Harlequin and the Bandar-log

Post Reply New Topic

From Dorothy Sayers, Murder must Advertise [a good book, you can find the full text online]:

"When you find them different, you try to make them all alike. Do you know anybody who is different?”

“Yes; you're different.”

“Only so long as I stay on my branch, Circe. If I come down to your level, I should be just like all the rest.”

“Come down and try.”

“I know when I am well off. You had better come up to me.”

“You know I can't.”

“Of course you can't. You can only go down and down.”

“Are you trying to insult me?”

“Yes, but it's very difficult.”

There are three main categories of people who see me as a heavy Green monkey.

A Unthinking Powervolk who notice that I will not bow down to the image or stop praying to my God [check Daniel 3, Daniel 6].

The THOUGHTFUL Powervolk will have occasional problems with me but know how to respect strength even in others.


B. Unthinking Socializers who see that I do not follow their path and subscribe to their doctrines. The Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.

THOUGHTFUL Socializers will have problems with my ideas but know how to respect thought and principle even in others.

C. Feartyfeartyfolk among the Socialized. A different opinion, a different allegiance means a demon.

SECURE Socialized do not always get me, but we get on just fine.

It cuts both ways.

Moi, I will happily talk about anything to anybody who sees me as a fellow human. I enjoy the ones with different angles as much as the likeminded. You like Chomsky? You like mayonnaise? You believe in astrology? Fine. I don't, and don't, and don't. But if you are willing we can talk about - anything. Come sit and we will discuss palm trees or No plays or the traffic in Boston.

But the people who call me a liar, the people who twist what I say [I think it is usually unintentional - but inevitable], the people who will not mean what they say and say what they mean - the people in fact who Green Monkey me - they are raml and bitl, de Boer and de Kikvors. And I have nothing to say to them.

---------------

???

peace j

I have found this place interesting as a forum of concepts, not a place for exhibiting one's personality difficulties. When one is intensely concerned with one's self there are other forums on this cite to request opinions.

Pax tibi. Check out Vexcalibur, Sand and certain others who see me as a red cape for their bull.

Then why do you not discuss concepts, instead of inflicting your personality difficulties on people who do want to discuss concepts?

Oh, I suggest ignoring it then, I have similar issues with one or two here and there are one or two here that bring out the worst in me, I am endevouring to rise to the challenge of bringing my higher self to the fore, wish me luck.

An old Bedouin saying along the lines of 'one in ten people you meet you will not get along with, it has nothing to do with good or bad, right or wrong it is just life, the secret to harmonious living is recognising your one in ten match ups and maintaining appropriate formalities and space' comes to mind. Seems like good sense to me, trying to keep it in mind.

peace j

I have noted some of that, and I do indeed wish you luck. I did try - I for quite a while refused to respond to Sand at his most manic and inane. Trouble is, the mere fact I exist seems to draw him out. As I told him, I know the feeling - the one I call TG walked into the room and within 15 minutes I was doing a full Vexcalibur on him.

I have now moved to plan Q - we will see how that works.

The OP presents a personality problem. There is nothing offensive in my suggestion that these can be investigated better in more appropriate forums.

@ sand, a valid observation except perhaps seeing it as an interaction of personalities problem viv-a-vis my bedouin folk saying is a better perspective?

peace j

No offense taken, though you do not seem willing to answer my question.

The point I made above is in fact at the base of - just a rough estimate - at least 50% of all wars and political disputes. It is not a personality problem - at least not mine.

It is a byproduct of the fact of personalities. I strongly recommend checking out this site: http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/

If you can get past the origins of the enneagram concept, you will find that the system explains a LOT of personal interactions.

It explains much of politics. It accounts for the differences in the philosophies of Russell and Wittgenstein and Weil. It helps to understand why the Carthusians and the Creation Science folks and the Society of Friends are as they are.

Frankly, although there is no doubt that personal differences are a strong element in conceptual conflicts of ideas it is vital that the consistency and validity of the ideas themselves as pragmatic tools are dominant in any sensible discussion.

This is a sincere request - most of my queries are:

Could you possibly restate that? I cannot get that to make sense.

Perhaps more simply, ideas are fruitful and acceptable by their utility more than by the character of their creator.

Thank you. Of course. That is my point - the character - highly dubious - of Gurdieff - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._I._Gurdjieff - can be ignored in light of the practical application of enneagrammatic insights to decoding otherwise incompreensible human interactions.