative comments about other traditions. Please note the fuller quote was as follows: "... choosing not to prevent horrible comments such as those which have been expressed about Muhammed being a rapist etc. Such comments appear to violate TOS but are allowed." The kamma to which I was referring is the volitional act of not enforcing TOS to prevent such comments from appearing on a forum devoted to discussion the Dhamma. - and -

(2) Other people's actions are not your kamma, and I never said they were.

It doesn't matter. My view of kamma, very simply, is that it is one's volitional action, the fruits of which one experiences oneself. One experiences only the fruits of one's kamma. But this does not mean we are incapable of harming others. If Jack's kamma is to kill Jill, Jill is just as dead no matter whose kamma is involved. I would never say that Jack's decision to kill Jill was a result of Jill's kamma. It doesn't work that way, in my view. Of course I understand kamma is much more nuanced and the foregoing summary doesn't do it justice and probably will be shot down with some valid remarks by someone who has a different view. We can agree to disagree, I hope.

Can we get back on Topic at some point?
:focus:
Sire patitthitā Buddhā
Dhammo ca tava locane
Sangho patitthitō tuiham
uresabba gunākaro


愿众佛坐在我的头顶, 佛法在我的眼中, 僧伽,功德的根源, 端坐在我的肩上。

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18545
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by retrofuturist » Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:16 am

Greetings,

You do realise the post you're fretting over is over seven years old, and in a closed topic don't you?

Shall we pull down the statues too?

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

User avatar
SDC
Posts: 3763
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by SDC » Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:30 am

L.N. wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:48 am
What are you referring to by "public displays such as this"? I created a Topic. This is a forum. I am not following what you are trying to say to me. Can you be explicit?
It is so funny that every time someone makes their intentions clear through consistencies in their speech, they act so surprised that the reader takes notice. You think each one of your posts is in a vacuum? My goodness, you're either 17, trying to be clever or completely oblivious. That is a private matter between you and you.

You want me to be explicit? Your shtick on DW in recent weeks is unoriginal and I've seen it many times before. People like you come and go like clockwork. You put in very little time but are then somehow qualified to pass judgment on the community, eventually get frustrated and then leave - all that yammering in vain.

However, if you would ever be interested in a lesson on how to influence this community I will gladly give you one. Just ask. But I'll leave you with this for now: if the attention is giving you a rush, then it is 90% about you. Take it from someone who used to talk a bunch of smack on here.

Yes, I know, you have no idea what I'm talking about. :smile:

User avatar
L.N.
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 6:01 pm

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by L.N. » Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:36 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:16 am
Greetings,

You do realise the post you're fretting over is over seven years old, and in a closed topic don't you?

Shall we pull down the statues too?

Metta,
Paul. :)
Are you referring to the post about urinating on the founder of a major world religion? I don't see why that should remain visible here on a forum devoted to discussion of Dhamma, but it's your call, not mine.

As to the statues, are you referring to the statues honoring Confederate leaders which were raised in the United States as part of the backlash against the Civil Rights movement and equal voting rights for African Americans? I guess you agree with the Trump supporters that these statues should have remained standing as a monument to state's rights? Personally, I think the statues were highly offensive to many African Americans, and it is good for society to remove these objects which have come to represent symbols of hatred to many who live in these communities. You are free to disagree.

Can we get back on Topic at some point?
:focus:
Sire patitthitā Buddhā
Dhammo ca tava locane
Sangho patitthitō tuiham
uresabba gunākaro


愿众佛坐在我的头顶, 佛法在我的眼中, 僧伽,功德的根源, 端坐在我的肩上。

User avatar
L.N.
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 6:01 pm

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by L.N. » Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:50 am

SDC wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:30 am
It is so funny that every time someone makes their intentions clear through consistencies in their speech, they act so surprised that the reader takes notice. You think each one of your posts is in a vacuum? My goodness, you're either 17, trying to be clever or completely oblivious. That is a private matter between you and you.
What are you talking about? Please be explicit.
You want me to be explicit? Your shtick on DW in recent weeks is unoriginal and I've seen it many times before. People like you come and go like clockwork. You put in very little time but are then somehow qualified to pass judgment on the community, eventually get frustrated and then leave - all that yammering in vain.
People like me? How are you the judge of me?
However, if you would ever be interested in a lesson on how to influence this community I will gladly give you one. Just ask. But I'll leave you with this for now: if the attention is giving you a rush, then it is 90% about you. Take it from someone who used to talk a bunch of smack on here.
I don't like "talking a bunch of smack." I like civility and friendliness. The attention doesn't give me a rush. It is unwanted. I had hoped to focus on the Topic, not on me. A lot of the discussion above makes no sense to me.
Yes, I know, you have no idea what I'm talking about. :smile:
Actually, I still don't know what you're talking about. Except that apparently you have a lot of opinions about me as a person. Whatever.
:focus:
Sire patitthitā Buddhā
Dhammo ca tava locane
Sangho patitthitō tuiham
uresabba gunākaro


