Is sensitivity really such a good thing?

[l. ron hubbard]

I have been the so called "sensitive" guy for all my life. Frankly, I wonder if being sensitive is really all that good. I never stood up for myself, never defended myself, and was always to some extent bullied. I never had them, what some might call cojones. Sure, there are always benefits to being sensitive. I was to some extent smart, good with music, etc. But is sensitivity to these things worth it, if you live a life of emotional despair?

[go12_3]

Humm...isn't there another thread elsewhere about the pros and cons in being
sensitive?  Or am I being too sensitive here?              

best wishes,

go12_3

[thalbergmad]

I have been the so called "sensitive" guy for all my life.

Well, it is better to be this way as opposed to being completely emotionally cold.

I seem to switch between the 2 extremes as mood dictates, but sometimes i wish i had less emotion.

Thal

[gyzzzmo]

Well, it is better to be this way as opposed to being completely emotionally cold.

I seem to switch between the 2 extremes as mood dictates, but sometimes i wish i had less emotion.

Thal

Like a girl with a beard.........

[go12_3]

Well, it is better to be this way as opposed to being completely emotionally cold.

I seem to switch between the 2 extremes as mood dictates, but sometimes i wish i had less emotion.

Thal

It is good to have a guy that is emotional because then he wouldn't be able to have empathy and caring for others.  It is better to have a sensitive heart  than a cold heart without feelings.

best wishes,

go12_3

[l. ron hubbard]

This is what I am asking: Is it really better to have a sensitive nature if your entire self is ruined? I agree with what you are saying though.

[thalbergmad]

It is better for others if you are sensitive, but not yourself.

Thal

[zheer]

I never stood up for myself, never defended myself, and was always to some extent bullied.

That's called being a wimp, not being sensative. Yes being sensative is a good thing, let me give you an example, your friends mother dies from cancer, would you go round making fun of people that have cancer, yes or no, probably no, that is sensativity at the basic level. However someone makes fun of you at school, calling you names, so you cry loads and think of commiting suicide as a result, that is not sensativity, that is weakness in character. you get the idea.

[l. ron hubbard]

That's called being a wimp, not being sensative. Yes being sensative is a good thing, let me give you an example, your friends mother dies from cancer, would you go round making fun of people that have cancer, yes or no, probably no, that is sensativity at the basic level. However someone makes fun of you at school, calling you names, so you cry loads and think of commiting suicide as a result, that is not sensativity, that is weakness in character. you get the idea.

I see what you are saying, but isn't being a "wimp" not another word for being "sensitive"? People who tend to be afraid are afraid because they are sensitive to the blows of life. People who are sturdy have an immunity, so whether it is physical or verbal onslaught, they don't react like a sensitive person would. At its most basic level, sensitivity is in opposition to hardness.

[go12_3]

I think being sensitive has to do with how you respond to certain situations and circumstances upon whether you would care or not.  Empathy plays an important part to being sensitive.
We cannot walk around with a heart of stone.  And yet there are times we have to in order to endure the challenges.  You have to bend with the wind and yet be strong enough to withstand the storms of life not matter what happens and being sensitive doesn't have to be a whimp or a coward, but face head on but with dignity and grace of a human being.  And to treat other people with respect no matter what burdens they are carrying within their minds and lives.

best wishes,

go12_3

[zheer]

At its most basic level, sensitivity is in opposition to hardness.

Women are generally thought to be the sensative ones because they are the softer sex, it's true, not always though. Men less sensative because they are tought very early in life to be hard, masculine ect ect. However sensativity is knowing how to treat others, you could be the hardest guy or girle in the world and still be sensative. It's true a real man does cry, show and feel emotion without being a wuss.

[l. ron hubbard]

Women are generally thought to be the sensative ones because they are the softer sex, it's true, not always though. Men less sensative because they are tought very early in life to be hard, masculine ect ect. However sensativity is knowing how to treat others, you could be the hardest guy or girle in the world and still be sensative. It's true a real man does cry, show and feel emotion without being a wuss.

I don't know, from what I see men and women are the same. Both will say f off when approached. I think the whole "women are more sensitive" though might be off.

[go12_3]

I don't know, from what I see men and women are the same. Both will say f off when approached. I think the whole "women are more sensitive" though might be off.

Men or women, it depends upon their personalities and temperament too. 

[gyzzzmo]

I don't know, from what I see men and women are the same. Both will say f off when approached. I think the whole "women are more sensitive" though might be off.

According to evolution you would think it makes sense theres a difference in sensitiveness between male and female. Men are supposed to hunt, provide food (and spread as much sperm as possible), while female are the ones who have to decide wich men they think can provide most (and best) offspring.
I'd say though its rather a different way of thinking (and sensitivity) than less/more sensitivity.

[Petter]

This is what I am asking: Is it really better to have a sensitive nature if your entire self is ruined? I agree with what you are saying though.

It's not like you have a choice anyway. Accept yourself for who your are even if you're the mastermind behind one of the worlds biggest scams.

[l. ron hubbard]

It's not like you have a choice anyway. Accept yourself for who your are even if you're the mastermind behind one of the worlds biggest scams.

What if I don't like myself, or at least my negative traits? Does a man not have power over will? I like to think I do. I work on my problems, and I believe that anyone could transform their habits if they realize their shortcomings. Um, what scams are you talking of...

[musiklover96]

apparently sensitivity causes more anxiety in pressure situations - eg performing in public

[Petter]

Um, what scams are you talking of...

Scientology

[john11inc]

Not that I would consider it to change my answer, but the term must first be universally defined; the word "sympathy" is often, albeit incorrectly, interchanged with "empathy":

"I have great sensitivity to your concerns."

for instance.  The term is also colloquially misused as someone who is particularly (often to a point of fault) reactionary to emotional stimuli.  Given the description you gave, I get the impression you are using the term in a tangential reference to the latter; however, you also seem to be using the term to connote an instinctive inclination towards acquiescence in confrontations.  None of these are appropriate definitions for the term "sympathy", really.

Either way, it also heavily depends on what you mean by "is it good".  It would highly depend on what you value in your life.  There are certainly situations in which it's advantageous (or, to be blunt, a facsimile of such is), but typically it is not.  To operate on a purely logical plane, as opposed to one interrupted by emotion, is, however, an abhorrent thought to most: "callous", "icy", "unfeeling" etc.  In a vacuum, speaking from a purely animal point of view, sympathy is entirely useless; only the feigning of such could be advantageous.  However, people do not live in vacuums, nor are they dogs or monkeys.  An example like this also does not take into account that other peoples' sympathy is advantageous to you, but getting into things like that is a bit pointless on a place like this.  To be too "sensitive" is, of course, negative, but to be entirely devoid of sympathy (as you define it) would define you as a sociopath, which is probably not something you're interested in being.  It's really up to you to decide what is "too" sensitive.  As I said, no Darwinian model will tell you that genuine sympathy is useful, so it really depends on how monstrous you're willing to be, assuming you have a choice in the matter.

[lostinidlewonder]

Sensitivity will not ruin you, the inability to deal with your emotions constructively will.

You will not gain control over your emotions by replacing it with self administered pseudo-amnesia nor by replacing the undesired emotion with another action, logic or from an alternative emotional stance in hope that this will remove the unwanted emotion from existing within us. Practicing self denial is quite limiting, you become a lesser person through it, instead one should deal with their emotions and accept that you are allowed to fail in life if these emotions are not benefiting you materialistically or spiritually.