4 Things Politicians Will Never Understand About Poor People

Post Reply New Topic

Your comments are very interesting to me. You say you help in a homeless shelter. Maybe I have misjudged your character. You are an enigma to me. You seem to display warmth and coldness towards people at the same time. I don't know how to explain it.

Do you mind if I speak to you in PM? I would love for you to tell me about your life and I would love to be able to tell you about mine. The thing is I am struggling with different things I don't grasp. Somewhere along the line I zigged when I should've zagged. I would love to compare notes if you do not mind.

The thing is the positive affirmations you like to use do not help me one bit. What would help me is things like you telling me what measures and techniques you did to get through basic training for the military? How were you able to keep up with the rest of your squad? You were able to go in and succeed in war which is a high stress situation. You're probably able to use these techniques in your everyday life. Maybe I or others can use them as well.

Another thing, you were able to get into IT and figure it out how to do that. I literally tried to but failed because I had difficulty determining where the bottom was?

It's called "being real". I do not let my disabilities define me, and I have worked hard to overcome them instead of wallowing in self-pity and confusion.

Set a goal, work for it, and never give up.

Give back to those who have helped you along the way.

That's all you need to know.

This is the definition of self-pity. excessive, self-absorbed unhappiness over one’s own troubles.

Fnord, why do you keep focusing on my emotional state instead of the logic and rationale of what I say? You're treating one's emotional state as like a muscle that one can voluntary move. How do you derive this? How does a person wallow in self pity and confusion? What are the faulty premises this person is coming from that led to his excessive, self-absorbed unhappiness over one's troubles?

You're giving me the same rationale that NTs give me and what I am telling you is it does not make logical sense to me and is fallacious.

If one is confused and is going by faulty premises that leads to faulty thinking then how can he use this same faulty thinking to get to sound thinking? This is what you're expecting and again I don't get how you derive how people are able to do this and why you expect them to. Can you answer this?

It is irrelevant whether I feel self-pity or not. I am questioning and examining your whole belief system.

For whatever reason you and others keep focusing on these positive affirmations and things like self-pity almost in a preservative way. Why do you do this?

Let's say negative attitude, negative emotions like self pity are y.
Let's say my experiences and my status in society are x.

Why do you derive x as a function of y instead of treating y as a function of x?

Why does y lead to x instead of x leading to y? What are your premises that you base your reasoning on to derive y leading to x?

Fnord, your reasoning may be sound and logical. Herein lies the problem. You've stated I have faulty premises. What exactly are they?

How is it logically possible not to depend on others whatsoever? If you want to function in a given society one has to conform to their social veneer am I correct? If I am correct and I don't have the premises and assumptions they have to do this then how would it be possible for one not to be dependent on others by them telling you what their premises and assumptions are?

I know a song that goes: "Depending on how you see it, the ship is free, or it's sinking." then later: "Depending on how you see it you're wasting time or in a moving line."

It's about life and how you look at it. The way you see things will affect the kind of life you have. If you see things as negative your life will be negative. If you look at the positives then life will be positive.

"4 things politicians will never understand ..." are just four things in a sea of a trillion they won't understand about people.

How do you derive this as so? What are your premises that lead to your conclusion? Your rationale makes no sense to me.

Let's talk about the ship and buoyancy.
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definitio ... h/buoyancy

If there is more pressure on the ship that pushes it down then keeps it afloat it will sink. If it is less it will float. How is it logically possible for the ship to be free if it is sinking? This makes no sense to me.

Here is the thing. It doesn't matter what my thoughts, feelings and attitude is. There is an objective reality outside of my self that is independent of these three things. We may be wrong at times at determining what objective reality but to say reality is dependent upon my thoughts, feelings and attitude makes no sense to me. I don't see it or grasp this concept.

Because they are lyrics from a song they are not meant to make scientific sense. The sub text of the song is that life is what you make it. If you see your life as hard and difficult then it will be, if you see your life as an adventure then it will be.

#5. Poor people do not have millions of dollars money set aside in a secret Swiss bank account for a "rainy day".

