neeeel

Atheism isnt about knowing deep down that something is true while pretending or trying to believe that its false. As kevin points out, "living as an atheist" isnt something that takes effort, you dont have to constantly be "denying god" or something.You talk as if you still believe in god ( you mention having had your prayers answered numerous times, and a shoulder to lean on) and it seems like you consider atheism as some sort of cloak that you use to cover all of that. Its not like that at all. Why do you want to hold on to your faith?

So what you are saying is, that it doesnt matter if its true or not, you will keep this hope, this belief, because it makes you feel better?

When you are a baby, or a child, you dont believe in god, or atheism, and you are still driven to live. You are starting from the premise that you need god to have meaning, and thats why other points of view look strange to you.

Something doesnt compute for me. People arent born rebels, they dont just " fall in with the wrong crowd". Addicts arent born, they are made ( in general). There seems to have been a strong disconnect in communication between you and your parents. That doesnt just come from nowhere. You cared about the pain you were causing your parents, and that made you ignore their advice and feel like you were being punished? And then suddenly on your 18th birthday you cherish the talks? it doesnt add up. You knew your actions were wrong, but you did them anyway? Why? To spite your parents? Im not really sure you did know they were wrong. I would guess that you knew that your parents thought they were wrong, but you didnt agree.

this strikes a chord with me. Ever since I can remember I have felt like I need to protect something, I think that the way you put it , the spark, the flame, the child, is close. The way I have protected it is by withdrawing, it feels like if I interact with people I will be somehow contaminated. That I will lose something vitally important. It also feels like taking on another identity , such as "adult" or "employee" or "father" would also threaten that which I need to protect. I am in therapy, and I guess what we are questioning is, do I still need to protect myself? Can I be, and do, in the world, and still keep that which is important to me safe? Will I be contaminated? I dont have any clear answers yet. But I think therapy is one ( perhaps the only) way to find the answers to these questions. It sounds like you had a horrible childhood, and you had great need to protect yourself. We need to re-learn, or be re-parented, in order to be able to act AND keep ourselves safe.

Im not sure I agree. There will always be some premise in the logical argument that you have to just agree to, in order for the logic to be valid and sound. Logic tells you nothing about what you ought to do, unless you accept all the premises, and theres always some point at which you just have to accept a premise, or the logic fails.. edit: I can see that by this argument, I am arguing against using logic at all, and obviously I use logic, so that could be seen as contradictory. I dont think that that makes my argument invalid though

Its interesting that you experienced these as punishment. ( not that you shouldnt have, just to be clear). When stefan talks about how he talks with his daughter, I wonder if she experiences that in the same way? I wonder what was missing in these Lectures that made it feel like a punishment to you? Did it just feel to you like something you had to endure, and not really pay attention to? "yeah yeah, heard it all before, can I go now?" type of thing? It sounds like there was a lack of trust for your father, in that, he was saying these things, but you didnt believe him, or didnt believe that he had your best interests at heart. I know that I basically disregarded,rejected, EVERYTHING my parents said, and I think the reason was because I knew they were full of shit. I couldnt trust anything they said, any judgement. On the face of it, these Lectures sound like good parenting,they were presenting facts to you, in order to show you why your behaviour wasnt acceptable to them, but you didnt experience them that way, I wonder why? What do you mean by too permissive? Do you have an example?

Im pretty sure that noise pollution does not violate the NAP but falls under aesthetically preferable behaviour

I do do this, yes. I actually did it recently for the first time in a while. It does bring up a lot of memories for me

Is this your definition of morality, or have I misunderstood? Ie, your definition of morality is "applying logic to ones goals" ?

why is this a concern? Whats wrong if the babies expect it? I dont understand, Do they sleep when you do co-sleep with them? If so, it seem like an ideal solution for everyone.

Disclaimer - I am not a parent, and know little or nothing about babies. Have you tried co-sleeping? If he wants to be held, and is with his parents, perhaps he will sleep more naturally. I realise that its inconvenient , that perhaps you want a baby that sleeps easily and naturally, like your daughter, but it seems like that is what you havent got. Does he still cry when being held? Perhaps this is an assumption on my part, but the impression I get is that you think he shouldnt be crying, and/or shouldnt want to be held? Co-sleeping, or holding him when he wants is not "giving in" or "spoiling your child" or even "Giving the baby what they want, regardless of your own needs". please, whatever you do, do not consider "Let them cry it out" ( i am assuming you mean, leave them alone in their crib until they stop crying). I cannot imagine that that is good for anyone, and there are many different options that you havent explored yet. You have my sympathy, I can imagine how difficult it is, and how it is made much more difficult by having 2 babies, and lack of sleep. I am sure you can find a way to resolve this.

