Empathy and Its Discontents
Infinite feelings/needs
I could write for ages, and it's pretty unsettling because there's a chronic fear I have that sharing my thoughts and feelings will be burdensome to other people. I have a sense that if I were to ever start sharing, the desire to continue sharing and open up more and more would grow to infinite proportions.
It's like I'm a baby bird with its mouth open waiting for food. And if someone feeds it, there's a feeling of satisfaction, but also a feeling of, "Oh, you're going to feed me? Well that's really convenient, because I'm actually really hungry! Here's a list of all of the grocery items I would like for you to procure. [shuffles over to edge of nest, grabs spectacles from table, and pulls out humongous scroll of parchment from a drawer; opens beak 3x wider]"
Theistic myths as allegories for this infinite need
I relate to the heaven myths in Christianity that express something to the effect of, "There is a deep, spiritual longing for a perfect, infinite happiness and wholeness that cannot be fulfilled in this world/lifetime." Another allegory is this idea of a primordial paradise that existed in the Garden of Eden and was lost. Even if it can't be found, there's still a taste for it and some sort of unconscious memory. In psychoanalysis, it's this idea of an infantile or pre-natal womb-like state of bliss in which every single need was met and absolute dependence on one's surroundings was met with complete satisfaction (oral/holding needs).
Object relations theory and layers of interpersonal disturbance
There's something I remember reading in Fairbairn's "Schizoid Factors in the Personality".
1) There's one level of fears where it's like, "I don't want to depend on other people because I don't trust them and I'm afraid they're going to let me down if I depend on them."
2) But there's another layer below that one where it's like, "If it turns out someone does give me what I want, my basic self/desires/needs themselves are bad/poisonous and are going to hurt/destroy that person." If you're kind to me, I will punish you by depending on you.
If the first dilemma is, "Nobody understands me and everyone is unreliable," then the second dilemma is, "If someone does understand me, all of my repressed neediness/loneliness and my intrinsically bad deep self will pour out and I'm going to annihilate/ruin that reliable person by depending on them too intensely/fiercely." I'm really afraid that if I write, I'm going to expect or hope for people to listen, and that's going to create an endless stream of needs that impose stress on other people.
How I see empathy/helping
For me, empathy is like there are two people in the situation (myself and the other person), and I choose which person's thoughts or feelings I want to pay attention to.
1) Myself
If I'm empathizing with myself, then I really sink into my body, I let my own thoughts go where they want, I focus a lot on how things make me feel, and in concentrating/absorbing myself in this I naturally am not paying as much attention to other people.
2) Other person
On the other hand, if I'm empathizing with another person, I'm trying to focus on what they're saying, mirror/reflect their meanings, fully inhabit their worldview, hypothetically imagine what I'd feel in their situation, remember any situations where I have felt similarly and put myself back into that experience, and avoid introducing any foreign elements from my side that might distract from or deter a mutual immersion into the other person's intrapersonal world. Although there are all kinds of experiential and emotional connections happening here, the process as a whole involves bracketing off or temporarily ignoring my own experiences and reactions if they don't connect to the broader purpose of engaging with and being in harmony with what someone else is experiencing.
Is empathy dishonest?
I had a girlfriend who got offended/angry when I told her about the way that I experience empathy, because it made it sound like my empathy was a conscious, effortful, farcically dishonest act of labor -- rather than some sort of divine, natural, intuitive, heartfelt, sincere, sacred, simple experience.
I think I'm just very aware of the fact that even in the best-case scenario where another person and me seem to be completely in tune with one another and on the same wavelength, we're still different people and there's a difference between my experience/story and the other person's experience/story.
There is a contrast between what I will do if I'm sharing my own personal/spontaneous reactions and trying to fulfill my own needs... versus what I do if I'm really dedicating myself to understanding and appreciating another person's perspective and trying to listen, absorb, process, harmonize with them.
