Being Enabling and Critical

[CogentPursuit]

I want to believe this too.

But my pressure; the agitating feeling I felt when they moved away from my directions; I felt like that is bad and unhealthy and--
-- selfish.

But I see your point. Has it helped others so far? Have you ever received any flack because of it?

It is selfish to accomdate people so that they will stay and be your friend. It is unselfish, perhaps both, to accomdate people so that they will stay and you can learn from eachother. You are not helping anyone if you push them to close their ears or walk away. Sometimes it can be necessary to sacrifice a relationship if it gives them the emotional shove they needed to change their life. In all this one must be careful that you are not deciding their happiness for them. My goal is only to help them find their own.

So it is sort of like a long game?

Endless patience is required. I must accept that things may never change but there is value in trying.

 

[CogentPursuit]

But my pressure; the agitating feeling I felt when they moved away from my directions; I felt like that is bad and unhealthy and--
-- selfish.

But I see your point. Has it helped others so far? Have you ever received any flack because of it?

It has been very helpful in the results. There is much opposition to my directions that causes me and them suffering and I doubt myself. I am such a foward thinker that I can get past that and see good results even if years later. I have recieved acknowledgment that I had a positive influence after the change has occured. The greatest opposition seems to come from those who see suffering as bad in and of itself and has no vision for a greater future.

I am not the friend you invite to a party that is for certain, nor am I the guy you go to only for validation. I am the guy people go to for advice without judgment. My advice is not critical in that I regard what they are doing as bad but that they infer that what is, is bad because I would not seek to change it if it was not. I specifically state what is good about what they are doing to inalidate what they would infer then state why this is instead better.

I have been purely critical but it is such a rarity. Criticism without an answer to the problem is not only unhelful but frustrating. Why point out something that cannot be fixed or you have no understanding on how to make it better?

 

[Trifoilum]

Say you have a person that you know is illegally doing drugs. Do we rat them out? I don't unless it becomes a problem and I think it would benefit them.
I agree with Radiant Shadow and pretty much everyone here.

I actually dunno. (There might be a difference in the way we see drugs here; the details matter)

At least for me, my conscience would scream. A lot. I would at least do something or talk to the person.

So I guess the details matter.

 

[Trifoilum]

I can only reply for this two for now; sorry! X.x mental energy sort of running out....

Sometimes it helps to look at enabling as allowing. And allowing always requires acceptance.

I actually don't know.....?

You can allow something to happen even when you disagree with it. I agree in that a case can be said that we may not reject the particular course of action -hard- enough to do anything, but the core would still be the same-- rejection.

When you accept something you are supporting it.

In a way; I agreed. Which is part of the moral burden in enabling.

"I know this is bad and yet why am I supporting it? I know the pain is necessary, but why did I not do anything? Why did I indulge them instead?"

If the acceptance is based on judgement and not understanding; than i can see how the enabling may feel uncomfortable. Yet the uncomfrotable feeling is not strong enough to elicit a different response to enabling which can be contrasting.

Agree. However what do you mean my based on judgment and not understanding? Can you give some explanation on this?

Offering contrasting solutions will give the feeling of "conflict" but it is not true conflict.

What is the difference?

It could be good to explore why you may feel the need to enable despite feeling critical. I think people judge because they are not understanding and because of it it is much easier to judge. I always saw understanding as the antidote to critical and judgmental traits. We tend to see our own inner processes in others.

I agree with the last part, at least. The others.....I need to think about it.

 

[Solongo]

@trifolium

To clarify; for me enabling and contrast are pretty black and white. Enabling is a behavioral trait and it can go against a person's moral compass. If a person enables something despite knowing that they did not agree with the enabling; then it creates contrast. The contrast is a call to action to correct the misbehavior - which would be the contrasting solution i mentioned in my original post. Being caught between the two extremes will force a person to make a choice. The choice will be to continue to enable and pacify one's own moral directive or completely go against enabling by supporting an opposing behavior. Perhaps people are more worried about how they would feel and how they would be judged if they make a decision to not enable. Especially towards situations where a lot of people are enabling it and being the only person going against the grain will test anyone's moral resolve.

I also think offering an alternative solutions that don't support enabling is just that; an alternative solution. But i can see how it can come across as "conflict" if there are not enough supporters to not enable and being the only person not enabling. The situation would have a feeling of "conflict" if an alternative idea was introduced requiring adjustments and changes that are not welcomed.

As for understanding versus judging; i feel like an understanding of something usually involves the person to look at the situation from a personal directive; involving themselves into the situation and thinking in terms of how they would react or do things if the situation would happen to them. Almost like putting yourself in their shoes. This makes the issue much more personable. While Judging takes an impersonal route; where the individual does not have anything invested in the situation or see any similarity to their situation so it is much easier to judge based on the information available without person involvement or emotional attachment to the situation.

 

[Trifoilum]

It is selfish to accomdate people so that they will stay and be your friend. It is unselfish, perhaps both, to accomdate people so that they will stay and you can learn from eachother.

what are the difference, if I may?

You are not helping anyone if you push them to close their ears or walk away. Sometimes it can be necessary to sacrifice a relationship if it gives them the emotional shove they needed to change their life. In all this one must be careful that you are not deciding their happiness for them. My goal is only to help them find their own.

Again.....how do you distinguish between deciding other's happiness and helping them to find their own happiness?
Especially when my sight was clouded by my own desire/fear?

 

[CogentPursuit]

Again.....how do you distinguish between deciding other's happiness and helping them to find their own happiness?

Especially when my sight was clouded by my own desire/fear?

You seem to answer your own question. Logically defined it would be what contributes to their long term happiness in life and brings them purpose even at the expense of short term harmony in your relationship.

You already can recognize it but something else gets in the way. I cannot help you deal with your desire/fear. For me it was simply a matter of recognizing what my desires and fears were then simply making a choice with my whole heart to do what is right and face the consequences whatever they may be and be proud of what I did.

There is also the concept of the 'ego' and the depletion of the ego. I have reduced my ego and have been able to be the master of my desires and fear because of it. For me it was a natural progression of personal growth however buddhism teaches methods many people use to deal with the ego and create what they call 'right compassion or right thought' vs 'idiot compassion'. I am not a buddhist and I only have an outside perspective on it but I feel that it could possibly be relevant to you. If not, that is okay too.

http://bigthink.com/21st-century-spirituality/idiot-compassion-and-mindfulness