It happened again

[Dresden Ceriano]

---

Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

---

Malanya wrote:

---

edit- in regards to you quoting my phrase to Czari, I make friends with people while in the forum and then take it in world. It's my personal preference. We all have our own choices here in sl and just because someones belief does not go along with anothers clearly doesn't make either wrong = personal choice.

---

But you agreed that "what happens in the forums, stays in the forums."  If that is the case i have a few freinds i have to remove until we can meet face to face inworld. :matte-motes-crying:

---

Yes... the rule has been written... you must remove them with fire.

...Dres

[Tex Monday]

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

I liken such forum antics to that of watching a slapstick comedy.  Sure people are throwing things at each other, slapping each other back and forth, poking each other in the eye and such... but, at the same time, you know that no one is really getting hurt.  As such, I can sympathize with their "pain" and laugh at them at the same time.  If this is so unhealthy for the community, then

The Three Stooges

should have been banned a long time ago.

...Dres

---

BLASPHEMY!!!

STONE HIM!!!

:matte-motes-agape:

ETA: :matte-motes-sunglasses-3:

[Tex Monday]

---

Awe Thor wrote:

---

Tex Monday wrote that the "researcher" said:

 

" We know that it's very good to feel empathy and sympathy for people,"

---

Do

we

? Says who? Professional mourners? Charity workers?

---

Tex Monday wrote that the "researcher" said:

 

 Our society thrives on compassion and empathy."

---

Again, says who? Not Darwin. Those further down the food chain might hope for some beneficence from those who are better equipped to survive and thrive, but the latter have usually got that way by identifying and oppressing the weak.

 

 

Tex - thanks for the reference, which highlights the worst aspects of do-gooding social science: do a bit of an experiment, then conclude in line with your unsubstantiated prejudices.

Awe . . . still waits for evidence that schadenfreude is mentally unhealthy.

---

You asked for evidence that schadenfreude is (or can be) mentally unhealthy. The evidence is there. It can be unhealthy if people (all people who wish to have) empathy and sympathy towards their fellow humans. If you don't feel that this applies to you, then by all mean please continue to have your healthy dose of schadenfreude.

I do applaud after a waitress drops a tray of glasses...but then I feel bad that she's got to clean it all up afterwards.

 

[Dresden Ceriano]

---

Tex Monday wrote:

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

I liken such forum antics to that of watching a slapstick comedy.  Sure people are throwing things at each other, slapping each other back and forth, poking each other in the eye and such... but, at the same time, you know that no one is really getting hurt.  As such, I can sympathize with their "pain" and laugh at them at the same time.  If this is so unhealthy for the community, then

The Three Stooges

should have been banned a long time ago.

...Dres

---

BLASPHEMY!!!

STONE HIM!!!

:matte-motes-agape:

ETA: :matte-motes-sunglasses-3:

---

Did you see the movie they made http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0383010/?  I thought it was going to be horrible, but I honestly thought it was really cute.

...Dres (I did miss Curly making chicken soup.)

[Dresden Ceriano]

---

Tex Monday wrote:

I do applaud after a waitress drops a tray of glasses...but then I feel bad that she's got to clean it all up afterwards.

---

The instances in the forums, to which I was refering, usually take place after the tray has been dropped.  Some waitresses know what they're doing and can be quite efficient at cleaning the place up... others just scatter things about and make a bigger mess than what was there before.  Tell me that you wouldn't snicker at someone as inept as that.

...Dres

[Tex Monday]

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Tex Monday wrote:

I do applaud after a waitress drops a tray of glasses...but then I feel bad that she's got to clean it all up afterwards.

---

The instances in the forums, to which I was refering, usually take place after the tray has been dropped.  Some waitresses know what they're doing and can be quite efficient at cleaning the place up... others just scatter things about and make a bigger mess than what was there before.  Tell me that you wouldn't snicker at someone as inept as that.

...Dres

---

Of course I would...but the point of that whole discussion was that we need to have a little sympathy for the waitress in having to clean it up rather than just pointing and snickering and laughing at her.

It's like seeing a person in a play who is messing up horribly. It's ok to laugh, but you have to understand that they're trying to crawl inside their skin to get away from it. Without a little sympathy for the person, this world would be a truely cruel place indeed.