Thanks for your input. Its interesting that I feel a bit of fear about my therapist saying to me "Your done!". I am starting to rely on his support and kindness, I think My main self knowledge work outside of therapy is FDR, listen to podcasts, talk on chat, read posts. I did start a diary a year ago, but I only write about once a week, usually about what happens at my voluntary work, I suppose its only when I actually go outside and interact with people that I notice stuff and feel stuff. I think that even if I was much healthier and more outgoing, I would still use the PC a lot, but yes, I think it is a convenient way to occupy my mind and avoid going out, interacting, or having to pay attention to feelings.

you didnt do anything bad to them, but, they BELIEVED that what you were doing was bad to them. This is where the narcissism comes in, I guess. To them, you werent acting out of desires and needs of your own, you were acting to directly hurt them or disobey them.

I will agree that "need" was probably the wrong word, or not accurate enough. I think my point still stands though. They are in equilibria, altering the balance either way would probably be bad for both species.

then you dont understand equilibria and natural systems

its an equilibrium. Wolves need rabbits, rabbits need wolves. I would guess its just as bad for the pendulum to go to far in the K direction.

I wasnt actively trying to relax, no. I had been feeling kind of empty in the evening, was thinking about how I would turn back to the PC rather than stay with the empty feeling, and was thinking about how it didnt seem like I was getting anywhere in therapy, or that I wasnt able to open up. So when I got to bed, it was just a continuation of the train of thoughts from before, I think its hard for me to be sure, as I havent been keeping count, but it doesnt seem like the feelings of being pathetic and useless come more often at night. I suppose I might notice them more at night because I am not paying attention to the PC.

Sorry for the delay in replying, I appreciate your response. Yes, Expectations are a big one. Its good to remember, for example, that stefan was going to therapy twice a week for 3 years, or something, so thats 6 years worth of therapy once a week. I have done 1 year, so im 1/6th of the way to what he did. It helps to keep things in perspective I also wonder if I am expecting the stuff I feel to just stop, ie I wont feel bad any more and thats how I know Im "cured", and perhaps thats not a realistic expectation? I feel like I could just continue on like I am, forever, and that wouldnt be so bad, in a way. And then every so often I will feel an intense emptiness, or something, its hard to describe. I suppose that is whats prompting me to look into all of this. I do get a lot of enjoyment out of the PC so, yes, you are right, I should acknowledge that Thank you for your support. I am already in therapy, I think part of my frustration and what prompted my OP was that I couldnt see any progress, even after 1 year. Perhaps that is too early to be looking for progress( what would progress look like, anyway?), or perhaps Im not fully committed and am just playing, still testing out the waters.

Im pretty uncertain on the whole property thing. I know that generally its held that if you found it first, then its yours.

"jail" is not a thing that can own property. So your analogy doesnt work. Who owns the shitter, and who is going to chase after the inmate if they claim it? But, yes, I guess I didnt think it through, as I was imagining an apple that fell from a tree, and toilets dont generally fall from trees

So If I find an apple on the ground, I cant claim it,because I didnt create it or buy it?

Huh? Hes charging for use of his property ( using the definitions etc provided under the scenario) how is that taxation? So if someone owns land, he cant charge someone for use of it because its taxation?

Right, I get that. But, it still doesnt answer my question. Which is, why ? You say "if you believe that the source of wisdom and truth comes from" but this is just saying "I believe that". Why do you believe that? Why is this a good way to answer the unanswerable questions, and science isnt? Im sure I could come up with a semi coherent explanation of things, that hung together and "made sense". But that doesnt mean anything. You can come up with "what if " scenarios for anything, and they dont necessarily get you closer to the truth.

I find this so hard to believe. People are walking round with iron bars, every day, assaulting people, and the authorities do nothing? there are riots and the authorities do nothing? perhaps I am totally naive and wont wake up until its happening in my own city, but I dont believe this side of the story, and more than I believe the leftist side. She claims 18000 immigrants, the guardian claims 3800 immigrants?