Amnesia through hypnosis to erase painful memories.

#30

Postby Richard@DecisionSkills » Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:34 am

Joe100 wrote:Old timer hopping in here...

For what it's worth, and I do not imagine you will agree with or appreciate this comment, my experience of you on this forum is that you have a lot of knowledge and a lot of important contextual information. I think that's quite helpful, especially when we get people of all skill and knowledge levels on the forum.

At the same time, I have found that some of your comments seem to come across with a certain amount of certainty and what I experience as talking down to the poster.


Why thanks Joe, I'm glad you believe I have a lot of knowledge. How nice of you. But, might you share with me why after all this time you have not once posted in a single thread which I have participated to provide that positive message? Why did you wait and feel compelled to reach out only when the real message you want to share is how you feel that "some" of my comments talk down to posters?

It is an interesting phenomena, this "ghost audience," that sits in silence and waits until they disagree with my approach to speak up. Thousands of pieces of advice I have provided, plenty of people that say thanks, yet the silent audience waits until they see an opening to share their wisdom on how I am doing it wrong, or could do it better. Well, thanks Joe...I agree, I could do it better.

What is also funny, is how this ghost audience never sends a PM, but shares their wisdom of how they would approach it differently in public. Why do you think that is Joe? If you have felt I sometimes talk down to posters, why did you not send a PM over all these years? No. Something motivated you to avoid participating in hundreds of threads where the person seeking advice was glad or thanked me, and instead you picked this moment to make your opinion public.


I can imagine your motivation in speaking this way is to not give a stage to the pseudoscience and foolishness that we have in this field. And that makes sense to me, as that stuff does muddle the waters and make things more complicated for those who want to do real solid work.

At the same time I personally connect better with a more open and curious approach, one where words such as 'perhaps' and 'maybe' and 'in my experience' are used more freely than phrases like 'the fact is' and 'you can' 'you can't' and 'it's wrong'.

Might that approach risk allowing pseudoscience to have more of a stage? Perhaps. At the same time, in my personal experience, the gains of openness and speaking softly outweigh the loss. I could of course be wrong on that.


Well Joe, I actually enjoy discussing all sorts of pseudoscience. But, there is a time and a place. When a person asks should I go see a medical doctor or try this voodoo doll, it is not the time to share the fun advice of pseudoscience. This thread is an example, and the OP and I had a previous relationship. The OP is wanting a magic cure, a voodoo doll approach to rid himself of a selective memory. I explained in a previous thread, a back and forth that he needs to learn to manage the memory. This thread is not the place for pseudoscience as IMO it enables a person that needs help to believe a voodoo doll might be the answer.

So an open minded conversation about pseudoscience is not the issue Joe, rather the issue is when it is appropriate.
Richard@DecisionSkills
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 11027
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 2:25 am
Likes Received: 1153


#31

Postby Joe100 » Mon Feb 27, 2017 3:45 am

Richard@DecisionSkills wrote:
Joe100 wrote:I do not imagine you will agree with or appreciate this comment


Why thanks Joe, I'm glad you believe I have a lot of knowledge. How nice of you. But, might you share with me why after all this time you have not once posted in a single thread which I have participated to provide that positive message? Why did you wait and feel compelled to reach out only when the real message you want to share is how you feel that "some" of my comments talk down to posters?

It is an interesting phenomena, this "ghost audience," that sits in silence and waits until they disagree with my approach to speak up. Thousands of pieces of advice I have provided, plenty of people that say thanks, yet the silent audience waits until they see an opening to share their wisdom on how I am doing it wrong, or could do it better. Well, thanks Joe...I agree, I could do it better.

What is also funny, is how this ghost audience never sends a PM, but shares their wisdom of how they would approach it differently in public. Why do you think that is Joe? If you have felt I sometimes talk down to posters, why did you not send a PM over all these years? No. Something motivated you to avoid participating in hundreds of threads where the person seeking advice was glad or thanked me, and instead you picked this moment to make your opinion public.


1) I do not think you're unaware of the idea that you have lots of knowledge. Not much for me too add in that domain. On the other hand, it does appear that you might be somewhat unaware of how others experience you. Hence the comment and an attempt at bringing that up in a diplomatic and kind manner.

