<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Well, I'm not sure how much of a giggle this will get, but perhaps it's worth pointing out that what distinguishes Euclidean geometry from non-Euclidean geometry is the acceptance of Euclid's fifth postulate, which differs from the other four in that it is intuitive rather than logically demonstrable!</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>You are such a giggle. What makes you think that Euclid's Parallel Postulate is intuitive? There has been talk about it for centuries, and no one has proven it wrong yet. That seems fairly objective and logical to me! I'd say the re-written fifth postulate for projective geometry is MUCH more intuitive "Given a line L and a point not on that line, P, there are no lines passing through P parallel to L". Dude--that postulate almost takes FAITH!!! haha<P>Anyway, I would rather discuss Euclid's fifth Axiom: "The whole is greater than the parts"--particularly as it applies to a divorce situation. Do you REALLY think that the whole (the marriage) was greater than the parts (the husband and wife)? And which "greater" does he mean? The "bigger" greater or the "wow--great" greater? <P>Who would have ever thought that Euclidean geometry could be funny? It's almost like a Sinefeld episode. <P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Actually, I do have "feelers" and I am very capable of empathy. Or, at least, I am very capable of the "vicarious experience" part of empathy, and I do not always require the explicit communication of feelings in order to relate. If there are sufficient points of similarity between what someone else is going through and something I have experienced myself, I can make a pretty good guess as to what that person is feeling. Believe it or not, this is largely a conscious process, and if I cannot identify enough points of similarity I am left with nothing much more to say than "I can't imagine how you must feel."</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Let me guess. An person in emotional distress will tend to stay in emotional distress, and an person in emotional bliss will tend to stay in emotional bliss? Haha. Okay, what I meant by "feelers" is not recognizing a pattern and responding empathetically. "Feelers" are actually like...um... well, envision little emotional tentacles around my body that pick up on vibes and small emotional cues and body language and tone of voice and all kinds of other non-detectable stuff on a conscious level. It's a little like emotional radar. <P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Obviously, that form of empathy has significant limits. If you do not communicate your feelings to me, or at least enough facts that I can infer your feelings from them, it will take some pretty obvious cues for me to determine how you are feeling. I am actually rather proud of myself for my progress over the years in learning how to "read" my wife's feelings. I trained myself to keep an eye out for subtle physical cues that I had observed in past interactions (which is harder than it might seem, given my propensity to lose track of my environment and get caught up in the ideas of a conversation). As an example, I remember telling my wife about something I had learned that I thought she would be happy to know. But as I was talking, I noticed (eventually) that she had stopped shifting in her chair. (She's normally pretty squirmy.) Note that "my wife is not moving at the moment" is a datum fairly devoid of any inherent meaning. But after noting over several sample intervals that my wife still hadn't moved, I was able to match this behavior with observations made on other occasions, when similar behavior preceded an emotional outburst. From this conscious observation, I was able to deduce that my wife was upset, in spite of the fact that I had anticipated an entirely different reaction from her. (Unfortunately, this marvelous feat of observation and analysis failed to prevent another emotional outburst; but what the heck: I tried.)</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>Thanks for the story, Mr. Twain. Heehee. Okay, sorry, I'm just kidding you. I can hear from your story and from the words you chose that you have made a CONSIDERABLE effort toward this, and I must first say that I applaud you for so diligently trying to understand. WOW! Also, I would say that this might be part of the "feeler" thing. See, you are depending on the observable, analysis of past reactions--running the data you have gathered over the years through your model--to reach a conclusion: my wife will be happy to hear this or she will be upset. HOWEVER, you are not taking into account several major pieces that the "feelers" would subconsciously pick up on: like the way her hair is a little bit messed up, a sigh, a tired look in her eyes--gosh, just a thousand little things that add up to "she had a tough day and needs my shoulder, not my data."<P>My question to you, after years of gathering data and observing behavior and stuff, did you grow frustrated when you came to the incorrect conclusion? What did that do to your data models--were they totally scrapped, or just re-tooled? Did you inability to cross the "feelings" bridge seem incomprehensible, since you are able to think so clearly and objectively and logically in other areas? <P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>I suspect that a feeling-intuitive person would probably have noticed that my wife was upset sooner than I did, and without even trying, and without knowing her nearly as well.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>No offense, but probably. But...only because our intuition is able to process a thousand little unconscious things. So, let me ask you this--why don't you use your intuition more? Don't you trust it? Even though you are a stronger intuitive, is your sensor part pretty strong too--like 45/55 versus 20/80? I think maybe you're analysis gets in the way of what you know to be true, you just evaluate yourself right out of it because you doubt yourself! Hey, have you always doubted yourself, or was there a time that you were more secure in your analyses and intuitions?