From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Various ramblings...
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 16:41:56 GMT
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <1992Aug15.072142.24961@menudo.uh.edu>  kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown) writes:
> In article <1992Aug15.034211.38757@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.IBM.com writes
> >In  <1992Aug14.231331.4309@menudo.uh.edu>  kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown)
> >>
> >> Remember when Larry Margolis said ...
> >
> >No.  :-)
>
> Allow me to refresh your memory.
>
> In article  <1992Aug09.184102.22827@watson.ibm.com>, you said:
> > ...
>
> Convinced yet?  :-)

Oh yeah, *that*.  :-)

> >> I believe very strongly that one cannot be happy for very long
> >> living a lie, that knowing exactly how the real world works and where you
> >> stand with respect to it is mandatory if you're to get anywhere in it.
> >
> >On the other hand, taking something apart to determine how it works runs
> >the risk of breaking it.  If you enjoy something, you have to balance your
> >desire to dissect it against the risk of losing it by doing so.
>
> Well, if you're good, you won't break it.  :-)

Some things are welded, potted, etc. and simply not meant to be taken apart.

> There are, of course, ways of studying the outside world that don't
> require you to take something apart (physically),

Exactly - you study their interactions with the world around them, and
formulate hypotheses, which you refine with further interaction.

> but they're pretty rare.

I think in just about any interpersonal relationship, vivisection is *not*
a good way to determine what makes it "tick".  :-)

> >If I recall correctly, you were told by management to stay away from her,
> >and yet you persisted - entering a restricted area in the process.
>
> I was told to stay away from the area, and presumed (I think.  It's been
> quite a while) that this was to prevent disruption of the work area.

Clue time - if she were interested, she wouldn't have gone to management
to keep you away.

> So yes, I've learned.  But my point remains: whenever you don't know
> what you're doing, the consequences can be severe.

Stage shows do openings out of town, to try it out and check out the
audience reaction before trying to open on Broadway.  If you go to
someplace where nobody knows you, and just "let yourself go" without
trying to analyze every action to death, then if you make a fool out
of yourself, so what?  Just don't go back there.

> What did I learn?  That trying to ask people out in the workplace is
> the Wrong Answer because it can severely affect you in the work
> environment.  So Don't Do That, unless you're willing to risk your
> job.

Being overly persistent can get you in trouble no matter where you are.

> >> Anyway, I learned from junior high, high school, and college that people
> >> will take advantage of you if you let them.
> >
> >Many will.  Some will not.
>
> You can't tell ahead of time.  Thus, the safe assumption is that they
> will until you find out otherwise.

It's equally safe to reserve decision.  The difference is in your attitude.

> Well, I drive a stick, so this might help, so what do you do if she
> likes to drive a stick too?  :-)

Let her sublimate.  :-)

> >This is a generalization.
>
> These are *all* generalizations.

(As long as you realize that...)

> >> I learned that people don't like people who are particularly smart
> >
> >People don't (generally) like people who try to show off how smart
> >they are
>
> Yes, clearly.  So the question is: how do you do things intelligently
> without appearing to be intelligent?
>
> That is, what's the difference (to the outside observer) between "showing
> off how smart you are" and using your intelligence whenever you can?

Without observing your behavior, I don't even know if my distinction
is relevant to you.

> At this rate, I won't know nearly enough before I pass away.

Then don't do that.  :-)

> >> So here I am today, alone as usual.  The only way I can learn things is
> >> by examining my surroundings and deriving information from my observations.
> >
> >So everything you learned in school was in a lab; you derived nothing
> >from books?
>
> Well, yes, there is the "book" thing.  I was speaking of how I can learn
> about my immediate environment.

So treat the advice from us as "the 'book' thing"; things that you learned
*other* than by observation of your surroundings, and which you can apply
without having to know exactly how it works.

> >> That's why I can't "use the Force".  It's why I'm "cold and calculating".
> >> It's why I can't read people.  It's why I can't use so much of that good
> >> advice that you guys have been giving me (and why you're probably so
> >> annoyed with me for saying, so often, "yes, but" :-).  It's why I *depend*
> >> on being correct, and thus why I'm so concerned *about* being correct.
> >
> >Yes, but...  This doesn't mean you *can't* use the advice.  You might stop
> >worrying about being correct and just try some of it to see what happens.
> >Do the experiment and find out what the results will be.
>
> Some of the advice given is stuff that I *have* already tried.  What
> happened?  Not a bloody thing as far as I can tell.
                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Remember, you're dealing with other people here; these aren't repeatable
experiments.  You have no way of knowing if the advice didn't work because
it wasn't "good" or because of the women involved.  E.g., all the women
present might already have had SOs, so the otherwise "sure-fire" thing
you tried fell flat.

If she slaps you, that's a failure.  If she goes out with you, that's a
success.  If not a bloody thing happens, the results are indeterminate.

> Even so, I suppose it's worth giving the stuff a shot anyway...

What do you have to lose, but your loneliness...

> >> only ones that arent't is my interest in cats, but there's little to talk
> >> about there,
> >
> >Why?  Lots of women like cats.  If you see someone interesting in a pet
> >store, asking them a question about cats might be a good way to strike up
> >a conversation.  (And remember - you're asking as an opener, *not* because
> >you want to learn something about cats, so the question can be silly,
> >trivial, or something to which you already know the answer.)
>
> That's not what I was referring to.  I was referring to the fact that the
> subject matter that would be of interest to most people on this subject
> is rather sparse, i.e. not very wide or deep.

Personally, I agree - once you get beyond what happens in a microwave, there's
not much to say.  But nevertheless, "cat people" can talk about their pets
for hours.

> This, of course, will not be true of a cat fanatic (which I'm not).  I
> doubt there are many of those out there.

But if you're in a pet store and the woman's looking at the cat toys,
the odds are *much* higher that she'll be one.  And whether she is or
isn't, the point is that it's an excuse to start a conversation.  Say,
"Gee, do you think my cat would like this?"  If she says anything about
her cat(s), you can follow up with "How many", "What kind", comparing
Cute Cat things they've done...  (Then, after you've established a
rapport, you could ask, "Want to take me home and show me your pussy?"  :-)

> >Do you ever go to jazz clubs?
>
> I need to.  I don't know of any where the atmosphere isn't smoke-filled,
> though, and I can't breathe in such an atmosphere.

Maybe jazz dinner clubs?  If they serve food, they have to have a non-smoking
section (around here, at least).  I went to see a friend perform Wednesday,
and the place was virtually smoke-free.  (Of course, we didn't get there
until after 10, and the place was virtually empty as well...)

> >> ... value physical condition, which for me is
> >> relatively poor [6'3" tall, weigh 220 lbs. which is *not* muscle.
> >
> >If you wanted to, you *could* do something about that.
>
> Yes, I could.  It would take a great deal of time, a great deal of
> effort, and a great deal of money to do it right, i.e. without killing
> myself in the process.  My brother's into bodybuilding, so I've done
> some studying of the subject.

Who said anything about bodybuilding?  If you're flabby, you could
work on that without trying to turn yourself into Mr. America.  And
it takes time and effort, but *not* necessarily a lot of money.

Start out with other aspects of your appearance that are easier to change
- such as your clothes.  Do you wear glasses?  If so, have you considered
contacts?

> >> Hmm...this isn't nearly as long as I expected.  :-)
> >
> >Could that be part of the problem?  :-)
>
> I don't follow...please explain.

(It was a teeny-weenie joke.)

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: soc.singles