Posts by one_ugly

16

Lousy Friends

by Nosferatu in

jw
friends

i just gotta vent here.

kinda hurting over this shit.

over the past couple of years, i've had nothing but disappointments with friends.

That sucks. The only thing that comes to mind for the sudden change of attitudes is the fact that you are getting married. It is a major life status changes, and your friends may a) feel left out, b) feel like they are missing out, especially if you are engaged to someone they admire as an individual, c) feel they are loosing you and your hours upon hours of devoted friendship to someone else, or d) all the above and then some. OR, don't discount that you are going through a lot yourself... whether your friends are aware of it or not, your emotional "home" is changing...

I noticed another thread, by Aztec, where someone mentioned that guys don't talk about feelings. It sounds funny but it's true. I have a particular friend who has stood by me in some pretty difficult times; but I tried talking about feelings once with him and he changed the subject 3 times back to cars and projects. I got the hint, and never tried again. When we go our seperate ways for a while, I just leave it at that... we eventually get together again and have a lot of catching up to do (about things). So, don't always count on trying to talk it out and figure out what happened.

I believe you will soon find many married couples that have gone through similar experiences and will be able to build some new friendships based upon a different level of "commitment".

Congratulations ! I wish you well.

ugly

46

What is more important to understand...

by Siddhashunyata in

jw
friends

moral principles, doctrine , prophecy , ourselves ?

one_ugly_time

Siddhashunyata -

Point well taken. That clarified things very nicely and I would have to agree with you; although my agreement is only mental as I have never maintained the state of awareness to watch this process. I will report back as soon as I figure out how to do this and get it to happen for a while.

Actually, come to think of it, this sounds a lot like how I talk with my children. It is extremely difficult, but it is the only method I can think of to stop "loosing my temper" when trying to communicate with a teenager. After all, I'm going to be wrong, so I just sit with my feelings and watch them come and go while still failing to get my point across.

hmmmm....

ugly

46

What is more important to understand...

by Siddhashunyata in

jw
friends

moral principles, doctrine , prophecy , ourselves ?

one_ugly_time

Moral Principles, Doctrine , Prophecy , Ourselves ?

An individuals Moral principles, Doctrine, & Prophecy are all within Ourself. In examination of the earlier three items (along with a whole nother list), you are in fact examining yourself. So to understand how you feel or believe about any of these things is closer to understanding yourself.

First, we must know our true-self, for everything else will be perceived through the lens of identity.

Because we are forever identifying ourself with others, eg relationships, society, work, etc. I believe that our lens of identity is shaped by all of those around us; particularly from childhood. Without the interaction of others, we would have no reflection of ourself to identify with and our "search" for understanding would be in vain.

Satan

shamus -- It's a sad day when I comprehend and can relate with your comment.

As I "watch" my mind I observe limitation after limitation. My perception is being cleansed by simply observing the "action". Limitation is declining and something else is coming forward. A different quality of mind .

Technically speaking, I have heard this refered to as an "observing ego", if I understand you correctly. It helps to have alot of self-awareness and self-esteem when attempting to view life this way. It is easy, real easy in my mind, to fall into a self-hatred trap when you don't understand how to make the changes you see as desirable.

Yes you can experience (real) what you can neither say (symbolic) nor figure out (imaginary). But then you don't understand it, and then you (as the subject of knowledge and understanding) don't really experience it. Understanding is the effort to put your real experience into words and "ideas", your "grasp of reality" into words and actions, the logic of your words into "vision" and "action", never giving up one aspect although there will never be exact correspondence between the three.

Narkissos -- I really have to disagree on this philosophy. A feeling is experienced. I may not be able to say it or figure it out, but I know what I know, and when certain feelings hit my body, I definitely understand it. No words could every convince anyone, even myself, about what I felt... Sometimes called "intuition". I believe that this is simply acute awareness of feelings. The only thing missing is the ability with our natural language to convince others we understand it and experienced it. And in my book, that is simply justification or intellectualizing, and isn't a requirement for understanding.

What I can't say I can't experience either. Or tell me I can without using words

I just watched the Pianist. Great flick. But I hardly doubt that the movie, or even the book, which is an autobiography, even begins to get close to explaining what this individual experienced. How do you put into words the feelings surrounding the loss of loved ones, the help from the enemy, and so on. These statements are pure intellectualization.

If or when, I discover my True-self, indescribably beyond mental and intellectual concepts, ideas and beliefs about who I believe myself to be, then, Life will be experienced as it was meant to be -- from the very same stage as Life itself, rather than secondhand via intellectual understanding or rendition. This, is why we must discover our True-self first, for only then -- do we live truly.