<P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>But the really difficult thing for me is to determine what "words or actions" will provide encouragement to you, and then to implement them in a convincing manner. As I said, showing my feelings is not something that comes naturally to me. And I'm a lousy actor. (Or, more precisely, I'm a moderately good actor within a very limited rage: I have a little bit of acting experience, and considering how wooden I am in real life, I have surprised people with my ability; but I have always been cast in roles that are compatible with my temperament.) Not too long ago, I tried to feign an outburst of anger, in order to demonstrate my actual behavior in certain interactions with my wife. I simply couldn't do it. I couldn't muster up the anger, and I couldn't fake it either.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>Would I be correct to assume, then, that your attempt at comfort or encouragement would be fake? This is hard for me to understand, so please try to explain more thoroughly. Do you not actually want to communciate encouragement -OR- do you really want to communicate it, but your analysis kind of gets in the way of it coming across as sincere? It's a thin line of distinction, I know, but do you see what I'm asking? If you do NOT actually want to communicate comfort, then why are you doing it? And if you do, but your analysis makes it seem insincere, then why don't you just SAY that? "I would really like to send you some support, but my darn INTP nature makes it sound so insincere. Just know that in the best way I know how, I support you and am here to offer you comfort in any way I can. Will you tell me what would help?" (BTW, feel free to print that and distribute that to all the INTP's you know. There's no copyright. haha)<P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Then again, come to think about it, maybe I'm being too hard on myself. A great deal of my self-evaluation has been done in the context of interactions with my wife, and I'm not sure that's a very valid context. How much of my failure to connect with her was my own failure? Perhaps I am allowing the self-doubt that developed in my marital relationship to affect my evaluation of other relationships. Hmm...</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>GDP, very excellent point. A lot of your interactions with your wife had nothing to do with you (no offense)--or more accurately, they had EVERYTHING to do with her. Here is a mind-boggling idea for you. Did it ever occur to you that you did NOT fail to connect to her? As you analyze the interactions, you need to add a whole portion of data that you are neglecting to take into account, and that is the stuff in the black box. Remember? You used to think, "input A = output X" but you did not take into account that L and M were in the black box, so "input A + L + M = output Z!!" Once again, in evaluating your interactions with your wife, and how you handled them and how she reacted, you are forgetting L and M that were variables you could not see. <P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Actually, I'm quite convinced that I don't notice everything. Since I can't be sure what data is significant unless I have complete confidence in my models, and since as an INTP I am never satisfied with my models, I am more concerned that I might be missing crucial data than that I might be gathering superfluous data. I want to notice and remember everything. There is no "chaff", only pieces that might belong to a different (and perhaps interrelated) puzzle.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>So, do you get a headache from remembering it all?<P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B> The data looks an awful lot like scientific analysis. I try to come up with models (which is where intuition is useful, as I said before), and then I check the data for a fit. The more data I have that fits, the more confidence I have in the model. If I have data that doesn't fit the model, I have to make an uncertain judgment: is it irrelevant (noise), is it tainted by factors I failed to observe (insufficient data), or is it an anomaly that will require modification (or abandonment) of the model?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>Is this what results in the constant self-doubt, then? Constantly re-evaluating the model? Having to decide if it's irrelevant, an anomaly, or insufficient data? Doesn't that get AWFUL tiring? I suppose being all smooshy feely would be tiring to you! But gosh, I can see where you would long for a quiet mind, because that darn computer is on 24 hours a day!<P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Anomalous data that I have never been able to explain by any model tends to get flagged as "something I don't understand" and filed somewhere just at or below the level of conscious recollection. That is, I may or may not have devoted much consideration to the data, but if I come across a new model that might explain it, it tends to jump back into my consciousness pretty quickly. It is amazing how often I will read something, and I will then suddenly remember some long-"forgotten" event and have a Eureka moment.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>Has your hard drive ever been full? Do you think your hard drive ever could be full? Does your hard drive expand the more you learn? Do you mind having you mind compared to computer parts. If not, then what is your floppy disk--your Daytimer? Haha. Please don't take this wrong, but do you think of yourself as a bit of a computer? It sounds that way a little bit to me. If that's the case, do you want to be human, or are you happy being a computer? Here's a REAL puzzle for you--what would be a Feeler's floppy drive? A kleenex box? <P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>It's all pretty haphazard, really. Thinking is heavily influenced by intuition and feelings. "Thinkers" just tend not to notice those influences, in much the same way as "Feelers" tend not to notice the models underlying their intuitions.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Boy, that's quite an statement you've made there! I think I'll think about that tonight. <P>Well, goodnight. That's all the analysis I can take for one night. And that's the world according to Garp <P>CJ<P><P>------------------<BR>Judge your success by what you had to give up in order to get it.

