Conference quark::human_relations-v1

>    I am still thinking about Tuttle and the story....reality is
>    that a person or persons can alter the perception of us as an
>    individual or we could alter how others perceive someone. 

Try to catch 'The Great Impostor', starring Tony Curtis.

It demonstrates that if a lie is outrageous enough and is repeated 
convincingly enough and loudly enough, there will always be people
who believe it.

Some call it a fairy tale and find it heart warming. Others call it
a hoax and get indignant. Still others call this propaganda and
become respectful. It works well in the movies, so-so on TV, very 
seldom in real life.

-- Ron

    Truth is beauty.
    
    Beauty is perception.
    
    Perception is reality.
    
    Reality is truth.
    
    
    I am Kris

    Re .2, So?  
    
    Lorna
    

    This technique is also known as "The Big Lie".     
    
    RE:1
    
>    It demonstrates that if a lie is outrageous enough and is repeated 
>convincingly enough and loudly enough, there will always be people
>who believe it.

   > It works well in the movies, so-so on TV, very 
>seldom in real life. 
    
    Actually, not to drag politics into this discussion, but ex-prez
    Ronald Reagan was a real master of this technique, particularly
    early in his administration. It worked very well for quite a
    long time. Examples would be labeling Contras "Freedom fighters"
    when actually many were members of the former military dictatorship,
    and treating the concept of terrorism as if it were a political
    philosophy rather than what it is, a strategy.
    
    -roger
    
    
    
                                                              

    re. .3

>            Re .2, So?  
    
    So beauty, reality and truth are all perception.
    
    Kris

    
<    So beauty, reality and truth are all perception.
<    
<    Kris

    So then the question comes of what events lead us to have certain
    perceptions. If you don't percieve me as beautiful is there anything
    I can do (aside from change who I am) to alter that perception or is
    it controlled by you alone.

    I'm very interested in this idea, I've been reading a book called
    "what to say when you talk to yourself" that advocates heavy use of
    positive self talk. "I am a strong and worthy person" is the mantra
    I recited every night after my separation. I still cried. I want
    this stuff to work. I want to be able to change my self-perception.
    But as we are discussing in the self-esteem note that may not be all
    internally controlled. I'm interested in your observations. liesl

    Re:  .6
    
    I've recently taken two of Digital's offered courses that have 
    advocated positive self-talk (maybe this should be in the self-esteem
    topic but since you brought it up here...).  Stress in the Modern
    Jungle suggests you talk gently to yourself.  Investment in Excellence 
    also stresses positive self-talk.  One of the things I got out of Inv. 
    of Exc.  that I'm trying to change in myself is...if you put yourself 
    down, even if you're kidding around, your sub-consious picks up the 
    negative stuff and you begin to believe the things you're saying on a 
    sub-conscious level.  They stress talking positively to yourself which 
    should help to build a positive image of yourself.  
    
    There's all kinds of interesting information in Investment in
    Excellence and I may not have put it into words very well but I
    hope you got the idea of what I was trying to say.
    
    Jan

>    If you don't percieve me as beautiful is there anything
>    I can do (aside from change who I am) to alter that perception or is
>    it controlled by you alone.
    
    First of all, Liesl, by what you've written in this and other
    conferences, I do perceive you as a beautiful person.  However that
    perception has zero bearing on how you perceive yourself.
    
    There is a philosophical school of thought which states that the
    universe is as it is because, were it any different, we would not
    be here to perceive it in the manner which we do.  Thus, in
    contemplating the universe; its origins and its fate and everything
    from the rainbow colours within a drop of oil on water to pulsars
    at the edge of the universe, perception is the basis of reality.
    And anthrocentricity is the basis of perception.  Therefore you
    and I and all the other people are the basis of reality.
    
    Some even take this further: Individual perception creates the
    universe.  Anyone who has studied quantum physics can tell you a
    story about a man named Schroedinger and his cat.  In a nut-shell,
    Mr. Schroedinger had a cat which he put into a box with a device
    which had a 50-50 chance of poisoning the cat.  With the box closed
    he had no way of knowing whether or not the cat was alive.  And
    the only way that the cat would be defined as being alive or dead
    was for Old Schroedinger to open the lid.  In fact, as far as the
    universe was concerned, until the cat was perceived to be dead or
    alive, it was neither.
    
    The same principle applies to trees falling in the forest with no
    one around to hear.  Or even the light in your fridge.  Who knows
    if it really is off when the door is closed?
    
    Events occur only in the mind.  All that is perceived is all that
    there is.  And from the point of view of any person, the universe
    does turn around them.
    
    Kris

    .6 liesl
    
    many(if not all) people who have negative perceptions of themselves 
    tend to seek external approval for their actions and beliefs. Those who
    use internal regulation to monitor their own actions and beliefs
    only have one person to get approval from: themselves.  Those who
    seek external approval must continuously modify their actions and
    beliefs to meet the approval of each individual person they interact
    with to main a good self-image.  Since each and every person you
    try to interact with has different "standards" to evaluate you,
    self-esteem drops because you can never be accepted for YOURSELF.
    	This mantra you recite every night is  possibly a means to refocus
    your need for approval from external to internal control.  AS long
    as you give up this external control to others, others will always
    control your happiness.  This change in Programming may be very
    difficult and painful, but the fruits of the effort are worth every
    bit of energy.  
    	Low self-esteem expresses itself in divers ways.  It could be
    expressed as suicidal ideations, depressions, neurosis, on one side
    or braggadicio, histrionic type actions on the other.  These later
    personality traits are an attempt to disguise low self-esteem and
    may, upon a superficial glance appear secure and self confident
    to others, but they are really reactions to low self-esteem.   
    	I think Kris was trying to say that our perceptions of
    ourselves reflect our perceptions of the world.  Our perceptions,
    thus, are our reality.  What I or anybody else thinks of you should 
    have no bearing on how you think of yourself( but I agree with Kris,
    you are a beautiful person).    
   