JT - I want to say thank you personally for these words. They meant a lot to me in my search. ugly

25

Solve this problem you dumdums :)

by JH in

jw
friends

my nephew sent me this problem that his teacher gave him.

you have to go through each line only once and come back to the starting point.

start wherever you want but you have to come back to that starting point without missing one line.

one_ugly_time

The German.

This reminds me of the 3 utilities, 3 houses problem, which is also facinating
I believe this puzzle is impossible unless you go beyond two dimensions.

It is possible if you build your city of 3 houses on a doughnut !

25

Solve this problem you dumdums :)

by JH in

jw
friends

my nephew sent me this problem that his teacher gave him.

you have to go through each line only once and come back to the starting point.

start wherever you want but you have to come back to that starting point without missing one line.

one_ugly_time

If you were to view this problem as though no tricks were intended... ie... lets say each "wall" had a door and the idea was to pass through each door only once (and who cares where you start or finish)... no tricks, no walking through walls, no re-entering doors, no walking through the corners, all that good stuff... oh, and no folding things (cuz it's a real house with doors and walls).

The answer is... in a book I have. I don't want to spoil everyones fun :)

This reminds me of the 3 utilities, 3 houses problem, which is also facinating -- It goes like this --

House 1 House 2 House 3

Gas Electricity Water

Connect 1 of each utility to each house, without crossing over another utility. This problem does have a solution that a baker came up with one boring night. However, countless hours of computer crunching prior to that fateful night could not solve it.

Have fun, ugly

20

Nonesensical Answers Welcomed

by Guest 77 in

ok all you prognosticators, will saddam get a quick trial and a quick sentence like mcveigh or will it a long drawn out affair?

was saddam set up by powerful forces beyond his imagination?

why your answer?

one_ugly_time

Who is this Machiavelli aka The Prince, that I keep reading about?

24

New Years Eve

by got my forty homey? in

jw
friends

.

knowing all the different time zones we have on this board, what is everyone planning to do?.

im just going to be at home with the wife, dog, two cats and maybe have a beer with the neighbor.. got three bottles of asti chillin in the fridge.

one_ugly_time

Bisous --

I see you are out partying like me. Happy New Year. May this be another step in the direction of

FUN !!!!

And you thought I was going to be thoughtful

ugly

37

Truly loving two people (KInd of a response to the Soul Mate thing)

by ADubsFriend in

i was reading the soul mate thread and wanted to ask: how many of you have truly loved and been in love with two people at the same time?.

i have been married 30 years to a wonderful man.

i do love him and he is crazy about me.

one_ugly_time

ADubsFriend -

I commend you. Yes, I believe you can love more than one at a time. Obviously, parents love each of their children and the joys brought from each of those loves is different, but just as strong.

As far as adults, absolutely. For those that have never experienced it, it is a foreign idea. For those that have, it is a sincere test of character, emotional stability, self reflection, assertiveness, compassion, empathy, and sorrow. I believe it is on the same level of internal confusion as a death.

Love has many definitions, the least of which I believe is sexual. Sex is a physical act. Love consists not only of how we feel, but how we act upon those feelings. I believe you were very accurate in saying you loved both men. If, however, you ran off for a week and caused havoc in both marriages, obviously lust was at work, not love.

Love takes some very strange turns. One of the best books ever written about today's marriage and the application of love is "Open Marriage". It is not necessary to agree with everything written in this book, but if it were read as a couple, both partners would have a sincere appreciation for honesty, boundaries, sex, trust, jealousy (or the unneccessary need for) and many other common issues regarding intimacy.

Is loving more than one considered morally wrong? It seems that way, but I am not sure why.
Is it ethically wrong? If it is acted upon in ways that are destructive to other parties without taking the time to consider their feelings, then yes, it is ethically wrong. But if LOVE is at work, these things won't occur and it is not ethically wrong.

Can a marriage exist, or rather grow and be rewarded by loving more than one? If your spouse recognizes that even though you could go to the mall tomorrow and find someone else to love, to share thoughts and dreams, to even have sex -- and your spouse also recognizes that he can't control or own your feelings -- and your spouse recognizes that in order to allow all of these natural parts of your existence to grow instead of eroding away and yet he wants you to come share the evening with him -- yes, your spouse will grow and the marriage will grow accordingly. In turn, each of you will be more open to allowing LOVE from others into your life.

With Love and Best Wishes,

one_ugly_time

67