Back to the top<P>------------------<BR>Judge your success by what you had to give up in order to get it.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FaithfulWife:<BR><B>You are such a giggle. What makes you think that Euclid's Parallel Postulate is intuitive? There has been talk about it for centuries, and no one has proven it wrong yet. That seems fairly objective and logical to me! I'd say the re-written fifth ostulate for projective geometry is MUCH more intuitive "Given a line L and a point not on that line, P, there are no lines passing through P parallel to L". Dude--that postulate almost takes FAITH!!! haha</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>OK, I'm confused again. (Not, I admit, that that should be considered in any way unusual.) How can merely restating a postulate change its logical and intuitive qualities? <P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Anyway, I would rather discuss Euclid's fifth Axiom: "The whole is greater than the parts"--particularly as it applies to a divorce situation. Do you REALLY think that the whole (the marriage) was greater than the parts (the husband and wife)? And which "greater" does he mean? The "bigger" greater or the "wow--great" greater?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I won't try to speak for Euclid, but yes, I think a marriage <I>is</I> greater than the sum of its parts; certainly in the "bigger" sense, and potentially in the "wow" sense. <P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Who would have ever thought that Euclidean geometry could be funny? It's almost like a Sinefeld episode.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Ooo, that was so clever I almost missed the wordplay! <P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Let me guess. An person in emotional distress will tend to stay in emotional distress, and an person in emotional bliss will tend to stay in emotional bliss?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>No, I figured out pretty quickly that that simplistic kind of extrapolation is unreliable at best, and dangerous at worst...<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Haha. Okay, what I meant by "feelers" is not recognizing a pattern and responding empathetically. "Feelers" are actually like...um... well, envision little emotional tentacles around my body that pick up on vibes and small emotional cues and body language and tone of voice and all kinds of other non-detectable stuff on a conscious level. It's a little like emotional radar.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Oh.<P>No, I don't have that.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>My question to you, after years of gathering data and observing behavior and stuff, did you grow frustrated when you came to the incorrect conclusion? What did that do to your data models--were they totally scrapped, or just re-tooled?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Um. The rule is, never throw anything away. (I don't want to hear it, WIFTTy.) It is important to remember that, in the long run, reality is <I>always</I> more complex than <I>any</I> model. There is always room for reworking and refining a model, and you never know when you might be able to scavenge an old one for parts. Playing around with trying to unify models sometimes yields helpful insights.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Did you inability to cross the "feelings" bridge seem incomprehensible, since you are able to think so clearly and objectively and logically in other areas?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>The reality and effectiveness of that "feelings bridge" is quite observable, and I have long understood that my failure to comprehend or cross it is a <I>personal</I> limitation. I cannot reasonably conclude that my personal obtuseness is evidence for any inherent incomprehensibility, and if I really <I>believed</I> that this sense or communication form (or whatever it is) is incomprehensible, I would have stopped trying to understand it.<P>But yes, it <I>seems</I> incomprehensible.<P>More later...<BR><p>[This message has been edited by GnomeDePlume (edited July 19, 2001).]