愿众佛坐在我的头顶, 佛法在我的眼中, 僧伽,功德的根源, 端坐在我的肩上。

User avatar
Goofaholix
Posts: 2961
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by Goofaholix » Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:58 am

L.N. wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:42 am
I believe I am the only Member who has said anything nice or positive about other people here in this Topic. My efforts have been to respond in a measured, respectful way to the personalized comments, and to give praise where it is due. Do you think that any response other than non-response or bending over is a form of escalation? How would you respond if you created a Topic intended as a serious discussion about Right Speech etc. and were met with a slew of personalized comments addressing your prissiness, your confusion, your hauteur, your hypocrisy, why you are not to be taken seriously, etc. Honestly, this all adds to the discussion for anyone outside looking in. I have never been outraged or bothered. I thought this was a good opportunity to discuss why personalized comments can lend themselves to issues and are an opportunity for all of us to be more mindful and take personal responsibility.
Life is really tough when you're right and everyone else is wrong.
L.N. wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:42 am
How is that escalation?
This whole thread is escalation, if you can't see that I don't know what to tell you.

Anybody who has been on the internet forums or social media for more that a short while has no doubt noticed that a lot of people don't hold to the same standard of politeness that they would face to face. It's an unfortunate fact of life, Dhammawheel is really quite well behaved on the whole.
“Peace is within oneself to be found in the same place as agitation and suffering. It is not found in a forest or on a hilltop, nor is it given by a teacher. Where you experience suffering, you can also find freedom from suffering. Trying to run away from suffering is actually to run toward it.” ― Ajahn Chah

User avatar
L.N.
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 6:01 pm

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by L.N. » Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:59 am

Actually, I don't need an answer to the above. It doesn't matter.

Any way, the topic is supposed to be:

Personalized comments, we all make them, and sometimes they have a surprising effect on others. Sometimes we make them because we want to provoke or demean, or because we want to praise. Sometimes we don't realize our comments are personalized.

When we make a personalized comment, we have an opportunity to be aware that it may have an effect on the person to whom the personal comment is directed. We also have an opportunity to recognize the kernel of truth in that person's response to our comment, even if we think the person is wrong. The kernel of truth may be, I have made a personalized comment which has resulted in this misunderstanding.

Our next words after realizing this can be an opportunity to make things better, or make things worse.

This topic goes to the heart of Right Speech and addresses a common feature of human conversation. When we make a personalized comment, we are "playing the person, not the ball." As the poll illustrates, even innocuous comments may reasonably be taken personally.

That's a high-level summary of the Topic. I don't think there has been much discussion here about the nature of personalized comments, how they can come across, and one's accompanying personal responsibility for words spoke, notwithstanding that the person spoken to might have taken it the wrong way and is himself/herself responsible for his/her reaction.

If no interest in discussing, no worries.
Sire patitthitā Buddhā
Dhammo ca tava locane
Sangho patitthitō tuiham
uresabba gunākaro


愿众佛坐在我的头顶, 佛法在我的眼中, 僧伽,功德的根源, 端坐在我的肩上。

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18545
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by retrofuturist » Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:05 am

Greetings L.N.,
L.N. wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 7:14 am
Some of the choices in the poll are personalized comments, some are not. It may be worth asking, which of the comments would you direct at Bhante Dhammanando or another venerable monk?
All of those which happened to be true. Which, incidentally, happens to be none of them in the case of venerable Dhammanando.

Your classification scheme of personalized and non-personalized comments is totally inconsequential to me. Truth is truth. If feelings cannot handle truth, does the fault lie with the truth or the feelings?

:shrug:
L.N. wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 7:14 am
I wish we would all treat one another with the courtesy and respect we show to these Venerables.
Yes. I will speak the truth to both layfolk and bhikkhus... at this point, I cannot imagine it being any other way.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

binocular
Posts: 4046
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by binocular » Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:07 am

L.N. wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:42 am
My efforts have been to respond in a measured, respectful way to the personalized comments,
You do realize, though, that people have reported your posts for repeated personal attack?

The perception that you say you have of yourself and the perception that many posters here have of you, differ greatly.
L.N. wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:50 am
People like me?
People who say such things as you do. Every now and then, an idealistic poster (saying things like you do) rocks up here and wants to make a difference.
A lot of the discussion above makes no sense to me.

Communication rule #1: Know your audience.