And yes, I did see the Stooges movie...but I thought you were referring to the original shorts that i used to watch almost religiously on Saturday morning television...

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Tex Monday wrote:

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Tex Monday wrote:

I do applaud after a waitress drops a tray of glasses...but then I feel bad that she's got to clean it all up afterwards.

---

The instances in the forums, to which I was refering, usually take place after the tray has been dropped.  Some waitresses know what they're doing and can be quite efficient at cleaning the place up... others just scatter things about and make a bigger mess than what was there before.  Tell me that you wouldn't snicker at someone as inept as that.

...Dres

---

Of course I would...but the point of that whole discussion was that we need to have a little sympathy for the waitress in having to clean it up rather than just pointing and snickering and laughing at her.

It's like seeing a person in a play who is messing up horribly. It's ok to laugh, but you have to understand that they're trying to crawl inside their skin to get away from it. Without a little sympathy for the person, this world would be a truely cruel place indeed.

And yes, I did see the Stooges movie...but I thought you were referring to the original shorts that i used to watch almost religiously on Saturday morning television...

---

I'm often the one dropping the tray and I don't mind the applause, but I agree with you, Tex. We all make mistakes, it's what makes us human. When someone is trying to crawl inside their skin, I'll sometimes try to pull it over me as well (couldn't you have found a better analogy, like crawling under the covers? ;-).

I've been there, I've done it, I still remember.

[Awe Thor]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

We all make mistakes, it's what makes us human.

---

Where does this piece of nonsense come from? Are you seriously suggesting that all the other species on planet earth get everything exactly right all the time?

Awe . . . can't wait for the next bit of apple pie and motherhood kitsch cliche with no reasoned basis.

[Carole Franizzi]

---

Tex Monday wrote:

---

Awe Thor wrote:

---

Tex Monday wrote that the "researcher" said:

 

" We know that it's very good to feel empathy and sympathy for people,"

---

Do

we

? Says who? Professional mourners? Charity workers?

---

Tex Monday wrote that the "researcher" said:

 

 Our society thrives on compassion and empathy."

---

Again, says who? Not Darwin. Those further down the food chain might hope for some beneficence from those who are better equipped to survive and thrive, but the latter have usually got that way by identifying and oppressing the weak.

 

 

Tex - thanks for the reference, which highlights the worst aspects of do-gooding social science: do a bit of an experiment, then conclude in line with your unsubstantiated prejudices.

Awe . . . still waits for evidence that schadenfreude is mentally unhealthy.

---

You asked for evidence that schadenfreude is (or can be) mentally unhealthy. The evidence is there.

It can be unhealthy if people (all people who wish to have) empathy and sympathy towards their fellow humans

. If you don't feel that this applies to you, then by all mean please continue to have your healthy dose of schadenfreude.

I do applaud after a waitress drops a tray of glasses...but then I feel bad that she's got to clean it all up afterwards.

 

---

Didn't really understand what you meant in the bolded sentence but here's my two-yens worth anyway. Schadenfreude - neither healthy nor unhealthy. Just natural, normal, and very, very human.

We watch horror films to get kicks from the fact it’s not us about to get a meat cleaver in the skull. We gossip discuss in detail about what exactly Mr Brown across the road was wearing when his wife walked in on him and the maid doing a spot of role-reversal because we’re deeply comforted that our own secret lives haven’t been announced to the four winds. Or that it was our colleague, and not us, who was the one to slip on those lethal high-gloss granite stairs and crash-land at the feet of the Big Boss. In other words – it’s in part relief that our own vulnerability – physical, social, mental – was not the one being violated.

Also, I think, if the cleaveree, the feather-dusteree and the slippy-stairee are all people who get up our noses, seem too big for their boots, are too pretty, too successful, too lucky, too darned happy – then our own self-esteem gets a little boost, as it might appear for a moment that fate has stepped in to even up things a tad.

So, to sum up, I shouldn’t think it either damages or benefits society – its existence is merely a barometer for the state of our own self-perception.

Don’t ask for proof or links or whatnot – this is just my gut-originating opinion. No, wait – that was the green peppers I had for lunch. Sorry about that.