Just so you two know that I'm not totally bereft of skill in 'cyphering' your type of guile....<BR>NEVER DOUBT A JEWISH PERSON'S MISSPELLINGS!<P>As for the actual content beneath your heady postualtions...FW is using her 'intuit' mode to explain the 'rational' model of geometry...a la 'Eureka'...the real power of Archimedes' epiphany...and the reason for the story, is that he 'sensed' displacemnt...he 'felt it'...That is the perfect embodiment of the synergy that I alluded to. It is responsible for breakthroughs in otherwise stalled efforrts to understand using only one model. You can get examples from many greats, including Einstein.<P>Dance the dance...its fun to read...but the larger sense... about two becoming one flesh, the whole being equal to more than the sum of its parts...and the attraction of this thread...the upshot? Learn to apply both methods when required...speak the other's language, even if you do not fully understand it, and grow as a result.<P>This is what I take from it.<P>P.S I did get the Beemer reference. I actually understand most of Dennis Miller, although literature bores me.<p>[This message has been edited by waiting_for_her (edited July 19, 2001).]

GDP,<P>"I loved that my wife could open these kinds of windows for me, but she could never quite believe that someone with so much intelligence could be so oblivious to so much, and I think this contributed to her mistrust of me."<P>boy, I can sure relate there. My best friend of 20 yrs calls me the "Absent Minded Professor".<P>"I figured out more than two decades ago that the Golden Rule did not apply well to me, since doing something to someone else that I would appreciate being done to me (e.g. blunt speech) might well result in me causing terribly hurt feelings."<P>You're lucky to have figured that out two decades ago. I think it was only two MONTHS ago for me. <P>Carry on....<BR>

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>So, let me ask you this--why don't you use your intuition more? Don't you trust it? Even though you are a stronger intuitive, is your sensor part pretty strong too--like 45/55 versus 20/80?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I believe your questions are good, but I don't know how to even begin to answer them.<P>Since I can't see my intuition in action, I don't even <I>know</I> how much I use it. I infer my use of intuition through self-evaluation, as I look for the assumptions behind my conclusions, but by the time I make that analysis, my ideas typically have already gone through so many revisions that I am no longer sure where I started from. My thought processes are both chaotic and rapid, and it is very difficult for me to try to observe them dynamically.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>I think maybe you're analysis gets in the way of what you know to be true, you just evaluate yourself right out of it because you doubt yourself!</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I am frighteningly good at rationalization. If I want to believe something, I am pretty sure I can find a way. To me that seems like a very good reason for self-doubt. So while I believe you are right in thinking that I cause problems for myself with my over-analysis, to me that seems like a necessary inconvenience.<P>Although, really, sometimes I have to wonder at the similarities between constant self-evaluation and various physical manifestations of OCD. <sigh> And of course, by thinking <I>that</I>, I'm self-evaluating yet again.<P>But, I don't really see this as a significant problem except when I am paralyzed by recursive mental looping.<P>Um, I guess I'd better change the subject... <P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Hey, have you always doubted yourself, or was there a time that you were more secure in your analyses and intuitions?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Hey, I <I>was</I> once an adolescent, you know! I may not have known everything, but I knew everything that <I>mattered</I>. <P>The longer I live, and the more I observe, the more confusing the world gets, and the less well-equipped I seem to live in it. Things that I believed in and depended on have lost their solidity, and I have watched them float away. And yet, while I have less trust in myself and in other people, I find that I trust God more. I don't <I>need</I> all the answers like I used to.<BR><p>[This message has been edited by GnomeDePlume (edited July 19, 2001).]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Would I be correct to assume, then, that your attempt at comfort or encouragement would be fake? This is hard for me to understand, so please try to explain more thoroughly. Do you not actually want to communciate encouragement -OR- do you really want to communicate it, but your analysis kind of gets in the way of it coming across as sincere? It's a thin line of distinction, I know, but do you see what I'm asking? If you do NOT actually want to communicate comfort, then why are you doing it? And if you do, but your analysis makes it seem insincere, then why don't you just SAY that? "I would really like to send you some support, but my darn INTP nature makes it sound so insincere. Just know that in the best way I know how, I support you and am here to offer you comfort in any way I can. Will you tell me what would help?" (BTW, feel free to print that and distribute that to all the INTP's you know. There's no copyright. haha)</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I <I>do</I> want to communicate encouragement, and to be honest, I don't really know how I come across when I try. (Those missing "feelers" you know.) Certainly my analysis makes my words and actions seems insincere <I>to me</I>, if I try to act in a way that does not come naturally to me.<P>Consider your own situation here. You are feeling tired and lonely and discouraged. What is my natural reaction? I think, "These are all normal feelings, and only to be expected. It sucks, but that's the way life is. The closest I can come to understanding your experience is to relate it to certain experiences of mine, which come to think of it aren't necessarily all that similar. Nevertheless, it might be worth mentioning certain insights that helped me to cope with my situation, even though I can't really say they made me <I>feel</I> any better."<P>What is a more "normal" person's reaction? Based on observation, I imagine it to be something like "Come here and let me give you a hug."<P>Which reaction is likely to be better received? I don't know, but I know this: if (make that when) I responded to my <I>wife</I> in the way that came naturally to me, she became very upset. If I tried to demonstrate empathy by telling her how I felt in a similar situation, she thought I was trying to "compete" with her. If I tried to reassure her, she thought I was invalidating her feelings. If I tried to repeat back what she told me about how she felt, she thought I was playing games with her. If I just held her quietly, she wanted to know why I wasn't saying anything. I recall one occasion when she was lying on the floor sobbing over some perceived failure on her part (at work or in school, I don't remember any more), and I was on the phone with her mother trying to figure out what to do. Her mother told me to hold her and rock her gently. So I tried that, and my wife got angry and wanted to know why I was shaking her.<P> <P>Telepathy would make things so much simpler...<BR><p>[This message has been edited by GnomeDePlume (edited July 19, 2001).]