    Ernie 
                                                

 I only want to disagree with two parts of Kris' argument. :-)

>However that
>    perception has zero bearing on how you perceive yourself.

 I disagree. How people perceive you and reflect that perception back to
you most certainly does have an impact on your perception of yourself.

><    So beauty, reality and truth are all perception.

 Here is the second point. Reality is not perception. Without getting overly <-
key word :-) philosophical, I have disagree (and I'll tell you why). Reality
is how things are; not how you think they are, not how you want them to be,
but how they are. Beauty is subjective; truth is supposed to be mostly
objective but seems to be rather subjective at times. But reality is entirely
objective.

 Now, you can have your own perceptions of reality which may or may not reflect
true reality. I guess you call that "your reality" as opposed to reality.
And I imagine that most everyone's perceptions of reality are different.

 Well, enough ratholing- this really belongs in a more philosophical context.

 The Doctah

    DOCTAH,
    	But this is what human relations is about-differences.  
    
    I have a problem with the statement that "reality is not perceptions."
    How do we measure this reality?  through the filters of our
    perceptions, correct?  since no two persons have the exact same
    neurological, and psychological filters, how is this reality guaged
    precisely?  To obtain an objective perception (another oxymoron?)
    of reality, we would have to have a new gadget, a unique means for
    percieving the universe,that would enable us to perceive reality
    without the use of our physical senses given us at birth. Since there 
    is no way to transmit this information about this (absolute?) reality
    to our brains without neurological and psychological filters, Believing 
    there is an objective reality is as much a matter of faith as believing 
    there is a GOD. ("Nobody asked, Just my opinion" (:'> )   
                                                              
    Ernie

    re. .10
    
>     I only want to disagree with two parts of Kris' argument. :-)
    
    Feeling agreeable today, Doctah?
    
>     I disagree. How people perceive you and reflect that perception back to
>you most certainly does have an impact on your perception of yourself.

    You're absolutely correct.  I was thinking in terms of perception
    alone rather than perception with feedback or reflection.
    
>     Here is the second point. Reality is not perception. Without getting
>    overly <-key word :-) philosophical, I have disagree (and I'll tell
>    you why). Reality is how things are

    But the point is that there is no reality without perception.  We
    live in a causal universe wherein events or their effect are the
    only way in which we are "certain" of their existence.  It is only
    through the observation of the universe that the universe takes
    on any form of reality and Einstein showed that the observers
    perception is by no means absolute.
    
    Here's a statement about reality: Up is a direction perpendicular to
    the ground.  But up for me and for someone in Australia, our "Ups" are
    in two opposite directions.  But then the reality of "Up" is relative
    to your point of perception.
    
    So the question which begs is, "What's Up, Doc?"  (I crack me up)
    
    Kris 

>    I have a problem with the statement that "reality is not perceptions."

 "The way thing really are" (reality) is independent of our ability to perceive
them. So because we are unable to see gamma rays is independent of the fact
that gamma rays exist.

>    How do we measure this reality?

 We don't. We attempt to arrive at an understanding of what reality is through
our perceptions. We accrue a series of perceptions which become our view of
reality. However, there is no definite relationship between our reality and
reality itself, though most people can attain a view of reality which indeed
approximates reality (I think). :-)

 Thanks for writing, Ernie.

 re: Kris

>    But the point is that there is no reality without perception.

 False. The fact that you don't perceive gamma rays to exist does not alter the
reality of their existence. Reality is independent of perception. You cannot
arrive at a _view_ of reality without perception.

 I cannot see Pluto, nor use any other sense to perceive its existence. However,
if I go to a suitable observatory, I am indeed able to see the planet we call
Pluto. The reality is that Pluto exists regardless of my ability to see it.
So if I don't see it for a week, that doesn't mean it ceases to exist for that
week.

 The Doctah

    I've been thinking about this and the self esteem problem for
    several weeks now. And finally I've come to some decisions about
    what I think is reality and how it may be changed and what that
    means to my life.

    There is a "true" reality. Just because people believed there was a
    "Tuttle" didn't make it so. No one would be able to see him or
    speak to him. However, believing this was the catalyst for a change
    in people that was real. (in the context of the show anyway)

    I can NOT decide to believe that I won't be hit by a car and be able
    to stand safely in the middle of the freeway at night. I CAN decide
    to model my life in a manner that changes my life (and maybe keeps
    me from walking on the freeway at night).

    What this means for me is that I can't change exterior reality but I
    do have the power to change me and my response to it. And for me
    personally I've realised I've spent the past two years accepting my
    husband's idea of what I was and not my idea of what I could be.
    Being separated from him wasn't being free of his control over me
    but it was ME that was granting that control.

    As for the effect of others on this process, I thank all of you who
    have given me support and told me I was OK. Especially those of you
    who put up with me over the past months and never wavered in your
    support. We do have to finally be the one who makes the change in
    ourselves but some of us need to be kick-started to break out of the
    cycle and believe that we are valuable individuals.

    I know there will be times when I fall back a few steps but a
    certain weight and doubt have been lifted and I can make it. liesl

    Wonderful! Don't be afraid to look for support on those times when you
    need it. You WILL prevail (not just survive).
    
     The Doctah

    I have thought of this note and the MASH episode several times this
    week.  The question that comes to mind is
    
    Did the media create a couple, Carol and Charles Stuart, that were above
    reproach so that individuals did not dare voice their suspicions in the
    case?