2) On the other hand, it does appears that my imagination was correct in this instance and that my comment wasn't something you agreed with or appreciated. And so, I apolgize for hurting your feelings.
Joe100
Preferred Member
 
Posts: 822
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:51 pm
Likes Received: 6

#32

Postby Richard@DecisionSkills » Mon Feb 27, 2017 2:05 pm

Joe100 wrote: On the other hand, it does appears that my imagination was correct in this instance and that my comment wasn't something you agreed with or appreciated. And so, I apolgize for hurting your feelings.


Joe, you didn't hurt my feelings, nor do I disagree with your comment. I am fully aware of how others sometimes receive me. It is fine that sometimes people disagree and try to explain to me how their approach to giving advice is superior, but I most often find it hypocritical.

A kindler, gentler way to criticize, right Joe? You criticized me appropriately in your opinion. You approached by first complimenting, then softly explaining that "sometimes" you feel like I talk down to a poster. Your way is correct, while my way is flawed.

It is the same as Krystian or Jimmy, believing as long as you say, "I'm not saying you are, but..." then that language is the appropriate way to criticize and if the person takes it the wrong way, then it is on how they chose to interpret the criticism, lol.

That is how it happens Joe. About twice, maybe three times a year people come out of the woodwork to provide their critique of how I give advice. The rest of the time they remain silent. Why Joe? Why do they sit in silence during all the other threads? You can't speak for them, but you can speak for yourself. Since you started with a nice compliment, why did you wait until this moment, this thread to communicate with me? Why did you choose to pass up all the other opportunities you have had to participate and reinforce the positive, the things you like about my advice? Why did you remain silent Joe, waiting only to contribute in a thread where 2 other people have already pointed out they don't appreciate my approach? Why not a PM Joe?

Ever consider your own motives here Joe and how you might improve?
Richard@DecisionSkills
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 11027
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 2:25 am
Likes Received: 1153

#33

Postby Candid » Mon Feb 27, 2017 2:50 pm

Joe, sometimes the pseudosciences are helpful. If a troubled person feels better because s/he lights a candle and beats a drum, where's the problem? After all, this is a psychology forum and psychology is a head game.

Just saying. :wink:

Richard, the number of Likes Received says it all. You're running at 10 per cent. Keep it up!
Candid
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 9086
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:00 am
Likes Received: 442

#34

Postby Richard@DecisionSkills » Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:33 am

Candid wrote: Richard, the number of Likes Received says it all. You're running at 10 per cent. Keep it up!


Lol, yes...think of what percentage of "Likes" if I were not such a (insert ad hominem or whatever criticism here). I most certainly would be at 40% if I just knew how to be more like the advice givers that are helping me better myself by giving me advice on how to give advice.

It is not that I am anti advice, rather it is the periodic band wagon of hypocrisy that I find amusing. "Let me criticize you my way. Learn from me how to criticize correctly."
Richard@DecisionSkills
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 11027
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 2:25 am
Likes Received: 1153

#35

Postby jimmyh » Fri Mar 03, 2017 5:05 am

Keep up the double-talk all you like jimmy. There is no reason for a person to intentionally say something in a way another person might "choose" to interpret uncharitably and then be shocked or dumbfounded when the person indeed interprets it in such a

It is the same as Krystian or Jimmy, believing as long as you say, "I'm not saying you are, but..." then that language is the appropriate way to criticize and if the person takes it the wrong way, then it is on how they chose to interpret the criticism, lol.


That is not the point I'm making. I thought I had been clear enough to lay out the conclusions, but perhaps I was not. I'll clarify.

There is no reason for a person to intentionally say something in a way another person might "choose" to interpret uncharitably and then be shocked or dumbfounded when the person indeed interprets it in such a way.


Yes, you are absolutely correct.

The issue isn't about being "shocked" or "dumbfounded". As you know, "Not to be the man who starts trouble" shows that this (potential) reaction was anticipated, so Krystian obviously is neither shocked nor dumbfounded.

In other words, if you don't want a person to possibly interpret something uncharitably, keep that opinion to yourself. If you are okay with them interpreting it uncharitably, then own it.


