I have already explained myself so simply copy pasting:
How hard is it to accept that OP messed up instead of throwing objectively wrong word salad? Your whole argument is like someone trying to claim that cents are not money because they can’t be used to buy big things.
Triggers are anything that initiates a reaction or event, regardless of their intensity. They are independent of how they are perceived, whether positively or negatively. Triggers have developed a tendency toward negativity due to their rising connection to negative events.
Glimmers are, at best, a specific type of positive trigger with added context.
Another example can be reading my reply. If you were curious about this whole thing, you would be TRIGGERED to feel happy or excited that you learned something new, and this would become your GLIMMER. On the other hand, if you were argumentative, you would be TRIGGERED to feel bad that some random person on the internet does not agree with your definition, which would fulfill your definition of triggers.
This thread can be a glimpse of Orwellian doublethink horror.
I mean I think we are joking here and I did chuckle, but I would agree that there is a clear distinction.
A trigger is a conditioning you have that brings up negative past experiences and associations.
These glimmers are basically you conditioning yourself to check-in with yourself and appreciate a moment and be more conscious of positive emotions or associations.
So yes both conditioning, but one is a totally involuntary conditioning and the latter is a trained conditioning.
And I would say in their intensity they will also be very different. We are just very wired to feel negative emotions incredibly visceral to immediately change our behaviour. The same is not really true for conditioning ourselves to appreciate a moment or perspective.
How hard is it to accept that OP messed up instead of throwing objectively wrong word salad? Your whole argument is like someone trying to claim that cents are not money because they can’t be used to buy big things.
Triggers are anything that initiates a reaction or event, regardless of their intensity. They are independent of how they are perceived, whether positively or negatively. Triggers have developed a tendency toward negativity due to their rising connection to negative events.
Glimmers are, at best, a specific type of positive trigger with added context.
Another example can be reading my reply. If you were curious about this whole thing, you would be TRIGGERED to feel happy or excited that you learned something new, and this would become your GLIMMER. On the other hand, if you were argumentative, you would be TRIGGERED to feel bad that some random person on the internet does not agree with your definition, which would fulfill your definition of triggers.
This thread can be a glimpse of Orwellian doublethink horror.
For what it‘s worth I think you are correct. Even if I feel triggered in feeling that you came in hot, but you are speaking truth and in a mental health forum I think that is most important.
I think in my response I should have rather touched upon that what the other poster is touching upon is that for a Glimmer we sometimes have to learn to experience them fully, which is not a clear distinction between the two. There can also be negative triggers you do not catch up on.
So yes, I drew a false dichotomy and should have approached this differently, thank you for correcting it.
They are technically triggers but for good things, right?
no, i think a trigger is something that gives you the urge to be angry about something right now.
a glimmer would give you a feeling of content-ness, but it lasts longer. like maybe a few seconds or hours.
I have already explained myself so simply copy pasting:
How hard is it to accept that OP messed up instead of throwing objectively wrong word salad? Your whole argument is like someone trying to claim that cents are not money because they can’t be used to buy big things.
Triggers are anything that initiates a reaction or event, regardless of their intensity. They are independent of how they are perceived, whether positively or negatively. Triggers have developed a tendency toward negativity due to their rising connection to negative events.
Glimmers are, at best, a specific type of positive trigger with added context.
Another example can be reading my reply. If you were curious about this whole thing, you would be TRIGGERED to feel happy or excited that you learned something new, and this would become your GLIMMER. On the other hand, if you were argumentative, you would be TRIGGERED to feel bad that some random person on the internet does not agree with your definition, which would fulfill your definition of triggers.
This thread can be a glimpse of Orwellian doublethink horror.
No. A trigger is a link to a negatives experience. This is noticing good things.
So you mean like a trigger but for good things?
I mean I think we are joking here and I did chuckle, but I would agree that there is a clear distinction.
A trigger is a conditioning you have that brings up negative past experiences and associations.
These glimmers are basically you conditioning yourself to check-in with yourself and appreciate a moment and be more conscious of positive emotions or associations. So yes both conditioning, but one is a totally involuntary conditioning and the latter is a trained conditioning.
And I would say in their intensity they will also be very different. We are just very wired to feel negative emotions incredibly visceral to immediately change our behaviour. The same is not really true for conditioning ourselves to appreciate a moment or perspective.
How hard is it to accept that OP messed up instead of throwing objectively wrong word salad? Your whole argument is like someone trying to claim that cents are not money because they can’t be used to buy big things.
Triggers are anything that initiates a reaction or event, regardless of their intensity. They are independent of how they are perceived, whether positively or negatively. Triggers have developed a tendency toward negativity due to their rising connection to negative events.
Glimmers are, at best, a specific type of positive trigger with added context.
Another example can be reading my reply. If you were curious about this whole thing, you would be TRIGGERED to feel happy or excited that you learned something new, and this would become your GLIMMER. On the other hand, if you were argumentative, you would be TRIGGERED to feel bad that some random person on the internet does not agree with your definition, which would fulfill your definition of triggers.
This thread can be a glimpse of Orwellian doublethink horror.
For what it‘s worth I think you are correct. Even if I feel triggered in feeling that you came in hot, but you are speaking truth and in a mental health forum I think that is most important.
I think in my response I should have rather touched upon that what the other poster is touching upon is that for a Glimmer we sometimes have to learn to experience them fully, which is not a clear distinction between the two. There can also be negative triggers you do not catch up on.
So yes, I drew a false dichotomy and should have approached this differently, thank you for correcting it.