#6. Poor people will not vote for candidates that are condescending toward and dismissive of poor people.

#7. If voting for wealthy candidates results in no increase in income, a poor person is likely to vote next time for candidates that deliver on social reform.

#8. Poor people are not stupid; they will not believe every lie ever told by wealthy white males running for public office.

#9. Poor people do not want to be poor.

What if there isn't really any way to look at a lot of it positively...I mean sure sometimes that makes a big difference in how you feel about things but its not always a possible. For instance I'd say with certainty that there was nothing positive about being picked on, bullied and ostracized excessively as a child.......Nope no matter how I slice it it's negative. Could it have been worse sure, still doesn't make it something I can see in a positive light.

The fact I survived and am doing my best to continue doing so is positive, but the that in itself is not. So what then? should one delude them self into seeing everything in a positive light no matter how negative it is? Or are you simply suggesting to try and look at things more positively where possible?

I would say to look at things positively where possible. Of course I know that some things are negative and no matter how you look at them they will be negative. So in that case choose not to look at them. If there are bad memories of traumatic events, try to replace those memories by moving forward in life and burying the bad memories under newer positive experiences.

I figured that is what you meant, had to make sure since some people seem to advocate constant positivity 24/7 even in the face of terrible things which how anyone could do that is beyond me. Anyways that all is easier said than done, probably for lots of people especially with some disorders like PTSD in which ones ability to choose not to look at the bad memories is impaired and they may be bombarded by them regardless of any efforts not to...but it does make sense.

We all have our own views on how life should be approached, no one way is better than another.

If you are looking for some "objective truth" in how one should go about life then I doubt you will find it because I don't think there is one.

I would say there is some truth in the statement "life is what you make it", but there is also some truth in the statement "life makes you".

Robdomec,

I corrected some grammatical errors and added a few more things to it.

Robdemanc, this is what I do not follow. You, Fnord, and others repeat as though it is self-evident. For me, it is not. I don't grasp how you derive your conclusion, "The way you see things will affect the kind of life you have" as so. What are your premises that you use to reach your conclusion?

I do agree with it to some extent but not to the extent of what you, Fnord and other people seem to take it to.

It is time to put down what I do believe. First, I see this thinking that you and others have as simplistic and biased.

You are looking at one part of the tapestry. The other part that you are neglecting is the converse to what you believe and say which is “the kind of life one has may affect the way ones sees things.”

Even when you state your belief you state it as though it is absolute in nature when it is not. Why couldn't pessimistic thinking be used as strength as long as it is not used in excess and that is the same with positivity? This is called Defensive Pessimism.

The issue that comes up is different perceptions of the same event. Our perceptions our based upon our experiences, biases, prejudices, points of view, faulty thinking, faulty premises, etc. Our perceptions could be based upon faulty thinking and faulty premises which causes further faulty perceptions which causes even faultier thinker. It becomes cyclic in nature.

This means people's perceptions including mine could be skewed. This means my perceptions and feelings could be unreliable. This is why my personal feelings and attitude does not matter to me.

What I desire is sound premises and sound conclusions therefore leading to sound thinking. This means one has to pursue objective truth as much as possible. One has to set aside his perceptions whether they're positive or negative. One has to set aside as much as possible his attitude as much as possible even though it can be difficult.


This is what I am trying to do with Fnord, you and others.


This is what you are saying and how it comes across to me. For me, it makes no sense and I don't grasp your premises that you derive your beliefs. You seem to believe that one can change his attitude and his feelings like it is a voluntary muscle to be moved instead of looking at the circumstances that the person's attitude and feelings come from.

I do believe one can control his reaction and behaviors to his feelings and attitude though. For instance, if I am angry at someone I choose not to murder them because I believe and I choose to accept it as wrong. Something in my gut tells me it is wrong. I choose to follow that.

I am angry at those with Fnord's beliefs. I could curse them out but I choose not to. I choose to see that my own beliefs could have faulty premises which lead to faulty thinking. I choose to question and challenge his beliefs and your beliefs as well. I choose to question and challenge mine as well. I desire a better understanding of objective reality as much as possible and I wish to share that with you, Fnord and others. This is why I do what I do.