This is also good advice to live by, and I try to adhere to it myself. It doesn't make any sense to blame other people for how they respond to you, especially if it's something that you can predict. If someone having a particular response to your message is aversive to you, you have the choice to say something else.To make a predictably bad choice from your own point of view, and then go on to blame someone *else* for how your choice has affected you... Yes, that would be bad. If you were in the middle of criticizing them for doing it, then yes, it would even be hypocritical. I have no argument with this, because, well... it's completely true. We're in agreement here.

The key here is that interpreting motive behind someone else's words is a finicky thing, and it's really really easy to come up with an explanation that *seems* to fit on a superficial level, but is completely off the mark. Because of this, it is important to look at the finer details and context to determine which intention was most likely. Even more importantly, it is crucial to keep in mind that there *is* more than one possibility, that you don't know the answer with certainty, and that the reality might be very very different to the imagined motive that you've chosen to respond to.

This came up earlier in the thread, where you made what appeared to be a very quick knee-jerk interpretation of Krystian which turned out to be incorrect. I happened to be quite confident that your initial interpretation was wrong due to subtle factors that would be difficult to explain, but the point wasn't "trust me I'm right" - heck, the point wasn't even "I "could" be right, and you don't know that I'm not!". The point is that *unless* you have some sort of positive knowledge, you might be responding to something that didn't happen and therefore your responses may be inappropriate and unnecessarily hostile, and that *therefore* it is important to hold more than one hypothesis in mind and respond with all of them in mind so that you don't end up treating people unfairly when it unsurprisingly turns out that you were wrong. Again, if treating people unfairly doesn't bother you, that's fine. That's your choice. I prefer to treat people fairly.

To apply it to the current facet of this conversation, there's a couple distinct questions here. One question is whether Krystian was "owning" the statement that you were being overly aggressive. You are interpreting it as "not owned" and an example of the failure mode you've laid out above. It's seems pretty clear to me that this is not the case, but again take that for whatever it is worth to you, as it is not the point I'm driving at. The point is that it doesn't seem like you have even thought about the question "is there another more likely explanation that makes me look worse?", and that until you show some indication that you have, people are going to reasonably and justifiably see you as someone who ignores the truth when it is unflattering to you. Again, that's fine. That's your choice. It is, however, not the choice I would recommend making, for what that's worth.

On the question of whether *I* am "shocked" or "dumbfounded" by your responses and feel entitled to you "not being aggressive" or whatever, the answer is *of course not*. You're free to be overly aggressive if you want to be overly aggressive, and I am not at all surprised by your responses. They fit my model of you quite well. Applying my own advice to myself, I don't assume that you are the person you appear to be. I take into account the possibility that I have misread and underestimated you. This is the point of all the questions and the general rarity of absolute statements. These questions are picked because they're questions that my (leading) model of you cannot engage with without experiencing cognitive dissonance and therefore working quite hard to avoid answering - and so if you actually answer any of them instead of trying to deflect away, I'll know I have been wrong about you (and since the question's are things like "do you know something I don't", I'd be poised to be humble and learn what I've been missing).

So far though, even though I've been looking, I cannot find any way which you differ from "ego is overly sensitive because he knows he cannot back up his assertions, so he interprets everything as aggression and takes his own faults out on other people while avoiding any perspective that would allow him to see how well this model fits him". Consequently, I'm expecting you to feign laughter ("lol", "hilarious"), to accuse me of believing things that I obviously do not believe ("It is the same as [...] Jimmy, believing as long as you say [...]"), and to otherwise attempt to posture and assert (without argumentation) that I'm wrong about various things in order to distract from the points I'm actually making. I do not expect you to engage with my points beyond a superficial level, if that. This wouldn't necessarily mean that you're wrong, of course, but it would mean you look, walk, and quack like someone who is incapable of engaging with thought that challenges him.

I am aware that confessing this inability to distinguish you from someone who is merely reacting to a bruised ego makes me look dumb if anyone can point out a discrepancy I missed. I own this, and if it happens I will delve into the reasons for my failure and eat humble pie. If you can point out what I've missed, *please do*. I will be sincerely grateful, and I will apologize to you for being such an idiot as to have missed it. I am really really serious about this. I am also aware that in asserting my intentions to be charitable to you I necessarily open myself to feedback to anyone who thinks I am treating you unfairly. I would also sincerely appreciate feedback on this front.