If I'm pursuing empathy, I am making a conscious decision to prioritize the other person's story over my own, and I'm deciding at that moment that it's more important for me to hear their story and for them to feel heard/understood than it is for them to hear mine and for me to feel heard/understood. I'm also deciding that it's more important than *me* hearing my own story.
Summary of problems of empathy/expression
Based on the above, the grim picture I have of human relationships is that they involve:
-Two people with infinite needs
-Existing in a zero-sum game where at any given moment, only one person's needs can be attended to and satisfied at a time
-Where any care one receives is necessarily temporary, impermanent, and imperfect (unless if one parasitically sucks the life out of another person and they consent to it in codependent fashion out of feelings of obligation/guilt/fear)
-And where giving care to help another person requires sacrificing some of one's own self-connection, honesty, or expression in order to relate to another person's milieu
By posting on here and expressing myself, I'm putting out content into the world that has a need associated with it of, "Please read me and respond in a particular way that helps me feel heard." I'm presenting and imposing a need, which possibly introduces feelings of strain or a sense of being coerced/exploited in conscientious people who have committed themselves to being responsive or helpful.
I am simply one in a sea of thousands of baby birds with gaping beaks clamoring for attention.
Possible resolutions?
I'm trying to imagine a long-term arrangement where it is possible for people to co-exist but still be in touch with their own depths both inwardly and through external expression.
Options I can think of:
1) Reciprocity
-I agree to mirror or listen to you for X amount of time and attend strictly to listening to you and inhabiting your perspective, and in return you agree to mirror or listen to me for X amount of time with a similar level of care. We are both able to feel heard.
-Problem: there will likely arise natural imbalances where maybe one person is better at listening/satisfying needs than the other, or one person has a far greater intensity of needs than the other.
2) Synergistic selfishness
-I express myself without any special intention of mirroring or empathizing with what you're saying. I simply respond freely to what you're saying. You respond likewise, just reacting out of your own spontaneity.
-Concept: Although we are to some degree ignoring one another or not fully reflecting/listening, if we are sufficiently similar to one another, it may happen that what you have to say is naturally exciting, stimulating, or validating and we derive happiness from hearing what the other has to say.
Blending of these two?
Maybe a free negotiation in which both people sort of sit down and decide who wants to share/listen at a given moment, and they flexibly move around between different arrangements based on how they're both feeling--with some kind of assurance in place that both people are safe and will hear/support one another equally?
This was the solution I proposed with my previous girlfriend, but she shot it down because didn't have the same needs I did for safety, she didn't have the same capacity for mirroring/listening, she thought it was a stilted/legalistic arrangement, and she felt like my proposing it expressed that I didn't trust her. (Which is completely accurate, but somewhere in the whole mix, my entire worldview and experience got thrown off a cliff and subjugated.)
Overall feelings
I'm just trying to understand the degree to which Rogerian methods (i.e. the active listening that is done in this site) is applicable or extensible to real-world relationships, or whether it's even possible to do there.
There is something extremely special and almost holy about it. But it almost feels like something unrealistic to expect. I'm unable to reach out and lean into it, and I'm also unable to give it.
I feel guilty at the thought of receiving it; to the extent that someone is meeting my needs, I am pressuring them to bury their own needs. That experience is why I stopped listening; from the listener side of things, I felt like I was an effective mirror, but I didn't have anyone to hear the things that I wanted to say and share.
The experience of listening also taps into a sensitivity that is so dissociated/estranged from my real-life relationships that it just increases a pre-existing sense of alienation/isolation to engage in listening. Listening creates an accumulation of just that many more new experiences/selves that are off-limits and have to be hidden.
***
I have the greatest admiration and respect for the people on this site who listen/empathize, are actually good at it, and yet are somehow able to retain their sanity while doing that. By "good at it", I mean people who actually mirror/empathize at a deep level and care about connecting with what someone else is experiencing... as opposed to people who chuck pre-fabricated solutions at the other person, see if any of it sticks, and then blame the Member for being too complicated/messed-up and not responding positively to their well-intentioned but misguided suggestions.