(Waving magic wand)...<P>(Fairy dust flying through the air)...<P>Okay, now you have telepathy. <P><BR>Just trying to lighten things up a bit. First, I almost always have a zillion questions and I wonder if you ever grow weary of all these darn intrusive questions--as in, "I'm tired! Leave me alone!" If you ever do, just say something okay? <P>But...here's what I'm wondering now. If your natural instinct was to say "It's okay", to agree or validate in some way, to share an experience you had that was similar, and to share an insight or something that seemed to help you cope, is that the kind of response that would bring YOU comfort and encouragement? For example, if you were feeling soul weary, lonely and depressed, would you find comfort and encouragement if I said to you, "GDP it is quite normal for you to feel depressed over this situation. Life isn't fair, but it still hurts, huh? I remember last month when XYZ happened to me that I also felt depressed. One thing that really helped me was this passage from 'The Road Less Traveled' (insert quote here)." Would that kind of response help you in some way? Please do not take this wrong--I'm trying to comprehend the idea and learn how to "translate" from Feeler into Thinker.<P>I can relate/understand what your wife was saying about the competition thing, partly because I have felt like that at times, and partly because I am accused of that at times. To me, it's very frustrating, because in no way am I trying to "compete"--I'm trying to relate and connect! It almost feels like, I'm trying to do something good, and I'm being accused of being selfish. It's damn discouraging! <P>To be honest with ya, it sounds like you REALLY tried to learn though. I have to say, I'm impressed by your attempts to try to translate into her language and do what would help her to feel better. I know it may not have turned out very well, but you really did a pretty good job. I am kind of curious about one thing, though (of course--a zillion questions). Why didn't you ask HER what would help her feel better? And why didn't she tell YOU what would help her feel better? It's not all your responsibility, you know. You have the duty to learn as best as you can--and boy, I think you really gave a valiant effort there--but she also has the duty to tell you and communicate to you and teach you and LEARN YOU! I may be WAY off base here, but that piece sounds like it is totally missing. <P>I'll type more later, but for now, those are my thoughts.<P>CJ<P>------------------<BR>Judge your success by what you had to give up in order to get it.

Finishing up with old questions before the new ones...<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FaithfulWife:<BR><B>GDP, very excellent point. A lot of your interactions with your wife had nothing to do with you (no offense)--or more accurately, they had EVERYTHING to do with her. Here is a mind-boggling idea for you. Did it ever occur to you that you did NOT fail to connect to her? As you analyze the interactions, you need to add a whole portion of data that you are neglecting to take into account, and that is the stuff in the black box. Remember? You used to think, "input A = output X" but you did not take into account that L and M were in the black box, so "input A + L + M = output Z!!" Once again, in evaluating your interactions with your wife, and how you handled them and how she reacted, you are forgetting L and M that were variables you could not see.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Even though I believe I have figured out a good bit of what's in that black box, and it has indeed become clear that many of my wife's reactions were not direct responses to what I said or did, I am still unable to evaluate the quality of my connection attempts.<P>By the way, don't worry about offending me with blunt speech. It is very difficult to offend me. Heh. When my wife suggested that I might have elements of an abusive personality, instead of getting offended my immediate reaction was to wonder whether that might be true. And that reaction did <I>not</I> come from self-doubt: I <I>knew</I> I had never abused my wife. However, I didn't know anything about abusive <I>personalities</I>, and until I had done some research I was going to suspend judgment on the matter.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>So, do you get a headache from remembering it all?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>No.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Is this what results in the constant self-doubt, then? Constantly re-evaluating the model?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>That's a chicken-or-the-egg situation.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Having to decide if it's irrelevant, an anomaly, or insufficient data? Doesn't that get AWFUL tiring? I suppose being all smooshy feely would be tiring to you! But gosh, I can see where you would long for a quiet mind, because that darn computer is on 24 hours a day!</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Indeed it <I>does</I> get tiring. Sometimes very much so.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Has your hard drive ever been full? Do you think your hard drive ever could be full? Does your hard drive expand the more you learn?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I have never considered the problem of filling up the "hard drive". If it has happened, or if it ever happens, I don't see what I could do about it.<P>But in any case, I am more concerned about accessing what <I>is</I> stored. How good is the search function, for instance...<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Do you mind having you mind compared to computer parts. If not, then what is your floppy disk--your Daytimer? Haha.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Analogies are often useful, as long as one is careful to remember that they are <I>only</I> analogies. But I generally try to avoid making analogies where the word "floppy" is involved. Ahem.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Please don't take this wrong, but do you think of yourself as a bit of a computer? It sounds that way a little bit to me. If that's the case, do you want to be human, or are you happy being a computer?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I'll give you one guess as to what my nickname in elementary school was...<P>I <I>like</I> who I am. I don't mind being a computer as long as I can be a human too. And <I>I</I> know I'm human, even if few other people can tell.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Here's a REAL puzzle for you--what would be a Feeler's floppy drive? A kleenex box?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>See above.<P>

