Rebis
Blessed are the hearts that can bend
I want to address this phrasing that's commonplace as an invocation of defense. I hear this comment alot
and while I understand the premise: "Don't let others define who you are " this is an easy remark to make it's barely revelating, but I think it ignores the benefit of percieving yourself outside of the ego, interpreting yourself as a separate entity. Perception is what binds us so if we default on self-perception we're not seeing the full picture. Perceptions are fragmented truths, if you're able to interpret what someone thinks about you and try to understand where they're coming from you can gain an understanding of yourself. We indulge in projection of our personality onto others but we don't indulge others interpreting who we are.
The individual's ego is but only half the equation, what you think of yourself is not true if you consider that society exists independently of you. Also, what's so wrong with using a model of someone's perception to analyse yourself? Is the ego so fragile that it can't think of oneself as the bad guy? You hear the age old adage "There's two sides of a coin" or "it takes two to tango", yet when it's applied to ourselves we insist that we are mainly what we understand ourselves to be. People can lie to themselves when they're faced with a difficult realization.
I'm not saying any person with the ability to verbally eject words from their mouth should be considered, what I am saying is there is no harm playing a game of interpretation, take no offence to opinions that infringe on your self-realization, for to take offence is akin to the formation of a self-actualized deity: one that cannot be approached with reason or criticism and their interpretation of the world is irrefutable.
"Universal truth is not measured by mass appeal"
Universal truth is however universal, and it is measured by the cohesion of many independent perceptions, so to approach a better understanding of yourself (going towards truth i.e. irrefutable) you should try to consider the model of reality others live in, and how these truths in their model can help you piece together different opinions of the world.
I think the most common frustration (it surely is for me) is produced from cognitive dissonance: when expectations do not align with reality. The problem with this is of course, we do not see reality as malleable and our understanding of reality confined to what we have already experienced. People expect themselves to be who they are, so they become agitated when someone interprets who they are due to mischaracterization.
and while I understand the premise: "Don't let others define who you are " this is an easy remark to make it's barely revelating, but I think it ignores the benefit of percieving yourself outside of the ego, interpreting yourself as a separate entity. Perception is what binds us so if we default on self-perception we're not seeing the full picture. Perceptions are fragmented truths, if you're able to interpret what someone thinks about you and try to understand where they're coming from you can gain an understanding of yourself. We indulge in projection of our personality onto others but we don't indulge others interpreting who we are.
The individual's ego is but only half the equation, what you think of yourself is not true if you consider that society exists independently of you. Also, what's so wrong with using a model of someone's perception to analyse yourself? Is the ego so fragile that it can't think of oneself as the bad guy? You hear the age old adage "There's two sides of a coin" or "it takes two to tango", yet when it's applied to ourselves we insist that we are mainly what we understand ourselves to be. People can lie to themselves when they're faced with a difficult realization.
I'm not saying any person with the ability to verbally eject words from their mouth should be considered, what I am saying is there is no harm playing a game of interpretation, take no offence to opinions that infringe on your self-realization, for to take offence is akin to the formation of a self-actualized deity: one that cannot be approached with reason or criticism and their interpretation of the world is irrefutable.
"Universal truth is not measured by mass appeal"
Universal truth is however universal, and it is measured by the cohesion of many independent perceptions, so to approach a better understanding of yourself (going towards truth i.e. irrefutable) you should try to consider the model of reality others live in, and how these truths in their model can help you piece together different opinions of the world.
I think the most common frustration (it surely is for me) is produced from cognitive dissonance: when expectations do not align with reality. The problem with this is of course, we do not see reality as malleable and our understanding of reality confined to what we have already experienced. People expect themselves to be who they are, so they become agitated when someone interprets who they are due to mischaracterization.