Live your life. I said live it! Live it, or I will give you a dirty look I swear…as everyone wanders off ignoring the crazy person.
Today’s topic is relating. We all experience the world through a filter of our own internal language. Our memory of experience “enhances” all current experience, and we are caught up in an internal dialogue between me myself and I, as they say.
Is that your conscience? It is part of it, yes.
Even current research shows that the list of “characters” we can process in our experience is limited. The mind automatically applies a mask to anyone you are dealing with be that comedic, or tragic, or romantic. So with a noticeably short list of types of people we can understand, how is it possible to relate in a world that seems possessed of an infinite variety of people?
Side note. There is some reason to suspect that our brain isn’t entirely out of touch with reality in that there is a limited set of phenotypes that present genetically both in physical appearance and neuropsychological disposition.
Is this the basis of personality type systems? It is, yes.
Even a happy clown mask can be scary for some people. Indeed, and no amount of persuasion will make that happy clown ever seem anything other than scary to them.
I do wonder why clowns are a common phobia. Is it the false makeup? Yes. Clown make-up is a way to render a personality occult or hidden from vision.
But can’t the mask you apply to someone change over time? It can, but very often it doesn’t. Why is that?
It’s a reflection of us? It is more of a reflection of yourself and your personal attitudes, yes. But there is a process that can occur between people that will allow for growth. We have been doing it for as long as we have gathered together socially. Narrative or storytelling. You can never impart to someone an experience just as you interpreted it. Even if we advance technologically enough to allow a replay of someone else’s sensory data to a third party viewer, they will still filter it according to their own experience and personality.
They were ways to teach younger generations certain hunting techniques and things like that? They were.
The story telling process is collaborative. We don’t just download our experience into someone else’s witnessing mind. We offer bits of our processed experience and the listener offers a response that gives us a translation key.
It’s like that telephone game. The words end up different from one person to another. It is like that. The reason the telephone game breaks down is the same reason any form of consensus breaks down. We reject anything other than a single selected information stream and our primary information stream by default is our own thoughts. This is what they say characterises autistic behavior, but I won’t go into that.
Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.