Do Words Hurt?

Originally posted by Wang Tang
Yes, you can choose to take offense at an insult, or you can choose not to. You can choose to be hurt by words, or you can choose not to.

If you are not aware of this power to interpret comments however you want to, you are a weak minded fool, and you probably take offense to any comment that has a hint of insult in it.

Para 1...I have no problem with...

Para 2...I guess is supposed to look like a mathematical formula...but is really a bunch of tripe when you read it...

Å99

reply to post by akushla99


I would argue it looks nothing like a mathematical formula. There are no numbers, and no equal sign.

Originally posted by Wang Tang
reply to post by akushla99

 

I would argue it looks nothing like a mathematical formula. There are no numbers, and no equal sign.

"[a]If you are not aware of this power to interpret comments however you want to, [b]you are a weak minded fool, [c]and you probably take offense to any comment that has a hint of insult in it." Quote Wang Tang

If 'a', therefore 'b'...and, 'c'...

You can argue with yourself over this one...

Å99

reply to post by akushla99

Obvious garbage...

There are - even words! that cannot be uttered on ATS...apart from the laws that govern thier use/non-use in greater society...
What you are suggesting in the next sentence quoted, is that vilified groups throughout history only really had themselves to blame...that's gotta be a joke?!

Å99

Pointing, laughing and calling something names is not an argument outside the mind of a child. By all means, prove me wrong. Surely you can do that against "obvious garbage".

reply to post by Kashai

There are cases were assault is charged. Do you understand that there are people who are on probation and in anger management due to being verbally abusive with the people they live with[?]

Yes. And a society superstitious of words would have such cases.

What about the effect upon a small child being exposed to this kind of behavior.

Being exposed to abusive behaviour? or being exposed to words?

You see this is what people can experience when being insulted.

I'm not arguing that abusive behaviour cannot hurt. I am arguing words cannot hurt.

Are you suggesting that a child exposed to verbally abusive parents is not painful.

Not at all. I am suggesting that words do not hurt. Words and verbally abusive parents are entirely different things. Are you suggesting it is not the words but the experience of abusive parents that are painful? You're starting to agree with me all of a sudden.

Are you suggesting that the only way to define pain is as physical?

Are you suggesting that there are other types of pain that are not physical????????? This I have to hear if you ever get the time.

And you know I am going to yet again bring up the issue of how the elderly can respond to such behavior

In this case bad words can cause death do you disagree?

What you're saying is that bad words equals abusive behaviour, which is a stretch of the imagination, if not an outright lie. "Bad" words can be used joyfully and in "nice" ways.

What you are suggesting is the old man would die if he heard a joke using with the exact same "bad words". How this is possible I have no clue.

Friend with respect to Vanity you should avoid projecting

Some more of that abusive behaviour? Let's hope, for your sake, that I'm not an old man.

Originally posted by akushla99


If 'a', therefore 'b'...and, 'c'...

You can argue with yourself over this one...

Looks like logical reasoning to me.

I don't know where these people who think pain is only physical think that they process it or even know when they are in physical pain. I guess you think if the face is punched its the face tells you its in pain. Mental suffering can be (and in these depressed people that you think are weaker than you) is more painful that being punched.

Keep on talking about "words" that exist without thoughts, without consciousness,without a speaker and a hearer(without you). (Words in your world are disconnected from their meaning).
Keep on ignorantly thinking all this and also that if the hearer of insults is depressed( or even not depressed) that if your disassociated insults harm them and cause them mental pain it is their fault you said your harsh hateful words.

Keep on thinking that you are separate from other human beings and superior . If you harm them they are weaker and being vulnerable they deserve your abuse and scorn.
You have ignorance on tap.
And its harmful to allow the spread of thoughts/words spouting support for abuse of ( vulnerable) people .
Tell me if thoughts can harm why do you believe words cannot harm ?( what do you think words are)

Originally posted by Wang Tang
reply to post by ottobot

 

If as you say you are someone that cannot control their brain, then I would argue they are a weak minded fool.

Actually, what I said is that emotional pain is overwhelming to me. I have, however, learned to control my emotions and, thus, am not ruled by emotion. I do, however, admit I am a fool because I am not yet wise.

The brain is not the same thing as the mind. My mind can overpower my brain's natural functioning, but only because I realize that the brain is lacking certain neuroreceptors / neurotransmitters that are required for "normal" brain function. My brain does not properly make serotonin, so my mood is generally negative and sad. This is a function of genetics on my brain's formation, not a function of my mind. I do not inherently realize it because this has been my natural state from birth. It is only when I examine my thoughts that I understand, "These thoughts are a direct result of my body's deficiencies, I need to compensate."

