DaVinci

I think looking back on your past and making connections that you couldn't make before is scary. I know from my own experience of doing that I see how the hole I thought was my childhood was much deeper than I originally thought. The only thing I can say is I'm sorry about what you found out, but don't quit striving for self knowledge. As you saw going back to pulling the wool over your eyes was not a good thing.

I sometimes get jittery during heated debates, but what exactly do you think is making you feel that way during normal conversation?

I lol'ed at arachno capitalism.

I would say it starts as unconditional and then through the horrible blender of a neglectful childhood we learn to apply conditions, requirements, and rules to our love.

Basically keep it up. There is always a chance that people could regress. I also think if we are talking about humanity thousands of years into the future then the chance of cataclysmic natural phenomenon will probably go up. So volcanic activity, meteors, giant robots, etc.

I think the best part of this is that you are spending time with your kid. What part of Georgia are you in?

This might explain why humiliation finds it way into relationships with a large power disparity.

Heh, yeah. Love those videos. Of course people are so steeped in this stuff I doubt even their brain saw it. A cup of water poured into the ocean you are drowning in will probably go unnoticed.

I'm not sure that most of the people who went to see this would pick up on what you are pointing out.

I feel very sorry that you had such a traumatic childhood, and that the people around you did not acknowledge your trauma. I don't think anyone here thinks you are a bad person because you were abused. Many people here have suffered abuse in some form or another. We are all here to listen to you whenever you feel like talking.

What do you mean by "being artistic means we're constantly drawn towards nude figures"? As an artist myself, and having drawn nude figures, I wouldn't say I am drawn to a nude figure anymore than I am drawn to drawing musculature with no skin, or bones with no muscles, or a fully formed body that is fully clothed.

Art is a process and not the result. We like to call the result "art" but it is really not. It is like calling profit by the term "business". Profit is not the business it is just a result of the business.

First of all I'm very sorry to hear about how trapped and ignored you have felt all of your life. Based on what you have said, and based on similar experiences I can draw on in my life I would say it sounds like you are resisting finding a job because you see it as an extension of your childhood. You see it as continuing the feeling that you are invisible. Your entire post seems to focus on this idea of you feeling invisible to those who you want love and acceptance from. You talk about how success frightens you and makes you freeze up, and I think that might be because it is not a reaction you are used to, or that it is one that goes against this feeling that you should be invisible. You have this reinforcing mechanism that kicks on to keep you invisible when someone praises you or you have the opportunity to respond to someone acknowledging you. So what do you think about what I've said?

That is hard to answer as I can see both sides of the situation. I lived at home until I was around 25 and had both a strict confining angry dad, and a strict confining angry step-dad. While paying for rent in your own apartment/house might mean you have to go get a job you don't want or isn't conducive to where you want to get in life you might find you have more freedom in the long run by doing so and getting away from toxic relationships. On the other hand you might have more freedom by continuing to live at home, but the price you pay will be having to endure the toxic relationships. So either way you will be paying a price. Ultimately I think the goal should be to leave their home, and you just need to weigh the option of staying longer against leaving sooner and figure out which one can get you out of there and in a financially stable way that you enjoy quicker. My own personal experience looking back is that I should have left home sooner. Even if leaving home meant living in a winnebago, or a storage facility with a hammock, or whatever it took.

Basically, yes. My main point is essentially the title of my topic. How do you determine responsibility when other people are involved.

My ultimate goal was not to have an endless debate about hypotheticals, but to see how other people respond to a point of view I hear a lot. I want to listen to how other people might respond to an approximation of a real life debate I often have with family members to get a perspective on the situation that isn't mine. A debate that often centers around personal responsibility. Tjt hit on the subject in his post. Basically, when does a child become responsible for their actions? Can a child who grew up being neglected, abused, etc, point to their place in life and say "I am 100% responsible for my life."? For example if I say to a family member that my parents neglected my education and, that if my parents had put in the effort that they should have I would probably be better off in terms of both my education and my finances, I'm bound to be met by the sentiment to "Suck it up" or "So what? Mommy and daddy didn't love you enough isn't an excuse for where you are in life."So how do you gauge where the responsibility of one person ends for putting someone into a situation, and where does the responsibility of the person put into the situation begin for getting out of said situation?

I mean if Man B can't be found at all. Man B has completely disappeared after the initial abduction. I think tjt hits on what I am thinking about at the moment: I wondering about this too.

What if Man A acts out only against himself? What if he only hurts himself due to his trauma and not others?

Then consider this me brushing up on my knowledge of the basics of philosophy. I'm interested to hear your answer to the question. Just humor me if you would please.

So then Man A is responsible for acting out against others?

So in the scenario I created above where Man A makes it home, but then acts out against someone in a destructive or violent way, you are saying that Man A cannot Say Man B is responsible for his actions because that would be assigning moral responsibility to someone who is immoral? Man A has the ability to go to counseling, get therapy, or otherwise work through these issues. If he does not work through the issues and instead lets his trauma fester, how can we say that Man B is responsible for Man A when he acts out in a destructive or violent way?

Okay, so when Man B makes Man A whole again, but isn't this the ideal situation? What if Man B can't be found? Then we are right back to Man A being left with psychological trauma that he has to deal with if he makes it back home. We are right back to the idea that Man A, and only Man A, is responsible for his actions.

How can Man B be responsible for which direction Man A walks in? Sure, Man B is responsible for taking Man A into the middle of nowhere, but after he leaves he has no control over the legs of Man A, or the voice of Man A, or the emotional state of Man A? Correct? Even if we say Man B is responsible for the direction Man A walks in and what happens to Man A after being dropped off in the middle of nowhere, when does Man B's responsibility for Man A's actions end? Let's say Man A makes it to civilization, finds help and makes it back home, but a year later Man A is not over the trauma of this event and acts out in a destructive way against someone else? What if he damages property or assaults someone physically because the trauma of being kidnapped, wandering in the middle of nowhere, and the lack of water is still weighing on his mental well being? Is Man B still responsible? Can Man A just say "Well, Man B abducted me a year ago" as a defense?

That is the key, to research and think about it, but reading about UPB is a little like reading about how to do statistics. You might have an idea of how it works, but you will never really know it well until you work through some problems. It is only then that you will actually "get it". I found in trying to just get the basics down I actually had to try to use UPB in arguments, run up against resistance, read and think about it more, and then try the arguments again when I had a better understanding. That process however is not something that is supplied to us. This isn't quite Stef's UPB class. This is just like reading a text book for a class you aren't in. So in that sense I can kind of see why someone might be asking for things to be a little clearer and more concise.

Can someone explain to me the idea of personal responsibility where other people are involved and have an influence over your life? So for example, let's say Man A is walking home when he is abducted by Man B. Man B has knocked out Man A with a chloroform soaked rag, and thrown him in the back of his trunk. When Man A wakes up he finds himself in an empty field in the middle of nowhere and Man B has disappeared. Man A has no clothes, money, or cell phone, and can't see any signs of human civilization for miles around him. So who is responsible for what happens to Man A at this point? If Man A decides to walk east to look for help instead of walking west and he dies of dehydration because there was no civilization and no water of any kind for a hundred miles to the east, but there was a town a few hours from his original position to the west that he could have made it to, who is responsible for his death? Himself because he chose to take the path east? Man B because he put Man A in this situation in the first place? Both of them?