When I first started using this site as a Member, I was appalled by the quality of listening I received. Before that point, I was so doubtful whether I was any good at listening. Now I feel like I'm good at it, but I'm just incapable of doing it until my own needs are satisfied and I have enough inner clarity/space (and some reassurance of being able to safely/consistently maintain that) that I'm willing to offer some of that space to another person.
@frigidstars27 Interesting, not burdensome—to me, anyway—and I hope I may contribute some reactions.
Yes, sharing could, I suppose, grow to theoretically infinite proportions although in practice each of us is finite. I suppose that's how some of those authors who write book after book feel about it.
I don't know how to resolve "everyone is unreliable" vs "I'm going to annihilate/ruin that reliable person". My first reaction to the idea is that I have boundaries that limit the importance of everyone's unreliability to me, and boundaries that limit the extent to which I might ruin someone, so that within those boundaries it matters less, to the extent that I don't usually worry about it. Certainly, I think, boundaries are essential for listeners here.
On empathy, "fully inhabit their worldview" and "hypothetically imagine what I'd feel in their situation" are opposites! Again, my reaction is that empathy works best when it lies between those extremes. I like Rogers' explanation, which I quoted in this earlier thread: Forum Discussion - Can we teach Empathy ?
I definitely think Rogerian methods, or even just the bare active listening part, do work in real-world relationships, but are not sufficient to sustain real-world relationships. I agree with you that having unmet needs gets in the way of listening, and that's why 7 Cups encourages listeners to take breaks as necessary. All of us have times like that.
There's a strong sense of your separation from other people, I think, in your grim picture of human relationships, while myself, I have a strong sense that people are connected. Maybe that's a little Jungian of me.
I hope you will continue to write here in this diary.
Charlie
@RarelyCharlie
Thank you for reading and responding, for encouraging further writing, and for expressing that it wasn't burdensome.
I'm able to find agreement with your points intellectually/from the head up if I exert effort, but I have to confess it's not something I'm able to feel or deeply identify/agree with from the vantage point of my body. There are some statements that feel like they would be reasonable, pragmatic, teachable, and beyond fault. But on some non-rational level, it feels like if I try to engage with those ideas, the problem gets just pushed out of awareness. It's like the felt sense in my body goes into hiding because I'm chasing after a solution too forcefully, like a fawn intelligently and instinctively fleeing from an overzealous nature enthusiast. (Another analogy would be Darth Vader slaying Obi-Wan in Star Wars Episode IV, but then finding that the body has disappeared--and sort of just standing over an empty pile of clothes looking somewhat defeated and wondering whether he really succeeded.)
Maybe something that would help me is to try to form a picture of what it would be like to live through these ideas, as if I were an actor creating a character. I'm free to cast off the character afterwards and I can give the disclaimer that it is not essentially me and I am not personally agreeing with or identifying with that character. (This character also is not you, but rather me trying to assemble a plausible/possible version of myself that could hold some ideas that you have presented.)
Note: I'm not able to access the link you posted, even when logged into my Listener account. I get redirected to a page saying that the item has been removed.
***
1) Change
People are finite, impermanent, changing, and exhaustible. There isn't any specific mood, feeling, thought, or desire that persists in a fixed way. Everything is oscillation between opposites. One state that seems permanent gives way to another opposing state that seems equally permanent but then returns to the first, etc. Everything exists for as long as it has fuel or need to exist, and then it disappears and is reborn as something else.