[Carole Franizzi]

---

Awe Thor wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

We all make mistakes, it's what makes us human.

---

Where does this piece of nonsense come from? Are you seriously suggesting that all the other species on planet earth get everything exactly right all the time?

Awe . . .

can't wait for the next bit of apple pie and motherhood kitsch cliche with no reasoned basis.

---

Mm? You called? 

 

 

[Carole Franizzi]

---

Awe Thor wrote:

---

Suspiria Finucane wrote:

 

Some educated readers 

---

Where are you going to find them around here?

Awe  . . . apart from Carole and Dresden, of course, and they know the score.

---

Awe...shucks.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Carole Franizzi wrote:

Didn't really understand what you meant in the bolded sentence but here'

s my two-yens worth anyway. Schadenfreude - neither healthy nor unhealthy. Just natural, normal, and very, very human.

---

I'm in approximate agreement, I think (this isn't something I've thought about much). But as our social evolution is moving faster than our genetic evolution, I wouldn't be surprised if we discover that schadenfreude, as well as being natural, does affect overall health of an individual and the social group, though perhaps in opposite ways.

I'll be fascinated by the experiments that attempt to tease this all apart. It's very interesting to see how researchers attempt to isolate the things they're looking for.

 

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Awe Thor wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

We all make mistakes, it's what makes us human.

---

Where does this piece of nonsense come from? Are you seriously suggesting that all the other species on planet earth get everything exactly right all the time?

Awe . . . can't wait for the next bit of apple pie and motherhood kitsch cliche with no reasoned basis.

---

"Mistakes" go all the way down to the genetic replication level, but you've gotta be pretty far along the evolutionary path (and on the right one) before you find a creature that consciously perceives mistakes as such, and better yet has a word to desribe them. It is pretty cool that you can back up on the path a bit and find other animals that get close.

I like apple pie, motherhood (though not enough to try it), some cliches and stepping outside the confines of your reasoning.

What's the reasoned basis for your attempting to refute Aethelwine's statement yesterday with evidence that had no bearing on it? Some mistakes are effortless, and some seem to require baffling amounts of work.

ETA: It's even cooler when you back wayyyy along the evolutionary trail to a fork before the thing you found, then take the other path and find it popping up there was well. Will this vexing "natural irrationality" turn out to be a better than average way to go?

[Carole Franizzi]

---

Suspiria Finucane wrote:

 

Great to see you again Carole! :matte-motes-evil-invert:

 

Despite our differences in the past, I've always appreciated your individualism.

 

PS I'd be happy to send you a copy of the hippie get up :matte-motes-wink:

 

 

---

Well, hello there, Suspiria. Us? Differences? When?? I'll not have that! Why, we've always been bff's, haven't we? (bff does stand for beyatchy female foes, doesn't it?) (If there was a little winking devil smiley, I'd insert it here. Just imagine it.)

Glad to see you too. Though probably not as glad as someone else I can think of who, without your never-give-in attitude would have had oodles of hours less entertainment in these forums. But then, let's be honest - you're kinda pleased to see him back too. 'Fess up. On ya go. I'll tickle you till you admit it!

Frankly, I think the pair of you should get SLhitched. I could make a fortune selling tickets for your couples therapy sessions.

 

 Edited to add this PS - don't get the hippy-thingy reference. Remind/illuminate me.

 

 

[Malanya]

---

TDD123 wrote:

---

Awe Thor wrote:

Have you not been told that it is inadvisable to post real-life photos of yourself, Willy?

---

That's ok. Already have my mugshot ready as well.

 

 

 

---

Awe Thor wrote

Awe . . . someone might recognise you and turn you in to the cops.

---

Is that like being recognized by the moderators here for posting as an alt of a main that is banned from these forums ? Who'd make that the bigger clown of all of us ?

---

:smileysurprised:

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Tex Monday wrote:

I do applaud after a waitress drops a tray of glasses...but then I feel bad that she's got to clean it all up afterwards.

---

The instances in the forums, to which I was refering, usually take place after the tray has been dropped.  Some waitresses know what they're doing and can be quite efficient at cleaning the place up... others just scatter things about and make a bigger mess than what was there before.  Tell me that you wouldn't snicker at someone as inept as that.

