Posts by Sarah Sanders2

Donna Doyle2 said:Wouldn't it be fascinating if our names actually serve as a buffer that keeps us from truly experiencing the essence of other people? Is it possible that if we couldn't address anyone by name, we would be forced to actually experience them on a deeper level, or am I just overthinking it? It's almost like how words act as a barrier that prevents us from directly experiencing reality, don't you think?

If we had better senses, we'd just sniff each other out like dogs. Or if we could ditch verbal Communication entirely and just swap data through vibes—whether from across the room or face-to-face—we wouldn't need names. Though even those vibrations would probably carry some kind of ID. But yeah, we'd definitely be able to connect deeper without all the labels.

ironrider11 said:Maybe they're just out in the woods somewhere. Who, though? Some random forest types... Look, whenever I run into someone I don't know, I usually don't lead with a handshake or anything. It feels weird, like I'm forcing an interaction. But if they grab my hand and start doing that awkward rhythmic shaking thing, then fine, I'll play along. I'll give them the whole routine—"Good morning, I'm Žarko Palić"—just waiting for that basic social reflex where we actually acknowledge each other... You know, the bare minimum. Once the pleasantries are out of the way, I might ask for help or whatever. If I don't explicitly ask for something, I'm just expecting them to realize I'm right here...

When you're hanging out in a high-profile crowd filled with big shots, does anyone even need to introduce themselves? If you're close enough to someone and you catch their eye, you can just start talking without that awkward, desperate "Hey, [Name]!" routine. Take me and my friends—we don't always go by names, we just vibe based on how we know people. Like, if a group of us starts gossiping about Ivanna, and there are like a million Ivannas out there, we can't just say her name or everyone will get confused and start talking about their own friend. To make sure we're all on the same page, we have to add some descriptors that actually mean something... "Which Ivanna?" "The one who runs the show at Spic, the one with the purple and green hair..." "Oh, *that* Ivanna. What about her?"

Just an observation... Sure, if you need to grab someone from HR, you’re gonna call out names like "Hey, can you get Zdenka and Mark in here?" especially if you need to know the who, what, and why behind their paperwork. But once they're actually standing in front of you, you don't need to keep repeating their names just to have a conversation. If you're dealing with a massive crowd of people all day long, why waste the mental energy constantly identifying everyone by name when you're already in the middle of the interaction... it just seems redundant...

If we’re looking at the stats, and someone chooses to skip using a name when they really should have used one... then—going back to that idea that you can't really have, run, or even track any decent Communication without names—does some random ID like x-24-dd4861lh66 actually tell us anything about a person? It's pretty much irrelevant. But sometimes, in those old-school ways of talking, you'll have two or three nameless people gossiping about Ivanna for half an hour straight. By the end of it, nobody even realizes they were all talking about different versions of her. You could tear apart multiple different icons of Ivanna just through gossip, treating it like some kind of meaningful way to interact... maybe...

You're overthinking this. Nobody said Communication is impossible without names, just that it gets significantly harder. Try going a month without using a single name. Delete every contact in your phone. Look at all the names on this forum and see if your life gets easier or more difficult.

If you've got three Ivannas at the office and the crew wants to gossip about "Ivanna," you've already narrowed it down from hundreds of employees to just three. From there, you use a last name or just say "Ivanna from HR" to clear up the confusion. If all three Ivannas share a last name and somehow all work in HR, then you move to physical identifiers: glasses, hair color, whatever. People think in categories. If your family is gossiping about your cousin Ivanna, you aren't going to confuse her with the Ivanna from your job because there's zero overlap.

ironrider11 said:So you're saying it's impossible (to have Communication) if you don't know someone's name? Like, their full name or nickname...? 🤔

Maybe she was thinking about when two people are gossiping about someone else. How do you say, "I went to the movies with that guy"? You go, "You know, the one with the curly brown hair?" "The guy with green eyes?" "No, the one with twins." "Oh, okay, the guy whose wife always wears a bun..." "Yeah, that's the one."