We have no obligation to force mentally ill people to integrate into our society of normally functioning human beings. They don't belong in a society with normal people. I am not saying we should completely separate mentally ill people from our society, but our interactions with them should be controlled and limited.

Who is "we"? I have no problem helping those with mental illness to overcome their issues.

You suggest that segregation or shunning is acceptable. For your sake, I hope you are never on the receiving end of this type of treatment. I feel like we're not communicating well on this point - where would you draw the line? And, how do we determine who is not "normal"? What is the basis of "normal"?

Am I too extreme on this issue? It may seem so. I also live very close to Newtown, CT where the shootings took place last December. Our government has responded to this shooting with a massive campaign on gun control laws, but I see the real issue as the interaction between normally functioning human beings and mentally ill human beings. I believe this is an example of "a weak minded fool" who would take offense to words that were not meant to offend him. I use "weak minded fool" as a derogatory term to label all people whose brains don't function normally, and perhaps this is what is bothering you. I admit it is pretty condescending of me to label myself as a superior human being to someone like Adam Lanza who could not handle the stresses of life and broke down and killed 26 people at an elementary school, but again who would not consider themselves superior to Adam Lanza?

It can happen to you at any time. You have no control or input on the matter.

Unfortunately, this paragraph only serves to underline the lack of understanding you have of mental illness. There are many types of mental illness, and you are responding emotionally to a couple of very extreme instances of mental illness. By suggesting that ALL mental illness must be treated in the same manner (segregation, shunning, etc), you suggest that anyone who is different from your acceptable "norm" is not a valuable human being. You're treading dangerous waters there, Wang Tang. When we consider some of the worst atrocities against humans in the world, the root of them all is, "They are unacceptable."

Most types of mental illness (depression, anxiety, autism, phobias, eating disorders, pica, etc) are completely harmless to the external world - it is only in the mind of the subject that these thoughts and feelings cause harm.

I know you are angry about these types of incidents, I am too. I hate that nobody stepped up to prevent this - that these people were not properly monitored, that there were so many people affected by these lone and psychotic murderers. It breaks my heart.

But, you are grouping all people with any type of abnormal brain function into the same category: psychotic murderers. I get it it's just easier to attempt to separate yourself from anyone who may not be in total control of his/her faculties. That makes sense if one never has to interact with anyone else in the world. However, you will never be able to tell those who "break" from those who don't unless you understand the underlying issues.

I'm not "bothered" as you say, in all honesty, I am only interested in your perspective. I don't know how you define "weak minded fool", but I can only imagine you are holding yourself up as the standard for "strong minded wiseperson".

As I said, I feel like we are talking about two different subjects on some of these points. I feel that the mind operates in a different manner than the brain does. All those electrical impulses and connections and nerve endings that we take for granted for "normal behavior" are not available to some people.

Maybe I am a cold-hearted logical thinker who has not yet experienced raising children so I cannot empathize with the struggle of raising a child who is mentally unstable. However, from a societal point of view and not a parental point of view, if a child is unstable, they should not be living a "normal" life, because the concerns of all parents in a society override the concern of one parent whose child is unstable.

So, how do we know who is unstable?

Is there a way that you, personally, can discern every single person you come into contact with who takes a medication for mental illness?

I guess I am not seeing your perspective because I have worked with many mentally ill people and understand that the majority of people who are defined as "mentally ill" are not dangerous to anyone but themselves... I feel like you believe that anyone whose brain isn't "normal" is automatically a danger to society. This is simply not true.

What is a "normal" life, anyway? Do you mean outside of an institution?

Originally posted by Wang Tang
reply to post by ottobot

 

The big difference in our definitions of pain are that I assume that pain is primarily a physical phenomenom, while you say it is primarily an emotional experience.

Personally I do not like the concept of emotional pain. I think we are lumping together multiple feelings like sadness, anger, and regret, and calling it emotional pain just to simplify things. I still do not see sufficient scientific evidence that points to the existence of emotional pain...

One cannot feel any type of pain without a response in the brain. All pain can be measured in the same manner. I provided several links containing information about how emotional pain is measurable in the brain, just as physical pain is. Emotional pain registers in the brain and is measurable on an MRI. A subject, when asked about level of emotional pain on a scale from 1-10, will respond with what they believe is the corresponding level of pain. Just as with physical pain.

If we perceive pain, it exists. I can feel pain that you do not think exists and vice versa. One can only speculate upon his/her own experiences. This is why I provided examples from my own experiences - I have learned to understand both types of pain, so I believe both types of pain exist.

Emotional pain can be any emotion which causes the subject to feel pain. Pain can be experienced as physiological and/or psychological effects in the body.

For this topic, I am focusing mostly on the emotion which is most commonly associated with emotional pain: sadness.

