|
|
| M i s c . D e b r i s |
|
L Y N X P H I L O S O P H I S I N G - P A R T II
| |
"But what about?" you shout. "If I do this, you say I'm?" is exclaimed. "Get real!" screams another.
Is it all that easy, all that uncomplicated? Of course not. Life is not black and white, not in the least, it is a tonne of grey.
So... some expounding may be in order.
"What if I go to a (insert event/place here) with a friend, despite the fact it bores me to tears. Am I being dishonest and should be shot?"
No, of course not. That's not being dishonest... it's being NICE. Indulging the interests of your friend, even if it interests you not,
is more a sign that you care for the person that is your friend. You care that they have their interests, identity, and their own
self expression. That you would take them to a place that interests them shows that care. Planning for such events, or agreeing to
accompany them does as well. If your friend comes to visit, and you take them to see the () in your town, because they like ()s,
you are being a good host, and a good friend. Now... if you claimed you LIKED such a thing/event/etc, when you really didn't, then it is
a different story. Now you are being dishonest. Eventually, the truth will likely come out (argh, I hate those things!). At this point,
it will no longer seem like a kind and selfless action on your part, to 'endure' what you didn't like, instead, it can bring to mind
malicious intent. Worse, it can lead to questions about what else you may be 'lying' about. This doubt will run on two fronts: self-doubt,
and doubt towards the 'friend'. Either way, it is destructive. If the friendship is a true one, there should be no problem expressing
true interests.
Taking it from a different angle, though... forcing your friend to attend events they do not necessarily like, because, hey, they're your
friend, they should want to spend time with you, or they've done it before, is not good. Taking a friend visiting you to (), because
you love it lots and want to go... well, it's obvious. ASKING them if they'd like to accompany you to () is another matter... they may
indeed agree, because as mentioned above, friends do such things. But removing the choice, or 'pushing' the issue (oh, you want to go, don't you?)
leads to a bit of frustration, which can snowball off other events or items. "Does this person really care what I feel?" is the ultimate
lead-in to a state that causes crumble.
"But... what's considered balanced, and all the time?"
Not entirely all the time. I tend to give more than I need to receive. And there certainly are times when we just want to indulge (or be
indulged), just accepting for all it's hedonistic worth, being showered and basked by another. And certainly we can offer such a thing,
without a wish or need for it to be immediatly reciprocated (assuming, of course, that it is at least appreciated). But the balance has
to come in sometime... offering the same in return (or equivalent) at some time. No, this isn't some legal argument I'm trying to craft here,
nor a contract. As much as it may sound like one. But it will be noticed eventually.
"What if I'm planning a special surprise event, and I don't tell about it... dishonest?"
Does this even need a comment? Not even close to being dishonest. Why am I even bringing this one up? To be complete :P
"So, I let the person know about all the faults in their work/themselves, now their drive is destroyed."
Remember the clause to be kind. Everyone needs criticism to grow. So give a critique, not a list of faults. Giving reasons for what you
are saying/feeling/observing is a good beginning. Offering suggestions on how to 'fix' the work is another. List the good and the requires improvement.
Say it from the point of your opinion, not a universal law. Look at the whole picture. Giving critiques is not the easiest thing in the
world to do, but being truthful up front can prevent later destruction when the work is finished, submitted, and then the faults emerge.
Editors are not always as nice as you may be.
"Ok. I did something WAY back when, now I've changed, I have different views. Am I a hypocrite?"
Depends. Don't you just hate those answers? But it does depend on how long it has been, and what has changed, and exactly how you
are approaching (or (ab)using) the change. It is a case-by-case basis. Hypocracy usually deals with the say/do situation at the present
time, or within a relatively short time span (a year or two). For the most part, changing your ideas, ideals and behaviour over time
does not make you a hypocrite. It mostly requires a contradiction.
"If I violate these ideals once, am I done for?"
That's why they're called 'ideals'. They are goals to live up to, but it is impossible for any mortal to always live up to them. (See page
3 for more...) We all have bad days. We all are sometimes 'off'. We will all be put under stress, be seen at times of no sleep. We will
snap. There will be times of confusion or hurt that will make us vengeful, or act unfairly. And there will be friends who will forgive
(though not necessarily forget). We can only try.
"So... explain this to me about liking to do something, the other person liking to do the same thing, but... there's a third part?
Well, this only applies, really, to demark the difference between friends and aquaintances. With aquaintances, you will get together for
activities, because you both enjoy doing that thing, for example, a sport. You'll hang out before and after, chat about things, and
do the activity. Your minds, however, are focussed on the activity, and little else; you are both there simply to support the other in
this activity. With a friend, you may indeed both enjoy the same activities, but you should also enjoy the fact that you are sharing
these activities with your friend. A good portion of the enjoyment comes from doing the activity with the friend, atop the normal
enjoyment from the activity itself. Furthermore, you would pay attention more to how the friend is doing/feeling/performing, and to what
they are getting out of the activity. More empathic, might be the right phrase. If an aquaintance can't make it up to X, you may say
'bummer dude', but if your friend can't make it to X, you'll give them a hand, offer encouragement, etc.
This doesn't limit itself, really, to just sports, but to all activities, be it physical, mental, a bit of both, spiritual, experiential
(ie movies), etc. In all cases, it can be an activity where you go with someone, or an activity you share with someone. Superficially,
they seem the same thing, but looking deeper, the latter is more involved.
Perhaps in the simplest way to put it... You both enjoy the activity, but enjoy it more because of the fact the other is your friend.
"How does this work, with humouring someone vs being nice to them by engaging in an activity they want..."
When I say someone is humouring me (and others may have different definitions), I mean that someone is doing something not because they want
to do it, or do it for me, but rather they are doing it because they feel they should, they feel obligated to do it, they feel it would be
only fair, or their concience won't let them get away with not doing it. So they aren't really being nice in this case, they feel
trapped, or they don't want to be cruel or unfair (which can be a noble effort in itself, don't get me wrong). They don't want to do it.
Myself, I would prefer them being upfront and stating that they are not interested in doing so/seeing me/etc, and just not do it, lest I
start to think otherwise. Mind you, it's usually becomes quite obvious when someone is just humouring. They may think they're just being
kind, but it usually doesn't come accross that way. They're doing it for themselves--to alleviate any guilt they may feel--rather than
doing it for you.
"I'm confused. Hard rules?"
Once again, this isn't meant as a 'list of rules' to follow. Nothing is black and white, it's all shades of grey. These are philosophies.
Part of being a friend is to accept the other for what they are, but, that does not mean that one can be walked all over.
On an overall basis, sometimes some balances are tilted more one way, but another is tilted the other, thus each side is
providing for the other. Sometimes the balances are tilted all one way, but that does not mean that there is necessarily a problem; friendships
can come in all forms. Every friendship is going to be a bit different, and will ebb and flow, with differing levels of give and take, in differing areas. The levels of each
will change, sometimes being unbalanced one way or the next, due to circumstances. Giving your friend a shoulder to lean on shouldn't be
a mark in a tally book for a favour later on; it is just given. That the debt will undoubtedly be repayed is actually a given. Friendships
have a way of having that occur.
So, just who do I think I am, preaching all this stuff? Heh... read on.
|
|
|