Or calling out to someone, like she mentioned. "Hey, you! The mechanic with the blue hair and brown eyes!"🤣

Bottom line:
People slap a label or a name on everything just so they can identify what's being discussed while passing info along (communicating). Without names, it’s pure chaos. Pronouns like this, that, him, her, those—they aren't enough. That's how I talk when I'm having an Alzheimer's moment: "You know, that round thing, you put it on the spinning thing, it's for lunch, and when you put it on the round thing, it plays music?" You thinking of a record, a turntable? Yeah, that! We have to give things and people names to limit them, to differentiate this from that. We need labels to navigate reality and feel secure; because if nothing is identified, then what even is it?

There’s a whole lot you could say about names.

Nomen omen. A name isn't just a label—it's destiny. Back in the day, naming a kid was basically a blessing. It was a way to signal or predict what they’d become, or maybe just a parent's wish for their future. Like, if you name someone John, which means God is merciful, you're basically praying for some divine grace to show up in their life.

Think of a first name as an attribute and a last name as an appositive—they describe who you are or how you're supposed to be. It's like saying John Smith or Robert Smith. You see this in Native American names too, like Sitting Bull. Or even how certain countries are named. It's similar to stuff in the Bible: you’ll be called Moses because I pulled you out of the water (Moses literally means "drawn from the water"), or when God told Jacob he'd be called Israel because he fought bravely with the Almighty.

At its core, a name is just how we distinguish ourselves from everyone else. That’s why we have last names—and Social Security numbers, since names alone aren't enough to track us. Last names often point back to where you came from or whose kid you are. Growing up, I was always asked, "So, whose kid are you?" Names like Nikolovska or Prevalov all answer that same question: Who do you belong to? Which family are you part of?

Then you’ve got nicknames that eventually stick as actual names or surnames. In my extended family, we used to call one specific branch the Smiths because they were so slow.

When explaining this to a kid, you gotta keep it simple. My grandma gave me one of the best answers. 😉

George Long6 said:Exactly.
What kind of friends? People are so two-faced and nasty these days that looking for friendship isn't even worth the effort. Why bother having someone you tell everything to (unless it's your sibling or a parent)...?
People have always been this way, but nowadays it's just reached a breaking point.
Otherwise, you just have acquaintances you grab a coffee with occasionally, but true friends—people you share your problems, fears, and goals with while listening to theirs... what's the point? It feels totally unnecessary in life.
Just get a dog or a cat... you won't find any better friends than them. 👍

Nonsense. I don't know what kind of crowd you hang out with, but there are still good people out there. Real friends exist. People who actually have your back instead of talking trash behind it.

Maria Price3 said:Yeah, I felt the same way—things were fine until I found myself completely isolated. I mean, I could have opted for "virtual happy hours," but what’s the point?

And as for that panic you felt, it makes total sense. Any sane person would probably be hit with panic right now as the lockdowns ease up. For one reason or another. It's just shock upon shock.

Paranoia or panic—it's really just different shades of the same thing... fear is fear.

The only reason I’m struggling is because the lockdown actually worked for me. Now that life is getting back to "normal," I'm not really feeling it. And no, it's not even about being scared of the virus lol.

Maria Price3 said:Hey,

So, I was talking to my psychiatrist about how much I've been hitting rock bottom lately—I mean, I’ve always struggled with depression—and her take was basically, "Oh, that’s just standard procedure for everyone right now. Things are getting worse for almost everyone, except maybe those currently in psychosis."

Since you all have firsthand experience dealing with psychosis, I wanted to get your take on that statement.

Is she actually onto something here, is she totally off base, or is it somewhere in the middle?

I don't have psychosis—just BPD—but I'm actually doing great. I'm only struggling because I missed my weekly therapy sessions, which just let all this suppressed grief over my mom bubble up to the surface. Honestly, for once, the world has finally slowed down to my pace. I don't have to sprint just to stay level; everything's stalled out, and I'm finally "competitive" because everyone else is stuck in their own existential crisis too. At least I don't stick out anymore.

Not everyone is miserable like your doctor claims; some people are doing totally fine without needing to be psychotic.
Edit: I actually had a panic attack when they mentioned easing restrictions—like, a legit "is this happening?" moment where I thought I was having my first actual breakdown. So, tell me again how "normal" this is...

Most doctors out there are just uneducated hillbillies who couldn't even explain their own specialty if their lives depended on it. They’re such pathetic losers that they actually get offended when you—an apparently "ignorant peasant," despite maybe having a PhD they wouldn't recognize—actually turn out to be right. Just small-minded, miserable souls. Shoutout to the rare exceptions, though.