From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (dreas)
Subject: Re: Credibility and Trueness
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 00:42:50 GMT

In article 727932461@convex.convex.com, ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>In <1993Jan24.001651.1625@sol.UVic.CA> atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (dreas) writes:
>
>>We MUST get into some Ed history here. He has on occasion admitted to
>>never having had a relationship. How does he know what a relationship 
>>would be like?
>
>Oh?  Really?  Strange, I don't remember "admitting" that.  Nor can I
>imagine why I would "admit" something that's not true.
>
>I may have said something along the lines of "The longest relationship
>I've ever had a relationship lasted all of four dates."

You are either an excellent comedian or don't know the difference 
between an acquaintance and a relationship.

>I don't see how 
>you could equate that with "never having had a relationship" unless you
>graduated from the Charlie Martin School of Mathematics.

Well, I think it's about time you cut him a bit of slack. If the man 
has a point, he has a point. He has often pointed things out that are
irrevocable and blatant to a four year old. Did you ever hear of a 
thing called humility? 

>>The trouble is that people blame themselves for things that go
>>wrong in their lives, 
>
>Which is sometimes justified and sometimes not.  Unfortunately,
>some people, such as Charlie Martin, have accepted the idea that
>anything which makes them unhappy is somehow their fault.  Which 
>is probably why Charlie, when not reinventing logic and mathematics,
>is busy having his head shrunk.

I find it a wise move to seek help for problems in one's life that
are just too big to handle... 

>>It takes a considerable amount of working on yourself emotionally.
>>I don't claim to be an expert at being content all the time, but I
>>must admit that I am content and at peace with myself more of the 
>>time than I was, say, five years ago.
>
>The problem with being content is that it ensures you will never
>achieve anything more than what you've already got.  Change requires
>some effort, and summoning that effort requires some level of discontent.
>You just have to be content with that. ;-)

So you are an excellent comedian. That's a good one, I'll admit.

Change does require effort. It depends on what kind of effort. You
probably know all about working hard or working smart instead. I appear
quite easy-going on the exterior, but I'm putting a constant effort in
to improve my situation, and I'm done with obstacles. I prefer to get what 
I want out of life by going around obstacles instead of through them.

>Discontent can, however, rise to the level where it paralyzes you.
>To prevent this, it is important to recognize the fact that you may
>fail, at least temporarily.  As Dirty Harry said, "A man's got to
>know his limitations."

I have been there and done that several times, Ed. Limitations are
meant to be challenged. I never really fail, but encounter frequent
setbacks. These are always meant to be cheerfully challenged while
dodging life's little and large obstacles.

>>It's more like pulling a bulldozer up a 15% grade than throwing a switch.
>>If it were as easy as throwing a switch, then we'd all be very much at
>>peace, AND drugs are not the answer.
>
>If all you want to achieve is mindless contentedness, drugs
>probably are the answer.

Agreed, but that is not my personal goal, nor do I believe that it is
yours. I could be stoned out on heroin or opium at this very minute, but
I have learned that illegal drugs are not for me a long time ago. I used
to be on tranquilizers, tricyclic antidepressants, lithium carbonate,
and all kinds of other prescription goo over the years. I am proud to say 
that I have not been on any prescription medication for almost a year, now. 

If I get a tad melancholy, all I have to do is shine a full spectrum light at 
my eyes indirectly for half an hour. This reduces the melatonin concentration
in my brain, and I'm perfectly well again.

>>If you help somebody by doing a good deed, you feel good about having
>>done the deed. The person you do the deed for appreciates it when you
>>give of yourself to help them. The loneliness in your mind is not
>>gone, but it's diminished to an extent. 
>
>Maybe for you.  For me, it takes someone whose apprecation goes
>beyond what he or she can "get out" of me.  It's one thing for
>someone to be pleased that I do something; it's another to be
>pleased that *I* do it.

Can't you just take pleasure in doing and giving of yourself? Folks
appreciate it and can tell when you appreciate doing things for them.
Once again, it's an attitude thing. If you are angry at people, they 
will reply to you in kind. If you are cheerful, others will generally
be that way with you.

dreas