I wrote this a while back.

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt206352.html

If I truthfully have faulty premises to what I say here in my post, what I say here, and I have faulty thinking then this is what I ask of others. Please show me why my thinking is skewed and why it is skewed? What premises in my thinking are skewed?

My post and what I've written here documents my thoughts and my conclusions that are based upon my experiences. The thing is you're trying to state that I need to be positive and that my thoughts become reality without justifying the premises behind it. There is some truth to it that I can justify which further proves my point. Let’s say I give a negative thought or assertion. People will react to it in a negative light whether the rationale behind it is sound or not. This is fact that I can confirm. Even if your way of thinking is correct by the nature of being correct don’t others have negative attitudes as well? Can’t they change their attitudes and emotions as well? If your beliefs are sound then why does it have inconsistencies and contradictions such as this?


What I reject the level that you take it to and justified my rejection with my reasoning, my premises and my rationale. If my rejection is based upon skewed thinking that I have then can you all please show me with logical reasoning please? How do you derive what you derive?

All others have been saying is that it is absolutely correct without any justification whatsoever.

Sweetleaf has had horrible experiences and traumas that lead to her attitude and her disposition about things right now. Because of this, she may have faulty assumptions that lead to faulty conclusions. What she needs is true professional help to get her to change some of her faulty assumptions she may have.

She has emotional baggage based upon her experiences that have led to possibly faulty assumptions and conclusions that she may have. Telling her to change her attitude like it is a muscle that can be voluntary be flexed will not work and if it does then I don't grasp the logic behind it. This is how I see it. What she needs in my opinion and based upon my understanding of reality thus far is positive experiences. Part of that positive experience that she needs is for others in society to show they care about her and others who have major issues by helping them out. Some examples may be to put money up for her medical care. If I am wrong then why am I wrong?

If all you and others can do is restate your beliefs that seem to cause harm and without justification I have to reject them based upon logical grounds and moral grounds as well. I believe in the Socratic principle that no one intentionally does evil. I believe people do evil because of ignorance. The greatest evil perpetuated is by those who think they know what is good and what is good for the other person. To me, you and others are perpetuating an evil that is based upon possible ignorance. If I am wrong then by all means please show me.

what someone assumes, one's premises are precisely "how they see things".

ruveyn

I agree with this ruveyn to an extent. Even premises can be conclusions from other premises. This is why I ask questions. ruveyn, if my premises are faulty I would like to know why they are faulty. If how I see things or perceive things are faulty then I ask why?

There is a reality that is outside of our perceptions that we don't perceive with our five senses.. For example, we can only see light that is on the visible spectrum that is on the electromagnetic spectrum. We can only hear sounds on a certain range of frequencies. Dogs can hear sounds we can't hear. There is an objective reality that exists independently of our thoughts, wishes, feelings, attitudes, and emotions.

I do believe we have some influence over reality but we don't control the laws of time and space.

There are times that we can inadvertently skew our perceptions or the science we base our understanding on may be erroneous or it may not have all of the components.

If I am wrong, where am I wrong and why is it wrong?

I do not agree with this. For example, I believe it was the Aztecs who practiced human sacrifice. Would you see this is as living good? Personally, I do not.



By stating there is not an objective truth you've just stated one therefore negating what you believe.



I agree there is some truth to both of these statements.

Here is the thing. What you believe has become accepted as mainstream in the USA. I know you, Fnord, and others seek to do good by others with this belief but by your belief in your own goodness you are inadvertently perpetrating harm against others and you can't provide logical justification for it.

Fnord has suggested to love our nation or leave it. I can't leave it just like a doctor can't do harm to his patient due to the Hippocratic oath he took. This belief seems to be spreading across the planet as well and it is filled with fallacious thinking. I don't claim to know what the objective truth(s) are but what I desire is more people to embrace the idea of desiring objective truth(s) and the desire of obtaining them.

Sweetleaf is one in many that is being harmed by fallacious thinking.

If it turns out that I am wrong and I have fallacious thinking then I will listen.