Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. . . Most people as being shallow, or maybe you too are shallow?
What is your opinion about the shallowness/deepness of the people you have personally known?
I find most people I have met and who are in my family to be shallow.
I would like to be able to connect with people deeply, but most people seem to not want that.
I am aware, when talking to people, that the conversations, for politeness sake, are mainly kept to very shallow levels . . . I notice a lot of things going on at deeper levels, but often don't comment on what I notice because I sense that people "can't go there."
In your long life, what have you noticed in this area?
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by people being "shallow" or "deep". Are you talking about on a personal level? Sharing things about your life? Or some other level of "deep"?
I, personally, am not a big "sharer" when it comes to my life. Most people could give a hoot and why should I bore them? Most relationships are superficial at best anyway, unless you have a few really close family and friends. I have probably opened up more on this forum than I ever do in real life but that's because I have a lot in common with the people on this forum. Even so I am probably one of the posters who post the least.
Shallowness and deepness are, IMO, not related to deep thoughts or feelings. Everyone has them, not everyone shares them.
What is significant is the willingness and ability to discuss things that require you to imagine that it might be true even if you personally don't. Let me give you an example from my life. I have a lot of out of the mainstream skills that I've developed, skills that the herd isn't interested in. One of these is Astrology. For awhile I was running the second most famous astrology forum on the internet, second only to the one run by Noel Tyl( very famous contempory astrologer who has written more than thirty volumes on the subject over the past 40 years, some of which he was an Opera Singer in Europe). I usually don't bring up the subject because most people know nothing about it, and can't even imagine being interested in it. Most people don't know that it is singularly to most complicated endeavor I ever ran across in my 50 years of study of these things(I didn't study this kind of thing when I was below the age of 10).
But most people will not even begin to discuss this with you. Like wise if I talk about target shooting with handguns, making video movies, professional wedding photography, etc., if people have no personal experience with it, they won't talk about it---even to imagine what it might be like.
This is how people get considered not deep.
They cannot talk about anything except what they have personally experienced, or imagine things that might be possible, even if they don't have the experience. The other day I suggested that Bill Gates might not be a "nice guy". I based my view on what I've heard about his interactions, and about the fact that he's the 2nd richest human on the planet. All the really really rich people I've ever interacted with were pretty much drunk with power and money, and were not in the least bit caring of others needs, or even aware that others had needs. But the discussion I had was to have several people say that they didn't know if Bill Gates was a nice guy or not because they were not his friend.
Its all about taking in lots of information and imagining, and then talking about your imaginings.
When I observe person A describing person B as "shallow", what I perceive is that person B is simply not interested in the same things to the same degree as person A. Seems a bit harsh to label that as "shallow".
i need to look at a dictionary to answer this question............well, i suppose i need to simply "google" the terms "shallow"/"deep". I tend to think of "shallow" as saying a person lacks substance ....i.e. lightweight intellectually/academically speaking and deep being highly intellectual/intelligent/academically savy. The conversation here seems to be more about the question of people who are very open or very guarded. Which I don't think of as shallow or deep....some people are very comfortable talking about anything and everything.....although maybe short of appearing on the Jerry Springer show. Others are extremely cautious about what they share ....you always wonder about the dead bodies in their cellars.... So am I reading the question wrong? are we talking deep pensive thoughts or are we talking about opening up with those dark shadowy things that some of us never share? I'm intrigued! (that could mean i'm shallow! but i swear I'm not! i think i'm terribly deep .....but then i meet someone who is far deeper and they make it very clear that i am incredibly shallow..........oh well....................life's a b............)
(that could mean i'm shallow! but i swear I'm not! i think i'm terribly deep .....but then i meet someone who is far deeper and they make it very clear that i am incredibly shallow..........oh well....................life's a b............)
You are deep, mzfroggez....just a tad on the shy side
Shallow, for the sake of this discussion means lacking substance, surface-y, little curiosity, not an "inquiring mind" . . . deep would mean the opposite.
Shallowness can be emotional, or intellectual. The second is easier to spot, unless you know the person well, since we censor our feelings in public. It does seem that intellectual shallowness, or lack of intellectual curiosity, is far too common. I often see vehement posts here on C-D that reveal a total misunderstanding of the situation being discussed, particularly in economics. Those who want to understand the world around them aren't as numerous as I would like, which makes the population far too easy to manipulate by the media, and politicians.
I'll probably get flak for this, but when we were young and our peers started having kids, we found ourselves being bored as every adult conversation was constantly interrupted by a young child who wanted to be the center of attention. It's hard to have an interesting conversation when you just as you start to respond, a 5-year old rushes up and screams "Look at me!" and the mother instantly transfers full attention to the child and spends ten minutes admiring it. By then the topic of conversation has been forgotten, as the mother is reminded of some other kid-related story.
As our peers grew older, we tended to socialize more with those without kids, and they had both free time, and outside interests. If your life is consumed with child-rearing, you simply don't have time to spend researching things, or reading, or discussing hot topics with other adults. And while we spend far too many hours at work, at least the people there are also intellectually stimulating.
I'm not saying everyone who has kids is dull or "shallow," since there were some couples who had kids who did not fall into the trap of giving their kids attention the instant they demanded it. These kids are wonderful adults today, with better characters, attitudes, and work ethics than their spoiled peers.
Moderator cut: off topic
Last edited by Kimballette; 08-16-2011 at 12:27 PM..
Reason: off topic - this is not the Politics & Other Controversies forum
I work in Mental Health. I listen to people talk deeply, sorta deeply, and not so deeply for hours every day.
Frankly, I can honestly say that I do appreciate shallow.
I bet.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.