SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

I am just starting to read it again. I read it 10 years ago and it played a pivotal role in my life then. I hope it has the same effect now.

Anyone else read it and want to share your experience?

Ooooohhhh....I JUST picked this up from a Little Free Library in our neighborhood. Can't wait to discuss it!

I've read this book 3 or so times when I was younger. Loved it. It is actually out on a bookcase in my bedroom right now.

Jonathan Livingston Seagull was good.

Illusions by the author of Jonathan Livingston Seagull is excellent, I thought.

All time classic. Very deep, difficult to follow: well worth the effort. A wonderful explanation of our culture's distrust of feelings and subsequent submission to the role of "reason" in decision making.

I would love to be a part of this discussion when it gets going!

[This message edited by phoenixrivers at 5:22 AM, December 22nd (Monday)]

One of my favorite books. I read it initially as an assigned text for a philosophy class and have ready it again many times over. One of my favorite parts is the discussion of a gumption trap. Just a few weeks ago I referred back to it and the discussion of what is quality during a discussion of what is art. I also like the discussions of form following function (aluminum can shim) and our a-priori views versus reality.

great, great book for looking at and experiencing life.

and our a-priori views versus reality

ahhh! Then a little definition is in order.

Reality is a-priori,

not our views.

So it is how our views versus reality, because "views" are demonstrably not a priori.

I remember the thing about air at the point of things, how the moleculed point cushions things as he rides.

whoops, you are correct jjct, I worded that wrong.

I was just remembering how true it is that many things seem like they will be much more fun or cool than they are in reality, or are mis-interpreted due to our existing views and perceptions.

Astenaotie, good question.

Although not strictly from ZAAMM, I would think the western view of falling in love is an excellent example of things that present a lot different from what they are.

For example how differently did we see our partners before the infidelity? How many have changed the view of the relationship subsequent to betrayal?

I think our view of the world in general is constructed from many sources, not all of which are accurate. Nonetheless we tend to cling desperately to the constructs, despite the pain and suffering.

So to answer your original question, imho most of what we construe to be "fun" can transform unexpectedly to deep hurt and sorrow.

Nonetheless we tend to cling desperately to the constructs, despite the pain and suffering.

We all do this yesiree, and apropos to this community, Shakespeare, in Sonnet 116, is one who contributed to the [false] constructs, saying this about "never ending love":

Love is not love

Which alters when it alteration finds

iow, love, (the love of which he writes, human love, our construct)

is un alterable!

Pure poppycock! (to add an alliterative argument...frankly, I think billy was just big-talking again, trying to get some petticoat, or whatever they wore in the what? 16th century?)

I am here to tell you - my love has altered - and it's not because it wasn't true billy, so stfu you petticoat plunderer!

Add in countless other influences that "constructed" us (and I hold Disney to a very hot fire here), does it not seem at times we should shrug off the coats of constructs we so willingly donned in times past?

Easy to say. So hard to do. That's life. That's living. That's [painful] growing.

Have you ever been in one of those convos where someone mentions they always like learning new things?...I sure have, I've even said it myself a time or two

...notice though, that very few (just about none) mention that they like to be taught.

True jjct, so true. "Learning your lesson", and "being taught a lesson" are phrases that imply painful experiences.

To jjct's point, Scott Peck, author of "Everything You Need to Know, You Learned in Kindergarten", once said that notions of romantic love are horrible lies, perhaps necessary to get people to reproduce!

I think Pirsig's notion of "fishing for facts" is genius. He describes it as a mildly pleasant state in which we open our constructs to new experiences and alter them accordingly. However I think his ultimate confrontation with "Quality" was very different.

Betrayal falls into the latter category. Romantic love has huge cultural implications and underpinnings. Betrayal undermines cultural constructs (loyalty, faithfulness, religious values, white picket fence, happily ever after).

And yeah, Disney deserves as much of the blame as anybody.

a mildly pleasant state in which we open our constructs to new experiences

I have felt ... that I lose time ...my butt gets sore from sitting too long thinking, hearing...and how long have I been sitting? because it's disconcerting too....what time is it? More specifically, I don't care what time it is, but my butt's sore, how long have I been here? Have I sat so long? What have I been doing? (hearing something is the answer)

and alter them accordingly.

Yah. Document that.

Seems when I do, it comes out with rhymes, meters, alliteration, song in my own head. Something appears and then, I made that?

I think

just think mind you

that's quality. It is within me.

meant well, it is 'just' within me...

Excellent book with depth

This discussion prompted me to wrap up a copy of the book and throw it into my youngest (19) DS's stocking for Christmas. HE is reading it, and so far the impact has been that he wants a motorcycle.

phoenixrivers

For example how differently did we see our partners before the infidelity?

This has clearly been a change for me. My stbx adored me when we were dating. Everything I did was interesting and perfect, there were absolutely no conflicts. I saw what I wanted to see, I only looked at the surface. I thought that I had found the perfect partner and proposed, but as Pirsig might say; the facts were right there in front of me. I just did not see them.

Now, I value that I am in a relationship with a girlfriend who calls me out on issues that upset her or are not as she would like. We work through things, analyze things, and there is conflict. I now see the underlying structure and workings of my relationship as much more important than the surface appearance. How nice to have a relationship with someone who sees the value in me to be worth the conflicts rather than a person who wants me because I appear to be “perfect”.

I also have to see and accept the quality in me, the qualities that others find attractive and appreciate. It is hard. I spend 2 decades being told I was the cause of what was wrong in my M and my family’s life. I spent a childhood with the focus on being better rather than good enough. I am now learning to appreciate who I am, the surface and the basement. My quality is intrinsic to me, and I have to own and appreciate that.

Nonetheless we tend to cling desperately to the constructs, despite the pain and suffering.

Yes, I did much too long.