In light of this, even if there is a powerfully needy self, perhaps once that self has been indulged or received some satisfaction, it will have served its purpose and will be reborn as a different self with a contrasting stack of needs. The concept of a permanent/overwhelmingly strong self that is intrinsically needy does not accord with the reality that in actual everyday experience, things move around rapidly and don't tend to stay in one place forever. Dependence and independence exist on a continuum where one moves back and forth between the two according to one's present circumstances. Extremes are acceptable and do not need to be shunned or feared insofar as they exist temporarily and do what is necessary at a given moment, and then they go away once they have been incorporated and integrated.
2) Independence
With boundaries, I have independence so I am not bothered by the fact that others are somewhat flaky in providing certain things. These are not things that I am expecting or demanding, and they are not things that are realistically feasible for any person to provide. Therefore, it's something I've simply factored into my calculations; I can't ask for this type of thing, nor should I expect it. I simply shape my decision-making and planning around this reality. If it is difficult or unfortunate or pales in comparison to the beauty of deep fantasies, then my response would be that it is unavoidable. The world does not operate according to my wishes and whims. I will do what is necessary based on the circumstances and conditions that have been provided to me and my current skills/capabilities.
3) Limits of duty
With boundaries, I do not put myself into situations where I permit others to become so intertwined with me that I am capable of doing grievous harm to them. The expectations are very clear from the beginning: this is what I have agreed to do, this is how I conceive of my current role, and anything you wish or hope for that goes beyond this framework is not my responsibility. I have not agreed to give anything outside of this. If you become upset or angry that I have failed to give what you are seeking, but what you are seeking does not fall within my purview and the obligations I have noted, then it is unfortunate that you feel unhappy but it is not my problem.
I have stated my terms very clearly from the beginning. At that point in time, I received your agreement with those terms as a precondition for you remaining in contact with me. I have fulfilled my responsibility. I will not be swayed or coerced into providing something beyond what I have consented to give.
This is what gives me the safety to be able to empathize with anyone: the knowledge that any interaction is constrained and exists within certain known limits. I know exactly where those limits end, and I have complete liberty/freedom to end any interaction that disobeys or disregards those limits.
4) "Experiential" vs. "intellectual" empathy
a) Experiential empathy
To fully inhabit a person's experience is to become suffused with their thoughts and feelings with a vividness that is as if it were your own experience.
The direct experiencing has the benefit of being so in tune or in touch that it is as if you are able to predict things before they happen, and certain mysteries that would be impenetrable to a detached observer make sense from a first-person perspective. If I can sense your fears, doubts, and concerns, then I can also sense all the ways in which so many possible responses I might give could be hurtful. I am instinctively and effortlessly able to avoid these landmines; I cannot hurt another person because at this moment they feel the same as myself and whatever hurts them hurts me as well.
The direct experiencing has the flaw that if I am fully porous and sensitive, I am doomed to become afflicted with whatever suffering is presented to me. One would feel nervous if there were a medical doctor who received all of the illnesses of every single patient that they treated. Likewise, the ideal for a psychological practitioner would be to have some ability to engage with people without becoming sickened by them through emotional contagion.
b) Intellectual empathy
To hypothetically imagine being the other person is to stand at a distance and make inferences about a person's state of mind based on known information, as if it were an object of study. As an analogy, I am able to understand and explain how a knight moves on a chessboard, but that doesn't make me a knight or mean that I have the same thoughts and feelings as a knight.
The advantage is that I can simply approach people as I would a puzzle or a video game. There are inputs and outputs, and if one has the proper strategy and understanding, one can leverage one's knowledge of causality to produce desirable effects--all without getting one's hands dirty. My satisfaction is in the mastery that I have in that causal understanding, and the fact that I am able to troubleshoot people.
The disadvantage is that people do not follow strict models. There is no system, strategy, or scheme that works universally. Moreover, people are able to sense the cold tonality of this type of approach. "Am I merely a cog in a machine to you?" There are some things one cannot sense, predict, or respond to effectively without being in close contact with the actual experiences that are occurring.