My question for you is: what exactly is emotional pain? I have defined physical pain as "C-Fibers in our body..." and you have defined pain as an "emotional response." I don't think this definition is sufficient. What kind of emotional response is it? How do you scientifically define this emotional response? If we were to scientifically define a commonly accepted feeling like anger, it would be something like: an irritated state where heart rate, blood pressure, and adrenaline levels are all raised.

I believe there are two types of pain: physiological and psychological. Physiological pain is the more commonly accepted "physical pain". Psychological pain exists within one's mind, characterized by an emotional response.

Yes, psychological (emotional) pain is often linked to physiological events. Emotion is generally characterized as variations in hormonal, chemical, cardiovascular and brain activity catalyzed by a perceived event and can be interpreted as physical pain.

What I mean by saying physical pain is an emotional response is that when one "complains of pain", it is usually related in emotional terms. This is because the mind relates the physical pain to an emotional concept or event, and so responds in kind...

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by akushla99

 

Obvious garbage...

There are - even words! that cannot be uttered on ATS...apart from the laws that govern thier use/non-use in greater society...
What you are suggesting in the next sentence quoted, is that vilified groups throughout history only really had themselves to blame...that's gotta be a joke?!

Å99

Pointing, laughing and calling something names is not an argument outside the mind of a child. By all means, prove me wrong. Surely you can do that against "obvious garbage".

What you are suggesting is that the process of vilification (which is on the whole never initiated by the reciever) somehow can be lashed to the reciever in some 'about-face' process, where the reciever then becomes the perp...

What causes pain? A fascile and puerile argument (at the same time, interesting in its expose of the little childish games people can play with themselves, while implicating others)...

Do words cause physical pain? Perhaps not as a direct result of the words themselves...mood and atmosphere are created by words...set the scene, in a process initiated by a perp...

Yes, obvious garbage dressed as intellectual claptrap...the kernel of the OP question was a very simple one...instead, it got dressed in clothing fit for an emporer...and the little game is continued in your comment...

Å99

Originally posted by Wang Tang

Originally posted by akushla99


If 'a', therefore 'b'...and, 'c'...

You can argue with yourself over this one...

Looks like logical reasoning to me.

Logical reasoning devoid of any empathic sensibility...

Å99

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


Do Words Hurt? Yes and they are supposed to, by your own inadmission; at other times by your thoughtless expounding before thinking, by other persons to shock you into self-realization. Words only hurt if you are unprepared to hear their meaning (by others) or your own uncontrolled "Wish I could take that retort back" you blasted forth without thinking that you yourself may have injured someone. My thought is always know the response of the those you are speaking to emotionally, take care in what that desired thought/feeling will be; (that is) design the words to inform, expand or help/add amusing properties. NEVER EVER to hurt. Words can also defuse, Letters are ArF ArF BarK- MagIKal formulae, as numbers are attached to them (no one knows).

reply to post by akushla99

Yes, obvious garbage dressed as intellectual claptrap...the kernel of the OP question was a very simple one...instead, it got dressed in clothing fit for an emporer...and the little game is continued in your comment...

You proved no point except that you enjoy arguing over garbage. Do you stop and play with every piece of manure you see?

What you are suggesting is that the process of vilification (which is on the whole never initiated by the reciever) somehow can be lashed to the reciever in some 'about-face' process, where the reciever then becomes the perp...

What causes pain? A fascile and puerile argument (at the same time, interesting in its expose of the little childish games people can play with themselves, while implicating others)...

Do words cause physical pain? Perhaps not as a direct result of the words themselves...mood and atmosphere are created by words...set the scene, in a process initiated by a perp...

I am suggesting that we are so superstitious of words, that we have to resort to contradictions such as yours in order to posit them as causes of pain, for the mere purpose of supporting that superstition. I have not blamed anything but that superstition. Also I am not implicating others, I am implicating myself. I am referring to my experiences, not yours or anyone else's.

If proving your point by trying to insult me is your great effort, it failed miserably, but it gives us a fine example of someone superstitious enough to give supernatural powers to words in the hopes it would injure my vanity. Your words...how you use them...your fear of punctuation...your contradictions...say more about you than they do about me.

reply to post by BDBinc

Keep on thinking that you are separate from other human beings and superior . If you harm them they are weaker and being vulnerable they deserve your abuse and scorn.
You have ignorance on tap.
And its harmful to allow the spread of thoughts/words spouting support for abuse of ( vulnerable) people .
Tell me if thoughts can harm why do you believe words cannot harm ?( what do you think words are)

You're making stuff up here because you're drowning. I never said I am superior. These are your thoughts and your make believe. If you feel inferior, you might want to ask yourself why. I am words on a screen. How you see that as superior is not my assessment. You are more powerful than my words.

