evasion.md 4.4 KB
Over the past year I've found myself compelled to prevent myself from putting myself in a position to allow some familiar characters to consume my time or my attention. I am conflicted to conflicted over this as one part of me considers that I should do the utmost to ensure that we have every opportunity to resolve conflicts and come to a greater understanding about one anohter's concerns and the nature of reality. All the while, another part of me feels that this point was already reached long ago. In a sense, it was reached and I had yet spent more resources going through additional iterations of our previous behaviour, hoping for an improved outcome, but had only been surprised by the degree to which our dialogue had regressed. In the case of my brother, we had lready been speaking much less since his wife had begun working near him, but even before that, I had found the discourse to be lacking and fairly superficial. Sure, maybe it is me who is superficial, but there are some specific epectations that I need to see fulfilled in order for me to rationalize the session of interaction, especially recurring ones.
- We learn from one another. This is a crucial component to the interactions. Humans are liable to entertain all manner of habit that they may have cultivated at any one given time, and we are never fully aware of the entire apparatus of habits being employed in terms of our absolute set of motivations for any one given decision, but we know that it is better if the motivations we reinforce are ones we admire and want to see benefit us in a progressive fashion -> something whose mode of use improves with time. If the interaction is not an attempt to see something learned, but merely an administrative chore, an opportunity to seek to feel a sensation or emotion, a form of manipulation, or even just a habit that isn't yet understood, then it fails to meet the standard. There are cases where administrative and habitual interactions are acceptable, but it becomes inadmissible if other aspects of the interaction rae sufficiently undesirable. Non-communication by proxy: a disgraceful feature of modernity. Just as we have been able to increasingly defer services, accountability and more through industrialization and other forms of modernization, so too have the direct transactions and refinements that used to take place through man. Almost as if by design, if there are any females present, all communication seems to be directed to them. Not necessarily because they are the most pertinent to the conversation, but almost seemingly to seek approval about the discourse at play, making sure that they have no qualms that need to be addressed in the meantime, providing endless opportunity to derail the discussion and take it off to a journey where the points being sought become a redundant part of the dialogue. Even just by measure of sheer eye contact - it no longer occurs except for a few superficial and nervous glances, never enough to actually begin the stream of understanding which is necessary to have any forward movement at all. There is no connection being made and, obviously, if there are any subjects that could othrewise be contentended upon, they will be swept aside with their rot left to fester and expand. This follows suite with the scant previous discussions that had ever taken place. On matters of great concern for all parties, and particularly for myself and mty would be interlocutor, there is zero interest in allowing for the complete vocalization and enunciation of our opinions, as any effort is met with scorn and demonization. If we are all evil and corrupt, why would you even hope to break bread with us? Will you bring us to your view through osmosis? Why not let everything into the room so that truth can prevail? Either you fear truth, or are fearful that I will deceive you. These things should be much simpler to solve. Perhaps there is no desire for them to be solved, but why? We let the truth slide, because it serves one on more than one time scale, and in more than one way. If one happens to be wrong about one of the assumptions, then not only is the remaining mode of advantage still possible, but the removal of the other might indeed quel cognitive dissonance. The anticipation of this can permit the mind to accept taking on a belief which brings about confusion and cognitive dissonance. Short term: congruence with the cultural norms of the day, a path to higher moral standing Short term: might also help achieve more independence? exit