5) Connectedness
***
[breaks character] I can't currently identify in a straightforward or positive way with the idea that people are connected. I can come up with arguments and make them sound persuasive, but something about them leaves me feeling hollow or as if my feelings are at risk of receding even further backward.
If I imagine the arguments still persisting imperiously/undeterred through the character despite my reactions, then I start to have an emotional response that feels reminiscent of certain memories. I don't want to write it in this same post though, because the tone is so radically different--
--my body is back. There's a tension at the center of my chest and the peak of my neck. My breathing and muscles feel jittery, as if they are faintly vibrating or quivering. My chest feels like a skeleton spine held tensely in place like a family forcibly keeping a rattling/insecure vertical wooden beam of their home in place during a tyrannical wind storm. Like the feeling of being crammed into a bus that's standing-room-only and clinging on with a vice-like grip to a metallic beam to avoid losing one's balance. The skeleton is firmly stuck in place.
I know what I need to do, but I can't do it with people watching or put it into the same post as the character I've created above, so I'm going to call things off here.
I have an image of other people as stabbing knives trying to penetrate a steel plate armor--where the armor is only able to relax and become skin again when it is no longer in danger of being sliced through by knives. My understanding of connectedness is that my well-being is dependent upon other people having the courtesy and good sense to not stab me. (Or if that isn't possible or reasonable to expect, then dependent upon me constructing my life in a way that minimizes contact/depth with other people and builds up a sufficiently powerful armor that can deflect/repel all attacks.)
@frigidstars27
[I'm going to try something different. Self-dialogue on the topic of connection. Note: this isn't a 7Cups chat log; this really is me playing tennis with myself right now. Just wanted to make that clear so I don't accidentally get myself banned, lol.]
Listener: hello
Member: hi
l: how are you doing?
m: i'm doing okay. how are you doing?
l: i'm doing fine, thanks. what would you like to talk about?
m: i've been thinking about connection
l: ah, what sorts of thoughts do you have about connection?
m: i have mixed feelings about it
m: i'm not entirely against it, but i'm against the idea of it as some kind of absolute positive that is always beneficial or should be forced onto people.
m: i like the idea of disconnection being something that is allowed to exist and can be acknowledged as a truth as well. and, i don't want to prematurely give up disconnection for connection just because it's supposed to be better.
m: then it just sort of feels like some strict schoolteacher is hovering over me with a ruler, thwapping it against his palm, saying, "You will be connected! Or else!" :)
l: yeah, i see what you mean there. would it be okay for me to summarize what you've said so far?
m: sure
l: if i'm understanding, you don't like the idea of connection being something that someone would be pressured to accept or identify with.
l: if you're in a place where you just honestly feel disconnected, you want it to be okay for you to say that and feel what you're feeling.
l: and if it turns out that connection is "better" than disconnection, that doesn't really change what you feel you need to do, which is to be present in whatever you happen to be feeling rather than trying to force it to be something it isn't
m: <3 yeah, that sort of patience is something that i really want. like, it's okay to feel sad or unhappy. it's okay to be soft/vulnerable.
l: wanting for it to be okay to just feel things sensitively and rest in that without having to push yourself.
m: yes
l: is that something that's possible with other people?
m: i don't know.
m: i'd say i can imagine it, but in the present it's not something that happens.
m: i feel like if i go there, bad things happen.
l: bad things?
m: i'm a sitting duck.
m: it's like, i feel so much and the world is just so abrasive.
l: <3 like if you're soft, everything around you just becomes that much sharper and more painful.
m: yes, it's a lot easier to be really detached and just kind of mastermind my way through everything. there's a certain feeling of power and control to be had there. and i don't wish to denigrate that either, because sometimes that feels really good too, to feel as though i'm just this juggernaut that can completely dominate and crush whatever i set my mind to.
m: but, it's something different than this other side that i'm trying to connect with. like, the juggernaut is acceptable and well-liked and well-integrated socially. but everything that i really feel if i am relaxed and really sincere and gentle with myself, all of those feelings that come out haven't been really shared or heard.
