5 ms·

In my experience this is very true upon simply becoming the kind of person who is open to listening to others. The vast majority of people you've run into have

In my experience this is very true upon simply becoming the kind of person who is open to listening to others. The vast majority of people you've run into have had huge difficulties in life, or are affected by people close to them who have huge difficulties in their lives. People tell me I'm a wonderful listener due to my lack of judgement on their problems (more than once, people, including my therapist, tell me I'd make a great therapist), but really I've internalized the idea that everyone is living a life less than what they hoped their life would be to various extents and that there is also a near infinite combination of ways to achieve this effect such that no one can be dismissed for their misery in any respect without also dismissing the "legitimate" misery of a wide swath of people. When I come across people who are willing to dismiss others' concerns, either by dismissing them as oversensitive, or dismissing them as evil, I wonder if they've internalized this logic too. And if they have, what their experiences are to cause them to conclude that dismissal is the reasonable choice.

gbuk2013 7y ago
> less than what they hoped their life would be Now this, to me, would have made a much more interesting subject of investigation.
DisruptiveDave 7y ago
> but really I've internalized the idea that everyone is living a life less than what they hoped their life would be to various extents and that there is also a near infinite combination of ways to achieve this effect such that no one can be dismissed for their misery in any respect without also dismissing the "legitimate" misery of a wide swath of people. There's a downside to this logic, one of the enabling sort. I consider myself fairly empathetic, but with a very pragmatic tint. I find many, many people take on complaining and a victim/underdog status with an almost hobby-like approach. And I watch how others react, which is exactly as expected: sympathy, attention, allowing those complainers a way out of personal responsibility or true introspection (specifically into their role in managing reactions to external events). It's a never ending cycle. And it hardly ever promotes growth. And almost never results in true happiness (happiness is probably the wrong word...maybe contentedness is better, tho maybe not). So, the same way you wonder about those people who "dismiss others' concerns," I wonder about those who kowtow to others' words and fail to consider the reality (perceived, of course) behind them. It often feels lazy to me. And short-term thinking. Truly caring about another person sometimes means forsaking short-term "feel goods" for long term growth.
- asdf21 7y ago
  Ataraxia.. ;)
- SolaceQuantum 7y ago
  I only said it's important to be able to listen and acknowledge that people are troubled. That a person is troubled and therefore abusive to others is just an extension of that. I don't understand this downside you're explaining.
  - malvosenior 7y ago
    They're essentially talking about enabling. Sometimes listening and acknowledging can actually be harmful. Especially over a long term period of time if the person being acknowledged isn't actually changing (or attempting to change) the underlying behavior that's driving the unwanted effects. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling
  - DisruptiveDave 7y ago
    Well, unless I'm wildly misreading it, the quote I attached to my post calls out a very stark judgment on people's perceived sufferings. Specifically, the "no one can be dismissed for their misery..." line.
    - SolaceQuantum 7y ago
      Yeah, I don't dismiss that someone is miserable. I can also say they are abusive, hurt their children or spouse, are cruel and sadistic, or a myriad of other things. None of them make them not worth acknowledging their misery if they are miserable. In fact, just the opposite- it gives me a full idea of their motivations so I can better understand how to act around them in order to further my own interests of not being a target of their abuse, or how to best report their behavior to the correct authorities.
- kazagistar 7y ago
  Sure, the idea that the right solution is always sympathy and material assistance is a bit reductionistic. But the idea that what's best for people is always tough love and a job is just as reductionistic and oversimplified. And at scale, neither blanket solution is perfectly effective, but one at least leans towards kindness.
roystonvassey 7y ago
This is a beautiful, and much-needed, sentiment. All of us have our own struggles. Unless you’re that person, it is not for you to judge if it is small or big. It is enough to know that there are struggles.
DoreenMichele 7y ago
Once, when I was whining about what a "tragedy" my life was, someone told me "Everyone thinks their life is a tragedy." That stuck with me. I consider genuinely listening to merely be good manners. I have had to learn to be more stand-off-ish because this is apparently not some universal standard of good manners. In fact, it's apparently some bizarre aberration that signals "use me" or something. All manner of people imagine I am the solution to their problem and I am required to fix their problem, all completely for free while they don't do anything whatsoever for me. This was true even when I was literally homeless and going hungry. I don't get it. At all. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Like, don't you have a conscience? A sense of social obligation? A sense of quid pro quo? The tiniest inkling that simply using me up and never ever giving back is likely to either alienate me or kill me and, either way, I will stop being a resource for you?
- SolaceQuantum 7y ago
  Yes, I agree. People rarely intuitively understand obligation. We leave a lot of how social dynamics functions to the schoolyard and the act of socializing, which leaves many people undereducated on how to socialize. For some people this means being an awkward nerd. For others it means being an emotional leech.
- lonelappde 7y ago
  The version I heard is "If you knew X's problems, you wouldn't trade your problems for theirs." Not universally true, but goes a long way . Another aphorism is, "some people are givers, others are takers". It's a function of personality, not resources or circumstances.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- jack_h 7y ago
  This describes my experiences in life very well. It's lead to a lot of social isolation, mistrust, and heart ache for me. > All manner of people imagine I am the solution to their problem and I am required to fix their problem, all completely for free while they don't do anything whatsoever for me. It's also been my experience that if you don't then suddenly you're being selfish, a jerk, etc. It's as if you're being judged by an entirely different metric of social acceptability.

gbuk2013 7y ago

> less than what they hoped their life would be Now this, to me, would have made a much more interesting subject of investigation.

