(no subject)

[pengke.livejournal.com]

I’m sure everyone has read someone’s post on this community or read a comment that made you stop and think, “I don’t believe you.” If you haven’t, either you don’t read the threads very closely or you work very hard not to think critically about anything you read here, because there have been some very outrageous claims made here over the years. (But that’s an entirely different discussion.) I want to know what people think when they come across one of these statements that they just can’t believe.

Do you:

A) Think the person is lying.
B) Think the person is knowingly role playing
C) Think the person believes that they are multiple but is probably unintentionally role playing or some other form of imagination
D) Think the system is lying about the experiences
E) Think the system is knowingly or unintentionally role playing the experiences
F) Think the system is adhering to the community’s cultural norms/trying to fit in
G) Think the system probably honestly believes their claims even though another explanation seems more logical to you
H) Think the system probably started out making things up but has since convinced themselves that their claims are true
I) Worry that you might be making things up too or that someone else might think you are
J) Think something else entirely – please share

Also, do your thoughts change depending on why you can’t believe the statement? For example, is there a difference between someone claiming to do/be something that you think is impossible and someone contradicting themselves or claiming that something happened in real life that could not have happened?

Comments

[kiya]

Frequently, I find that 'unbelievable' claims are easily parsable as "This is a metaphorical structure that works for this person/system". Whether or not I believe it to be literal or factual is not relevant, if I can work with what amounts to a personal mythology. (A lot of my own multiplicity is something that I parse as 'personal mythology that works for resolving situations, who cares whether it's factual?'.)

I've also come across people who come across to me strongly as trying to fit cultural norms. I find this moderately aggravating, but not something I worry about greatly.

In general, if I feel that I'm not getting an honest presentation, I don't engage. I have better things to do with my time than chase down suspicions of deception in people I don't actually have to deal with. ;)

[sethrenn.livejournal.com]

Whether or not I believe it to be literal or factual is not relevant, if I can work with what amounts to a personal mythology. (A lot of my own multiplicity is something that I parse as 'personal mythology that works for resolving situations, who cares whether it's factual?'.)

That's closer to what I meant when I said I sometimes encouraged people to work within the context of beliefs I don't necessarily subscribe to. Rather, I tend to assume that they're being honest about having subjectively experienced it this way, regardless of its literal truth. The one thing I caution people against is talking about their subjective experiences too openly, not because I believe there is anything inherently shameful about it, but because this is the kind of thing that can get you locked away (or called names at best).

I've also come across people who come across to me strongly as trying to fit cultural norms. I find this moderately aggravating, but not something I worry about greatly.

Urk. Yes, I've seen several examples of this-- for example, I once recall someone asking how they could 'get more people in their system.' I asked them why they thought that any certain minimum number was required. The answer was along the lines of 'because we made a place inside and we need more people to fill it up with.' Apparently the belief has cropped up somewhere along the line that having more people somehow makes you more 'real,' and/or that you're required to have a 'place inside.'

[our-haven.livejournal.com]

This is exactly how I feel. So many things that happen mentally/internally are metaphors for broad or distant concepts.