Here's the classic thinker vs. feeler...<P>I asked my H to make a list of everything he thought I needed to do to save our marriage. I'm a thinker, so I figured that if I did everything on the list, then our marriage would survive.<P>I did every one of those things, and my ex still wanted a divorce. He said "I wish I could be a bigger man". I said, "You can if you want to" (thinking that he could just check that off on his to do list too, ya know?). Then he said, "I don't feel like it". Basically, it didn't matter that I had checked all the boxes and completed the "list". He still didn't "feel" like staying married to me. Go figure.

Once they've fallen "out of love", anything you do either isn't timely or is viewed as an artificial (and temporary)response to a crisis. Logic may dynamite every dam they have erected between you and the waters of their love, save the final one: they simply no longer want you around.

"they simply no longer want you around."<P>yep. That about sums it up.

Boy can I relate to what you two have said. I can be asked to open up and share my feelings - and when I do - - BAM!!! What I say is taken and turned against me . . . or I will do my best to demonstrate my "feelings" but it is too late and there is no trust . . But logic dictates that I must keep trying until there is no tomorrow.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FaithfulWife:<BR><B>If your natural instinct was to say "It's okay", to agree or validate in some way, to share an experience you had that was similar, and to share an insight or something that seemed to help you cope, is that the kind of response that would bring YOU comfort and encouragement? For example, if you were feeling soul weary, lonely and depressed, would you find comfort and encouragement if I said to you, "GDP it is quite normal for you to feel depressed over this situation. Life isn't fair, but it still hurts, huh? I remember last month when XYZ happened to me that I also felt depressed. One thing that really helped me was this passage from 'The Road Less Traveled' (insert quote here)." Would that kind of response help you in some way? Please do not take this wrong--I'm trying to comprehend the idea and learn how to "translate" from Feeler into Thinker.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Yeah, the "natural" way for me to respond to people is pretty much the way I would like to be treated myself.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Why didn't you ask HER what would help her feel better? And why didn't she tell YOU what would help her feel better? It's not all your responsibility, you know. You have the duty to learn as best as you can--and boy, I think you really gave a valiant effort there--but she also has the duty to tell you and communicate to you and teach you and LEARN YOU! I may be WAY off base here, but that piece sounds like it is totally missing.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I <I>did</I> ask my wife those questions. But with a couple of exceptions, her responses were too vague and abstract for me to do anything with. In actuality, I don't think my wife really understood what she needed herself.<BR>