DisruptiveDave 7y ago

> but really I've internalized the idea that everyone is living a life less than what they hoped their life would be to various extents and that there is also a near infinite combination of ways to achieve this effect such that no one can be dismissed for their misery in any respect without also dismissing the "legitimate" misery of a wide swath of people. There's a downside to this logic, one of the enabling sort. I consider myself fairly empathetic, but with a very pragmatic tint. I find many, many people take on complaining and a victim/underdog status with an almost hobby-like approach. And I watch how others react, which is exactly as expected: sympathy, attention, allowing those complainers a way out of personal responsibility or true introspection (specifically into their role in managing reactions to external events). It's a never ending cycle. And it hardly ever promotes growth. And almost never results in true happiness (happiness is probably the wrong word...maybe contentedness is better, tho maybe not). So, the same way you wonder about those people who "dismiss others' concerns," I wonder about those who kowtow to others' words and fail to consider the reality (perceived, of course) behind them. It often feels lazy to me. And short-term thinking. Truly caring about another person sometimes means forsaking short-term "feel goods" for long term growth.

asdf21 7y ago
Ataraxia.. ;)
SolaceQuantum 7y ago
I only said it's important to be able to listen and acknowledge that people are troubled. That a person is troubled and therefore abusive to others is just an extension of that. I don't understand this downside you're explaining.
- malvosenior 7y ago
  They're essentially talking about enabling. Sometimes listening and acknowledging can actually be harmful. Especially over a long term period of time if the person being acknowledged isn't actually changing (or attempting to change) the underlying behavior that's driving the unwanted effects. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling
- DisruptiveDave 7y ago
  Well, unless I'm wildly misreading it, the quote I attached to my post calls out a very stark judgment on people's perceived sufferings. Specifically, the "no one can be dismissed for their misery..." line.
  - SolaceQuantum 7y ago
    Yeah, I don't dismiss that someone is miserable. I can also say they are abusive, hurt their children or spouse, are cruel and sadistic, or a myriad of other things. None of them make them not worth acknowledging their misery if they are miserable. In fact, just the opposite- it gives me a full idea of their motivations so I can better understand how to act around them in order to further my own interests of not being a target of their abuse, or how to best report their behavior to the correct authorities.
kazagistar 7y ago
Sure, the idea that the right solution is always sympathy and material assistance is a bit reductionistic. But the idea that what's best for people is always tough love and a job is just as reductionistic and oversimplified. And at scale, neither blanket solution is perfectly effective, but one at least leans towards kindness.

roystonvassey 7y ago

This is a beautiful, and much-needed, sentiment. All of us have our own struggles. Unless you’re that person, it is not for you to judge if it is small or big. It is enough to know that there are struggles.

DoreenMichele 7y ago

Once, when I was whining about what a "tragedy" my life was, someone told me "Everyone thinks their life is a tragedy." That stuck with me. I consider genuinely listening to merely be good manners. I have had to learn to be more stand-off-ish because this is apparently not some universal standard of good manners. In fact, it's apparently some bizarre aberration that signals "use me" or something. All manner of people imagine I am the solution to their problem and I am required to fix their problem, all completely for free while they don't do anything whatsoever for me. This was true even when I was literally homeless and going hungry. I don't get it. At all. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Like, don't you have a conscience? A sense of social obligation? A sense of quid pro quo? The tiniest inkling that simply using me up and never ever giving back is likely to either alienate me or kill me and, either way, I will stop being a resource for you?

SolaceQuantum 7y ago
Yes, I agree. People rarely intuitively understand obligation. We leave a lot of how social dynamics functions to the schoolyard and the act of socializing, which leaves many people undereducated on how to socialize. For some people this means being an awkward nerd. For others it means being an emotional leech.
lonelappde 7y ago
The version I heard is "If you knew X's problems, you wouldn't trade your problems for theirs." Not universally true, but goes a long way . Another aphorism is, "some people are givers, others are takers". It's a function of personality, not resources or circumstances.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
jack_h 7y ago
This describes my experiences in life very well. It's lead to a lot of social isolation, mistrust, and heart ache for me. > All manner of people imagine I am the solution to their problem and I am required to fix their problem, all completely for free while they don't do anything whatsoever for me. It's also been my experience that if you don't then suddenly you're being selfish, a jerk, etc. It's as if you're being judged by an entirely different metric of social acceptability.