You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Good_Burning_Plastic comments on Open Thread, Feb. 2 - Feb 8, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: Gondolinian 02 February 2015 12:28AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (253)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 11 February 2015 02:22:35PM 1 point [-]

If you read David Burns "The Feel Good handbook" he makes the point that showing vunerability is a condition to get someone to love you.

What does "vulnerable" mean in this context? People use the word a lot, but nothing listed against it in the dictionary strikes me as a positive thing: susceptible of receiving wounds or physical injury, open to attack or injury of a non-physical nature, in need of special care because of age, disability, risk of abuse or neglect. The general Google hits on the word are even more unattractive.

Comment author: Good_Burning_Plastic 11 February 2015 09:44:39PM 2 points [-]

I think he means it in Mark Manson's sense.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 12 February 2015 01:25:43PM 0 points [-]

Ah. I'll pass.