Sisyphus, TheStudent, and Howling Alone:<P>I thought about how to respond to you'all. I think each one of you sort of wishes that somehow your spouses could give you a list, saying, "Accomplish these tasks, and I will love you". Then you would do the tasks, reasonably check them off your list, and say to yourself, "I have done all you've asked, so you must love me now." Okay--it's very simplistic, I realize that, isn't that basically the request? Well, for us Feelers, it doesn't work that way. There's not a task list with checkmarks that equals love, and there's not an equation or even sometimes logical steps even. It's an intangible thing that I term a willing and loving heart. <P>Here's an example: on my list of "tasks" is "find a recreational activity that we can do together". Now suppose you and your spouse print the recreational activity questionnaire, and after some research, you both chose the game of tennis--after all, you played tennis in high school and your spouse has always wanted to learn. So, you decide together to play tennis on Mon., Wed., and Fri. Monday and Wednesday go fine. On Friday, there is a schedule conflict at work and a meeting runs longer than anticipated, and your spouse is 15 minutes late to the appointed tennis match--and you are angry and sulky and scream about it in front of people. Monday is okay. Then Wednesday, you have to reschedule and you can't come at all. On Friday, you have a bad day at work and you take it out on the courts and you beat the doodoo out of your spouse. On Monday, something important comes up. On Wednesday, your spouse has to remind you three times that tonight is tennis nite. On Friday, your spouse decides NOT to remind you, and you forget. By Monday, there are no more tennis matches. BUT, you did what was on your spouses list--technically. You found a recreational activity that you could do together! The problem is, you didn't have a willing and loving heart. By putting that on the list, your spouse was trying to say, "Spend some fun time with me. Enjoy my company. Willingly and lovingly play with me." And instead, it became a task to cross off of a list, so you could say to yourself "Well, I DID what was on the list."<P>Also, as someone ever so wisely pointed out to me, part of what you three were really saying was that even if your spouses had given you a list, they had already decided that they didn't want you anymore, so the list would have been irrelevant. In other words, even if you had done what was on the list, they would have come up with another excuse to leave you. Well, maybe that's because of this willing and loving heart thing. <P>Okay, it's just a smooshy, feeley thought, so think about it, and reply in a kind way. YIKES!! Four THINKERS and only one little, tiny, 4ft. 10in. FEELER!!! I am intimidated by your obvious mental superiority <P><BR>CJ<P>------------------<BR>Judge your success by what you had to give up in order to get it.

GDP,<P>I really need to go to sleep, but before I do, I wanted to tell you something. I am so thankful that you have taken the time to write back and try to help me understand. I wish it was as easy to understand as a foreign language, because I can GET that! Anyway, your responses have been very thorough, well thought out, and yes--on occasion--even a bit of stretching yourself, and I appreciate that. <P>Here's the thing. I am in a really bad place right now, and I don't honestly feel like I'm very together emotionally or mentally, so it's monsterously hard to respond to all of your responses. Do you understand what I mean a little bit? My resources are stretched to the limit, and I just don't have the emotional energy to translate and spend the time I'd like to dedicate to thinking about your responses. Can you believe that? An INFP that is too drained to connect!! OMG <P>Anyway, I do have something VITALLY important that I really need to know. In some other posts, you have said that my H and I sound like you and your W right before she left you, and believe you me, I can see some strong similarities too. Here's my very serious question for you. If there was one (or maybe two) things that you could have SOMEHOW communicated to your W in those last days, that it seemed she could never receive the message, what would it have been? What do you wish she could have understood? I don't mean "the mental capacity to comprehend", I mean, through and through grasping the entire message and subject--along the lines of the biblical term "knowing". What did you try and try and try to get across to her that just never got heard yet was a very important message? <P>CJ<P>P.S. Just so you know, I'll respond to you as soon as I can, and you know how it is--in a day or two I'll be a little better. For now . . . ride the wave.<P>P.S.S. In order to communicate comfort and encouragement, please tell me I will be okay, I won't lose my mind, I won't be alone and I am an amazing strong and funny woman for someone under five feet tall. Also, feel free to lavishly tell me how much I have helped you or someone else on this forum. You may edit this in any way that you want, and feel free to checkmark items off this list if that helps you. <P>------------------<BR>Judge your success by what you had to give up in order to get it.<p>[This message has been edited by FaithfulWife (edited July 24, 2001).]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FaithfulWife:<BR><B>GDP,...<P><BR>P.S.S. In order to communicate comfort and encouragement, please tell me I will be okay, I won't lose my mind, I won't be alone and I am an amazing strong and funny woman for someone under five feet tall. Also, feel free to lavishly tell me how much I have helped you or someone else on this forum. You may edit this in any way that you want, and feel free to checkmark items off this list if that helps you. <P></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>(((((((((((((((CJ)))))))))))))))<P>You will be ok. <BR>You won't lose your mind.<BR>You won't be alone.<BR>You are an amazing stong and funny woman.<BR>You have helped me, and many others, in so many ways.<P>I came through my ordeal ok - so, it took a few years. And I didn't lose my mind. And God has always been there. (You do have the advantage of the Ambassador of Love.) And you are so wise, and brave, and strong, and smart. And you mean more than you realize to many people here.<P>Chin up, my friend, you are loved around the world. Literally. <P>Take care, my friend.<P><BR>