Like Joe and Krystian, I do not expect you to appreciate my thoughts nor my questions. I do think you're making a mistake not to, of course, or else I wouldn't share them, but I am not trying to get you to appreciate them. Saying stuff that will predictably fail to help you would be stupid, and I'm not stupid. Claiming that I'm doing this to help you would be disingenuous, and I am being genuine here. I am not trying to help you.

My *goal*, is to offer you perspective so that you can a) show everyone that you already get it by explaining how your response is correct even given this perspective, b) learn better how not to be a jerk to people on this forum and apologize when wrong, or c) make it as clear as possible that you are unable to do a) and unwilling to do b). I do expect it to come to c), but I would prefer to be proven wrong.

The reason it matters to me is that I care about this forum. This forum isn't always active, nor are all of the threads groundbreaking, but it is the single best place I've found to discuss novel and in depth concepts related to hypnosis and the more "far out" implications thereof. I have learned a lot from both reading and commenting here, and I would like to preserve the ability for this forum to function in that role when new and interesting minds come by - both for my own sake and the sake of others. The ability to function like this is predicated on there being enough mutual respect such that novel ideas can be seen and engaged with to help refine them and sort the promising ideas from the chaff. Yes, this forum isn't perfect, and there are squabbles here and there - heck, I squabbled with *Joe* a bit when I was new here. The cool thing is that the people here have been able to make it work anyway. Even though we had disagreements and butted heads a bit, Joe had enough respect for my thinking that he went out of his way to reach out to me anyway, and it's things like this that keeps the forum friendly and useful and don't get enough credit (thanks Joe, btw).

The thing that makes this work is that while everyone has ego and everyone wants to think they're the ones that are right and are the expertiest expert, people here, for whatever reason it may be, have been *very good* at engaging with opposing viewpoints themselves, and nothing is beneath consideration. Even the accusation of "this is beneath consideration" isn't beneath consideration. While there are, on occasion, things that look like "posturing and slapfights", the thing that you're missing is that they're largely *good natured* posturing and slapfights, done with a smile on their faces hugs and beers afterwards. It's done with respect for their opponents. In other words,it works because people act in such a way that works even when they aren't right and aren't the expertiest expert in the room.

As a nonhypnotist that has no experience with the mind blowing stuff that hypnotists have seen, with no concept of the incredible depth of thought that can go into making hypnotic approaches work, you have barged in here and not only asserted your view as if it were fact, but responded with aggression when challenged. You will be challenged here. Everybody get's challenged here because that's what we do, and that's how this works - but *doubly* so if you walk in here not knowing what you're talking about without seeing how far in over your head you are. If your response to challenge is not to explain how your view makes sense in light of alternate perspectives but instead to "slap" people for hallucinated aggressions and then not even apologize when you're forced to realize you're wrong... Then until you change your behavior you are bad for this forum and a detriment to the quality of discussion which can occur here. If you can't get along with *Joe*, despite his very Postel's law abiding response, then you will not be able to get along with anyone disagrees with you substantially, and as a forum centered around hypnosis that likes to discuss the crazier side which can't get discussed on Hypnothoughts... that's going to be most people here.

Again, I do not expect you to appreciate this or engage with this and give me a detailed response about how you've taken my points into consideration and how you see things, given that. I would be excited if you do, and you would gain a *lot* of respect in my eyes and I'm sure the eyes of others. What I *expect*, though, is posturing of being above engaging with the points I have laid out for you, demonstrating what I said about your inability or unwillingness to engage with people who don't buy into your presuppositions.

This post is for everyone else who reads this and wonders if you can back up your arrogance and aggression, or whether anyone else thinks you're in the right. This post is so that next time you're unnecessarily hostile to our new members, instead of running around the same circles with you to no end, I can just link back to this and simply say "Don't mind him, welcome to the forum".
jimmyh
Preferred Member
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:17 pm
Likes Received: 24

#36

Postby Richard@DecisionSkills » Fri Mar 03, 2017 4:50 pm

jimmyh wrote: This post is for everyone else who reads this and wonders if you can back up your arrogance and aggression, or whether anyone else thinks you're in the right. This post is so that next time you're unnecessarily hostile to our new members, instead of running around the same circles with you to no end, I can just link back to this and simply say "Don't mind him, welcome to the forum".