...Dres

---

Dunno what Tex would tell you, but I probably wouldn't snicker. If it was my tray they dropped, I might help them clean it up. If they were throwing the tray at me? Well, that's a whole 'nuther kettle of fish.

Don't ask me why they brought a kettle of fish, I asked for a salad.

[Carole Franizzi]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Carole Franizzi wrote:

Didn't really understand what you meant in the bolded sentence but here'

s my two-yens worth anyway. Schadenfreude - neither healthy nor unhealthy. Just natural, normal, and very, very human.

---

I'm in approximate agreement, I think (this isn't something I've thought about much). But as our social evolution is moving faster than our genetic evolution,

I wouldn't be surprised if we discover that schadenfreude, as well as being natural, does affect overall health of an individual and the social group, though perhaps in opposite ways.

I'll be fascinated by the experiments that attempt to tease this all apart. It's very interesting to see how researchers attempt to isolate the things they're looking for.

 

---

In reply to the bolded bit. If I'm to be coherent, I have to say I would be surprised. If I'm going to stick to what I said before then schadenfreude is only a symptom and not a cause. Just as a fever is a sign of the body fighting infection, a schadenfreudian (??) reaction is, I suspect, only a symptom of the schadenfreudic (???) person's debilitated ego reacting. Sure, if everyone gloated all the time at everyone else's misfortune, it would be a dreadful sign of the times, however, the problem wouldn't be the schadenfreudianism (??????) per se, but the underlying society-wide cause of the death of all empathy.

[Malanya]

---

Suspiria Finucane wrote:

---

Malanya wrote:

 

p.s. I am not arguing.

 

---

 More semantics. Perhaps you have never heard of opening arguments in every court case.

 

---

Malanya wrote:

Having an opinion is not an argument

---

 

An unexpressed opinion isn't worth much.

 

---

Malanya wrote:

edit- in regards to you quoting my phrase to Czari, I make friends with people while in the forum and then take it in world. It's my personal preference. We all have our own choices here in sl and just because someones belief does not go along with anothers clearly doesn't make either wrong = personal choice.

---

Quite frankly I think we agree on that point.

 

 

So what you could have said is: Disputes that happen in the forums ..

should

stay in the forums

---

Not in a court, it's a forum, and if it's looked at that way my "opening argument" was many posts back.. an opinion of what my opinion is worth is fine. I rather like the way I said the phrase "what happens in the forums, stays in the forums"  I do believe that it's personal choice, it's just not mine. In this case IMO, the poster did follow the OP in world and it was a form of aggressive action, I say this because of all the posts that showed the anger and hypocritical side of the person that replied to the OP.

[Malanya]

---

Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

---

Malanya wrote:

---

edit- in regards to you quoting my phrase to Czari, I make friends with people while in the forum and then take it in world. It's my personal preference. We all have our own choices here in sl and just because someones belief does not go along with anothers clearly doesn't make either wrong = personal choice.

---

But you agreed that "what happens in the forums, stays in the forums."  If that is the case i have a few freinds i have to remove until we can meet face to face inworld. :matte-motes-crying:

---

Oh I am sorry... I see that someone said it has been written in stone and I thought it was personal choice. I wouldn't use fire to remove them as suggested

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Carole Franizzi wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Carole Franizzi wrote:

Didn't really understand what you meant in the bolded sentence but here'

s my two-yens worth anyway. Schadenfreude - neither healthy nor unhealthy. Just natural, normal, and very, very human.

---

I'm in approximate agreement, I think (this isn't something I've thought about much). But as our social evolution is moving faster than our genetic evolution,

I wouldn't be surprised if we discover that schadenfreude, as well as being natural, does affect overall health of an individual and the social group, though perhaps in opposite ways.

I'll be fascinated by the experiments that attempt to tease this all apart. It's very interesting to see how researchers attempt to isolate the things they're looking for.

 

---

In reply to the bolded bit. If I'm to be coherent, I have to say I would be surprised. If I'm going to stick to what I said before then schadenfreude is only a symptom and not a cause. Just as a fever is a sign of the body fighting infection, a schadenfreudian (??) reaction is, I suspect, only a symptom of the schadenfreudic (???) person's debilitated ego reacting. Sure, if everyone gloated all the time at everyone else's misfortune, it would be a dreadful sign of the times, however, the problem wouldn't be the schadenfreudianism (??????) per se, but the underlying society-wide cause of the death of all empathy.