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FaithfulWife:<BR><B>Here's the thing. I am in a really bad place right now, and I don't honestly feel like I'm very together emotionally or mentally, so it's monsterously hard to respond to all of your responses. Do you understand what I mean a little bit? My resources are stretched to the limit, and I just don't have the emotional energy to translate and spend the time I'd like to dedicate to thinking about your responses.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I believe I understand. The emotional energy I have for participation in these forums also seems to be rather low right now for some reason (probably because the legal demise of my marriage appears imminent, but I still don't have a final court date and I am getting really, really tired of living in limbo).<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>In some other posts, you have said that my H and I sound like you and your W right before she left you, and believe you me, I can see some strong similarities too. Here's my very serious question for you. If there was one (or maybe two) things that you could have SOMEHOW communicated to your W in those last days, that it seemed she could never receive the message, what would it have been?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Well, I don't know whether the answer to this question is really going to be very helpful, especially since some of the similarities in our situations are sort of reversed; but here goes...<P>I wanted my wife to understand that I did not want from her what she <I>thought</I> I wanted from her. <B><I>I did not want her to become someone other than who she was</I></B>; I loved <I>her</I>, and getting to know the real person that she was would always be more satisfying to me than molding her into some personal fantasy could ever be. Moreover, I <I>accepted</I> her as she was; but that did <I>not</I> mean I accepted the idea that she never could and never would change Change would inevitably come, for better or for worse, but I <I>hoped</I> to see her grow. As long as she continued to grow, I would accept whatever change occurred.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>In order to communicate comfort and encouragement, please tell me I will be okay, I won't lose my mind, I won't be alone and I am an amazing strong and funny woman for someone under five feet tall. Also, feel free to lavishly tell me how much I have helped you or someone else on this forum. You may edit this in any way that you want, and feel free to checkmark items off this list if that helps you. </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P> I can't really predict the future, but this is what I believe: you won't "lose your mind", and you will discover that anything you <I>may</I> lose (or fear losing) is no real threat to <I>who you are</I>. You won't be alone unless you <I>choose</I> to be alone. I have really appreciated getting to know you (including your wit ), and support from you means more to me than it would coming from a lot of other people. In my book, you qualify as a true hero, for both your tenacity and your honesty (among other things), and I doubt very much that I am alone in my respect and admiration for you.<P>Um, OK, that's all said in sincerity, and I can understand how an expression of respect and appreciation could be encouraging. But I have to admit that I still have trouble grasping the idea that a message saying "you're going to be okay" really provides any kind of comfort. When someone says that to me, I never know what to think or say. I'm going to be how I'm going to be, whatever they may think about it (and how would they know anyway?), and I don't even know what "being okay" <I>means</I>. Furthermore, I am stronger than some and not as strong as others, but in the end what really matters is that God has promised to provide me all the strength I need.<P>My wife might think that I should have left off that last paragraph. At least, that's what her voice in my head says. Qualifying or diluting "comfort" with ratiocination apparently can destroy the effect. Me, I just don't know...<P>But there is one thing I <I>have</I> learned...<P>When in doubt...<P>{{{{{{{{ CJ<P>

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GnomeDePlume:<BR><B>Um, OK, that's all said in sincerity, and I can understand how an expression of respect and appreciation could be encouraging. But I have to admit that I still have trouble grasping the idea that a message saying "you're going to be okay" really provides any kind of comfort. When someone says that to me, I never know what to think or say. I'm going to be how I'm going to be, whatever they may think about it (and how would they know anyway?), and I don't even know what "being okay" <I>means</I>. Furthermore, I am stronger than some and not as strong as others, but in the end what really matters is that God has promised to provide me all the strength I need.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>First, thanks for all your kind words. I'm having a horrible, sad, awful day and I really needed to hear them, so thanks.<P>Second, about the "You'll be okay" thing. I know that you do not know the future, and thus can't really tell me if I'll be okay or not. Plus, like you said, what does okay mean and how can you tell anyway? BUT, it's kind of a comforting sound, like, "Awwww baby" to a child. It's not a literal thing, but rather a reassurance and a supportive little coo. I don't think anyone really takes it seriously, like "Well, since you said I'll be okay, I guess I will be." It's more like something soothing to hear like purring or a stream bubbling by or something. I'll be okay. Yup, I will make it. I can do this. <P><BR>CJ<P>------------------<BR>Judge your success by what you had to give up in order to get it.

OMG! <P>Page Two--can't have that!<P>I swear to God, I'll write back in a day or two. I am all "written out" tonight, and I'm so sick of coffee and staying up all night that I want to quit and sleep. Maybe for a day or two. <P>BTW, there is a BMW Motorcycle dealer right in my neighborhood, and there is a GREAT tan and black one. WOW! What a four-stroke engine on THAT baby! <P><BR>CJ<P> <P>------------------<BR>Judge your success by what you had to give up in order to get it.