This is your plan for aggression, the way you plan to back up your arrogance jimmy. Once again, welcome to your hypocrisy. You arrogantly assume that YOU are the judge, jury, an executioner of what is "unnecessarily hostile."

Anyway, enjoy wasting your time monitoring my posts. Good luck with implementing your plan jimmyh. Heck, maybe if you decide to reply to this post you can link to yourself.
Richard@DecisionSkills
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 11027
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 2:25 am
Likes Received: 1153

#37

Postby Richard@DecisionSkills » Fri Mar 03, 2017 7:38 pm

Oh, and jimmyh, since you have decided to be the overseer of my posts and have created a special post you can link to just for me, maybe you can also take the time to click that little "like" button once in a while to let me know when you agree with my advice.

In fact, why don't you go through some of my previous posts where people have thanked me for my advice and see if you might want to give me a big ole thumbs up. I'm sure you can find at least a few.
Richard@DecisionSkills
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 11027
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 2:25 am
Likes Received: 1153

#38

Postby Candid » Sat Mar 04, 2017 1:08 pm

As at 1.08pm Saturday my time:

Richard: Most Valuable Poster; Joined Dec 08, 2012; Posts: 7667; Likes Received: 738.

jimmyh: Preferred Member; Joined Mar 14, 2011; Posts: 369; Likes Received: 6.

One in 10 vs two in 100. Who should be warning new members about whom?

My math isn't great but my English is impeccable.
Candid
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 9086
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:00 am
Likes Received: 442

#39

Postby quietvoice » Sat Mar 04, 2017 2:56 pm

Candid wrote:As at 1.08pm Saturday my time:

Richard: Most Valuable Poster; Joined Dec 08, 2012; Posts: 7667; Likes Received: 738.

jimmyh: Preferred Member; Joined Mar 14, 2011; Posts: 369; Likes Received: 6.

One in 10 vs two in 100. Who should be warning new members about whom?

My math isn't great but my English is impeccable.

Like system started circa December 2014
jimmyh : about 75 posts since then / 6 likes = 8%
Richard : about 3215 posts since then / 738 likes = 23%

8% / 23% = Richard gets ~3 times the likes of jimmyh.
2% / 10% = Richard ... 5 times jimmyh ... not applicable.
User avatar
quietvoice
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2291
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 8:14 pm
Likes Received: 234

#40

Postby Richard@DecisionSkills » Sun Mar 05, 2017 11:08 pm

Here you go jimmyh...trying to make it easy for you to monitor my posts and give me feedback.

viewtopic.php?t=104684
Richard@DecisionSkills
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 11027
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 2:25 am
Likes Received: 1153

#41

Postby jimmyh » Wed Mar 08, 2017 6:47 am

Candid,

I'm not saying that Richard does not have anything positive to contribute to uncommonforum as a whole or even to the hypnosis forum in particular. Clearly someone finds value in his posts at least 23% of the time, and that's only the people that decided to click "like" - I bet a lot of people don't even know where that button *is*. Like I said, I'm open to feedback. If you can point out where I've treated anyone unfairly or anything I may have missed, I will happily fix it.


Richard,

Since you expressed interest in getting positive feedback from me: Yes, your comments in the anger management forum that you linked to were good, and I would have no issue with you making comments like that here as well. Additionally, when you were talking about traveling in the thread about hypno-busking, that was downright *friendly*. I like that a lot.
jimmyh
Preferred Member
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:17 pm
Likes Received: 24

#42

Postby Eramirez16 » Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:45 am

Kristen I'm interested in learning about your technique. I too need some help. I think this forum is useful when everybody contributes something positive and keeps all the negative out.
Eramirez16
New Member
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:40 am
Likes Received: 0

#43

Postby Eramirez16 » Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:47 am

Kristian I'm interested in learning about your technique. I too need some help. I think this forum is useful when everybody contributes something positive and keeps all the negative out.
Eramirez16
New Member
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:40 am
Likes Received: 0

#44

Postby pringipas » Sat Apr 08, 2017 4:21 pm

Hi everyone, I am new to this forum,

I would like to say that we all have different points of view, I am sure that krystian4684 didnt mean to offend anyone, it would be interesting to hear his point of view and have a fruitful conversation without attacking each other.
pringipas
New Member
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 4:11 pm
Likes Received: 0


PreviousNext

  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to Hypnosis