Logical reasoning devoid of any empathic sensibility...

Å99

Logic is in fact meant to be devoid of feelings and emotions.

reply to post by ottobot


You bring up many good points, most likely too many points for my next post to match the myriad of goodness of your post. You are right that I have to be more clear about who should be segregated, and about which mental illnesses cause someone to be a "weak minded fool." We seem to be on opposing sides of this argument because of our contrasting experiences with mentally ill folks. I've had only neutral or negative interactions with them. In high school someone pulled a knife on me during school because I told him to go **** himself after he spilled ketchup on me (we didn't realize he was mentally unstable until a little later). Less than an hour from my house Adam Lanza went on a shooting spree and killed 26 people at an elementary school. But despite these negative experiences I realize that I am in the minority with these kinds of experiences, and most people have neutral or positive experiences with mentally ill folks.

Now what you call an atrocity regarding the treatment of mentally ill folks, I call the norm. The segregation and "shunning" of the mentally ill happens naturally. Normal people do not have to put forth an effort to segregate and shun them, these folks do this to themselves naturally. I believe if mentally ill folks naturally segregate themselves and shun themselves away, we have no obligation to force them to integrate like a normal person would, because this forced integration has the potential to explode into serious problems.

In my view, there are three levels of people. Cognitively healthy folks, folks that have normal minds but have a temporary mentally illness, and folks that have a permanant mental disability. I tend to label people with mental illness and mental disability, along with many cognitively healthy folks as weak minded fools. It's just something I do because I am excessively vain and condescending. I call people weak minded fools when they unneccesarily take offense to something I say, or are overly sensitive and easily hurt by the words of other people.

I hope this clarifies some things, I probably did not hit on all of your points, and as I said before you had a lot of good points so I apologize if I left some out.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

More words, more of your nonsense again your have not answered any questions on your "conclusions" that abusive unkind words can't harm the people all we see is that you instead choose to insult and abuse.
You don't even know how anti social and dysfunctional it is to think that verbal abuse ( and the misuse of speech) is OK, especially to vulnerable human beings as you think they are weaker ?!!
Good you admit you feeling like you are drowning, we can all see clearly you can't answer them and do not understand your tread topic which is why you have avoided any of the questions.

When you just told us that you believe you are just words on a screen, are you unaware, not human, thoughtless, unconscious, dead, are you not aware of your own speech, your life, your connection to humanity and the universe, do you really think you are just disembodied (dead) words.
Some people believe they are dead( WALKING CORPSE SYNDROME) and live their lives thinking they are dead, you believe you are just words on a screen which is not that different (WALKING DEAD WORDS SYNDROME), you don't even know who you are or what you are.
Words are not separate from the speaker and thinker, they don't exist in isolation, thats just one aspect about words that you keep failing to grasp.




.

reply to post by ottobot


It still seems to me like it is much easier to define physical pain than it is to define emotional pain. I do not think they are the same thing. You define emotional pain as "any emotion which causes the subject to feel pain." This does not help me to understand what emotional pain is, as you defined emotional pain with the very words, "emotion" and "pain," that you are trying to define.

Now you say the feeling of sadness is often associated with pain. Personally I have never had an experience where my feeling of sadness has directly caused physical pain. It seems like an unlikely phenomenom. But assuming it is possible, if physical pain directly results from sadness, this is not proof for the existence of emotional pain. This is simply proof of a correlation between the feeling of sadness and physical pain.

Emotional pain... psychological pain... there is no evidence to show that these concepts are real. There is only the habit that we have grown up with of labeling certain emotions as causing emotional pain, even though we never really knew what emotional pain was to begin with.

Originally posted by BDBinc

You don't even know how anti social and dysfunctional it is to think that verbal abuse ( and the misuse of speech) is OK, especially to vulnerable human beings as you think they are weaker ?!!

I think that verbal abuse is OK, especially to vulnerable human beings who will not develop a resistance to it unless I help them out by abusing them verbally. I do it in their best interest, I make people stronger by verbally abusing them, while at the same time I make myself feel righteous and superior, so verbally abusing people is really a win-win situation.

I genuinely care about the human race, and I am worried that if we continue to baby people by putting on these fake faces and being nice to everyone the human race will become weaker. We should all be mean to each other, abuse each other, and strengthen the resolve and resilience of all people.

reply to post by Wang Tang


Have you not experienced mental suffering ever.
How can we explain to you something that obviously you have not felt are incapable of feeling.
You are telling us you are a psychopath, so we can’t help you understand emotional pain or human feelings as you have a condition that prevents you from feeling things that others feel.
This disorder you said you have does not allow us to help you to understand what emotional pain is. You have to experience it , to feel it, and you said you are incapable of that.