l: so there's this self that's really good at controlling things and getting things done, and that self feels useful and like it receives praise. but then there's this other side where it's like it's been abandoned or neglected.
l: sort of like, nobody knows it exists and it feels like nobody's caring for it or attending to it, and it has a lot of feelings it wants to share--but a lot of uncertainty as to whether there's anyone wanting to receive them
m: <3 that feels accurate
l: i'm curious how this intersects with some of what you said at the beginning about connection and disconnection
m: what do you mean?
l: i was hearing you say at the beginning that felt like you leaned more toward liking disconnection rather than connection. now i feel like what i'm hearing is that you'd very much like to be connected.
m: i'm not sure if that's accurate.
l: oh, okay--sorry about that, please feel free to correct
m: if there were some magical, fairy-tale world where it was possible to connect through this vulnerable part and not have everything go haywire and become super frightening and hard to deal with, and i were able to go through the world as this sort of soft and gentle presence and have that actually be something positive and safe to do, then i'd enjoy that probably.
m: i'm just not sure whether that's really possible. that's what connection would feel like for me--not having to put up defenses and just existing naturally and freely in this sort of really fluid, feeling self.
m: i feel like if it isn't possible though, or if it has lots of negative consequences, then the next-best thing is to keep my vulnerability hidden.
l: so if it were possible to be connected in this vulnerable way, it would be great. but you feel like it isn't, so realistically disconnection feels like a better choice.
m: i'm on the fence.
m: i'd say i'm torn between the two.
m: i mean, i'm connecting in some way by sharing all of this, so i must not be completely skeptical of the possibility.
m: otherwise, i'd just say, "this entire situation is messed up and unsolvable" and i'd vanish and try to find something else to do.
l: if you felt like connection were really impossible, then you wouldn't be here talking to me
m: yeah, i mean, i'm trying it. i'm trying to have some bit of faith that it's possible. and i'm inserting myself into it very gradually at my own pace. and there's a lot of defensiveness and fear there, which i'm trying not to brush off or minimize. it's really difficult.
m: the thing that feels really critical and absolutely essential is that this is something that is my own choice and i'm not being swayed or driven one way or the other by anyone else. i'm free to decide how to think and feel about all of this.
m: i feel like i really need to resist, cast off, and almost be violently dismissive of any sort of introjected outside voices that are invading or intruding and threatening to take away some of that automony or force things to line up a certain way.
m: it's just that, well, that violent opposition isn't something that i can share either. because then i feel like i just come across as a really angry/upset person, and that doesn't bode well for social presentation and it's also not conducive to maintaining relationships. and it doesn't feel entirely ethical either... because if i'm this vulnerable heap of feelings, i imagine other people have feelings too and would be affected by things i say and do.
l: okay for me to try to put what you've said into my own words to make sure i'm following?
m: yup
l: you feel like you're trying connection, but there's still plenty of trepidation or uncertainty around it and you're really trying not to push yourself into it too forcefully.
m: yes, it's not something i can make happen before it's ready to
l: yeah, so it's sort of your own judgment call for when you feel ready to do something, and it's important to you that you be allowed to discern that, decide for yourself what you want to do, and have that be respected and honored
m: <3 absolutely
l: and to the extent that other people are sort of trying to throw in their own voices or get you to do things and it drowns out your own voice or undermines your sense that people respect your autonomy, it feels like something that you really want to reject.
m: yeah, like if that's what connection is--everybody getting into my business, misunderstanding me, forcing their views and prejudices onto me, and pressuring me to do things that i'd be completely miserable doing... then i'd rather be disconnected.
m: it's so much to ask though--that people not do all of those things i just described.
m: at a certain point, it's more pragmatic to just give up and say, "well, there isn't anyone like that right now, so i'll just keep on with what i'm doing."
m: though there's kind of a different problem related to that.