---

I forgot to retain the part of Aethelwine's statement that makes what I said make more sense

"Schadenfreude is not a healthy pleasure to be boasting about."

If that shadenfreude is apparent, might the social dynamics punish the holder? (We could discuss whether Aethelwine was talking about the schadenfreude being private, I don't have an answer about healthiness either way.)

But I don't think I'd be surprised to discover that even when only known internally, that shadenfreude has an effect on health. What if it's discovered that people who engage in it frequently live longer than those who don't? I don't expect we'll see that study soon, and it'll be surrounded by critique, but it doesn't seem unreasonable to think that our natures affect our health.

ETA: While those "power of positive thinking" books might be mostly bunk, do we know they're all bunk?

[Tex Monday]

---

Carole Franizzi wrote:

Didn't really understand what you meant in the bolded sentence

---

the bolded area of the sentence...specifically the all those that wish to have  piece was directed at a certain forum poster who seems to have no sympathy or empathy for anyone but himself..my failed attempt at a jab to this person.

Please forgive me all...

[Awe Thor]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Awe Thor wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

We all make mistakes, it's what makes us human.

---

Where does this piece of nonsense come from? Are you seriously suggesting that all the other species on planet earth get everything exactly right all the time?

Awe . . . can't wait for the next bit of apple pie and motherhood kitsch cliche with no reasoned basis.

---

"Mistakes" go all the way down to the genetic replication level, but you've gotta be pretty far along the evolutionary path (and on the right one) before you find a creature that consciously perceives mistakes as such, and better yet has a word to

desribe

them.

---

So you're backing off now are you, and suggesting that it isn't the making of mistakes that  makes us human, but the ability to understand the concept, and recognise the commission.

I find it difficult to believe that this is the sole distinguishing feature which you would like to identify, because if so, this thread is replete with inhumanity.

Awe . . . is still waiting for a justification, rather than a Pythonesque "theory" that schadenfreude is unhealthy.

[Awe Thor]

---

Carole Franizzi wrote:

 

Sure, if everyone gloated all the time at everyone else's misfortune, it would be a dreadful sign of the times, however, the problem wouldn't be the schadenfreudianism (??????) per se, but the underlying society-wide cause of the death of all empathy.

---

While I am delighted to see the common sense you are bringing to this thread, Carole, I am afraid I have to disagree with you on this point, simply because schadenfreude would not exist without empathy; you HAVE to comprehend the feelings of another person before you can take pleasure in their discomfiture.

Awe . . . Even Simon Baron-Cohen, who should  know better, confuses empathy with sympathy.

[Awe Thor]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

While those "power of positive thinking" books might be mostly bunk, do we know they're all bunk?

---

Of course they are.

 

 

Awe . . . hasn't met anyone yet whose positive belief that they can fly, unaided, has proved successful.

ETA And all you have to do is look at the number of lardasses scootering around American theme parks to know that they don't work on dietary problems; or perhaps obesity is associated with illiteracy in the USA?

 

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Awe Thor wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

While those "power of positive thinking" books might be mostly bunk, do we know they're all bunk?

---

Of course they are.

 

 

Awe . . . hasn't met anyone yet whose positive belief that they can fly, unaided, has proved successful.

ETA And all you have to do is look at the number of lardasses scootering around American theme parks to know that they don't work on dietary problems; or perhaps obesity is associated with illiteracy in the USA?

 

---

Your absense of evidence isn't evidence of absense (for someone who argues so much, why do you keep making these very basic mistakes?)

Here's some evidence to the contrary...

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/positive-thinking/SR00009

Note that this is correlation, not causation, as revealed by...

"It's unclear why people who engage in positive thinking experience these health benefits. One theory is that having a positive outlook enables you to cope better with stressful situations, which reduces the harmful health effects of stress on your body. It's also thought that positive and optimistic people tend to live healthier lifestyles — they get more physical activity, follow a healthier diet, and don't smoke or drink alcohol in excess."

But you just know people are looking for causation. I've no reason to think they won't find evidence of it.