User avatar
L.N.
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 6:01 pm

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by L.N. » Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:18 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:05 am
Your classification scheme of personalized and non-personalized comments is totally inconsequential to me. Truth is truth. If feelings cannot handle truth, does the fault lie with the truth or the feelings?
When one expresses the truth about one's views of another persons personal characteristics or state of mind, it may be the truth about the views one holds, but it may not be the truth about the person to whom the comments are directed.

"Play the ball, not the person" sums up one valid response when someone makes personalized comments.
Sire patitthitā Buddhā
Dhammo ca tava locane
Sangho patitthitō tuiham
uresabba gunākaro


愿众佛坐在我的头顶, 佛法在我的眼中, 僧伽,功德的根源, 端坐在我的肩上。

User avatar
L.N.
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 6:01 pm

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by L.N. » Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:23 am

binocular wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:07 am
You do realize, though, that people have reported your posts for repeated personal attack?
No, I was not aware. Not sure what would have been perceived as personal attacks. How is it that you seem to have more information about private reporting of posts than I do? The whole "reporting post" thing here is pretty bizarre. I didn't realize it was so public.
The perception that you say you have of yourself and the perception that many posters here have of you, differ greatly.
That is clear.
L.N. wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:50 am
People like me?
People who say such things as you do. Every now and then, an idealistic poster (saying things like you do) rocks up here and wants to make a difference.
A lot of the discussion above makes no sense to me.

Communication rule #1: Know your audience.
I am getting to know my audience. As stated, lowering expectations accordingly. Thanks.
Sire patitthitā Buddhā
Dhammo ca tava locane
Sangho patitthitō tuiham
uresabba gunākaro


愿众佛坐在我的头顶, 佛法在我的眼中, 僧伽,功德的根源, 端坐在我的肩上。

User avatar
L.N.
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 6:01 pm

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by L.N. » Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:31 am

Goofaholix wrote:
Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:09 pm
Looking at your poll 17% of respondents find the most offensive of the comments you listed as being "personal", this suggests to me that most people don't think this is the big deal that it's being made out to be.
Actually it's not 17% of respondents. There are 10 comments, and each is allocated a percentage of the total vote. The total percent is 100%. If a comment gets 17%, then that indicates it is more commonly viewed as a comment which could reasonably be taken personally. It does not mean 17% of respondents think the comment is "personal."

The point being that a reasonable person could take any one of these comments personally, even the non-personal ones. So when we make a comment which clearly is a personalized comment, so much more the chances for "playing the person, not the ball."
Sire patitthitā Buddhā
Dhammo ca tava locane
Sangho patitthitō tuiham
uresabba gunākaro


愿众佛坐在我的头顶, 佛法在我的眼中, 僧伽,功德的根源, 端坐在我的肩上。

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18545
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by retrofuturist » Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:58 am

Greetings,
L.N. wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:18 am
When one expresses the truth about one's views of another persons personal characteristics or state of mind, it may be the truth about the views one holds, but it may not be the truth about the person to whom the comments are directed.
State of mind cannot be known directly, but speech can be heard and actions/behaviours can be observed. Speech and actions both spawn from mind.

Thus, actions and speech can be known, and mindstate can be inferred. That said, inference is just inference and is fallible.

None of that is reason though for such realms of discussion to be in any way off-limits, especially when it is behaviours, attitude, speech etc. which need to be discussed... and sometimes they do.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

User avatar
Spiny Norman
Posts: 5159
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Spam, wonderful spam

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by Spiny Norman » Wed Nov 22, 2017 9:27 am

What a strange thread. For some reason it brought this to mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
"My religion is very simple - my religion is ice-cream."
Dairy Lama

binocular
Posts: 4046
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by binocular » Wed Nov 22, 2017 10:02 am

Spiny Norman wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 9:27 am
What a strange thread. For some reason it brought this to mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
Yes ... It feels like many of us have simply taken the bait!

:toilet:

I agree that the topic of personal attacks in discussion is relevant, but I think it would be more productive if some other poster would start it and anchor it, someone who is not so enmeshed with it, someone who wouldn't be making it so personally about themselves through using mostly examples of (perceived) personal attacks on themselves.

User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 5632
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by Aloka » Wed Nov 22, 2017 10:47 am

Spiny Norman wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 9:27 am
What a strange thread. For some reason it brought this to mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

Yes, good point, Spiny! :clap:


.

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3044
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Right Speech: Getting Personal

Post by Mr Man » Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:18 am

binocular wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:07 am

You do realize, though, that people have reported your posts for repeated personal attack?
Hi binocular
How do you know this?
binocular wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:07 am

The perception that you say you have of yourself and the perception that many posters here have of you, differ greatly.
I imagine that would apply to most people in this forum & out.

P.S thanks for your reply yesterday

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: robertk, Spiny Norman and 13 guests