l: ah, what kind of problem?
m: like, let's say i find this amazing person that i get along with really well, and i'm able to connect with all of this deep stuff and be vulnerable around them. it still doesn't change the fact that all of the rest of the time i spend in the world... i'm going to have to bury all of that.
m: if anything, it actually makes things more difficult. because now i have this really special sort of relationship and... it's hard to keep something like that a secret when it's so important to me.
l: you would feel like you needed to keep that person a secret, because it was something vulnerable, so it would still have to be split off from the rest of the world?
m: mm, yeah.
m: like, it's something else that is sort of sacred that i can't really talk about with most people without feeling as though it's going to be stepped on and all of the beauty is going to get sucked out of it.
m: and it just intensifies this split where maybe i'm a certain type of person around this special person, but then i'm a different type of person around everyone else. and then, what happens if those two groups happen to be in the same place at one time.
l: yeah, like to the extent that you increase your connection with the vulnerable side, it becomes more stuff that you have to bury or conceal when you're living in the world through your normal/less sensitive side.
m: there are just definitely certain people that i don't feel safe being that self around. and i feel like somehow, they're also very perceptive and they'll pick up on it and start asking all kinds of questions about it.
l: ah, so if you were to start embracing vulnerability in private or with a select number of people, you feel like that would start to permeate outward into your normal self, and people you don't want to notice it would notice it.
m: yeah
l: yeah, that sounds challenging. you really want to be in touch with this vulnerable side and connect with people through that, but you only want to connect with certain people through it.
m: there's also this aspect to it of like... if you go on vacation for a while and you're in this beautiful, peaceful place and feel very relaxed... you start to feel like you don't want to go back.
m: and, vulnerability is tempting for me in that sort of way. i feel like if i let myself taste it, i won't want to be anything else. and it's like, the contrast between that and what i normally am is so jarring that it's just painful to switch back and forth.
m: like, i can't let myself be vulnerable because it increases my dissatisfaction with the opposite state.
l: if you let yourself be vulnerable, it would feel so amazing that you'd never want to go back.
l: but then i guess as you mentioned before, you feel like there are some situations or people where it's more beneficial to not be vulnerable
m: yeah, definitely some people. and i guess the vacation example can be taken pretty literally. like, my job tends to be a space in which i'm using a much more controlling, forceful, goal-oriented type of mindset. and i'm sort of powering through what i need to do, and it's great. but, it's definitely not an ideal space for vulnerability, or something that really meshes well with that.
l: i see, so at your job, you feel much more efficient, productive, and useful if you're living through this more insensitive, non-vulnerable side.
m: yeah. i guess it might be possible to switch back and forth between them. kind of like when i was in college and i had a really technical math course followed by a really spacy/daydreaming sort of seminar on spirituality followed by all of this really social sort of political/volunteer work. and all of that stuff was happening in a way that was spaced really close together.
m: i guess maybe in those situations though, i didn't feel as though there was any pressure upon me for my mind to be a certain way.
m: or i don't know, maybe it just felt very important to me that i be able to do all of that, and i liked all of it and was excited by it, so i naturally figured out a way to make it work.
l: you wonder if maybe it might be possible to have some kind of arrangement like in college where there are multiple you's, but you're sort of able to switch between them in rapid-fire fashion. and maybe the fact that you were able to do that back then had something to do with being passionate about all of the things you were switching between.
m: yeah, i don't know.
m: it's not something i want to push.
m: i guess that was in early college before things sort of crumbled.
m: but i feel like i've been talking for long enough, so i'm going to do something else.
l: oh, okay
m: is it okay if i chat again sometime?
l: yeah, absolutely
m: thanks, take care
l: sure, you too--thanks for chatting.
I'm sorry I didn't notice that the link I provided is for listeners only. 7 Cups lied to you when it said the content had been removed. The link works from a listener account if your browser hasn't recently cached the error page.
Charlie